Martha of Bethany

Recovering a role model

Mary of Magdala’s presentation as the redeemed whore has made hers a romantic story that appeals to the prurient as well as the devout throughout the ages. In the recent decades, we have seen her returned to her historical role as apostle, Christian leader and model disciple. This, not to mention the Da Vinci Code, has returned her to Christian consciousness and interest in her is keen. Yet it would be ironic if her story should obscure that of other independent women in the New Testament, who are still overlooked, or only seen in a one-dimensional manner. A prime example is Martha of Bethany.

Martha appears in three New Testament stories: John 11:1-44; 12: 1-8 and Luke 10.38-42. I can say categorically that never in a homily or in theological classrooms have I ever heard the Johannine texts exegeted with a focus on Martha’s role, though I am indebted to a personal conversation with Fr. Campion Murray OFM for my new perspective on John’s texts. Most of us are familiar with Luke’s story about Martha reprimanding the Lord for allowing Mary to sit at his feet with the other disciples while she prepares for their meal. The traditional interpretation of this passage is that Martha represents the laity, burdened with the cares of the world and Mary represents the contemplative or monastic life, which Christ decrees is superior to Martha’s service.

Now, when these texts were written, there was no Christian distinction between active and contemplative forms of life, though Jewish culture certainly had a tradition of educated men studying Torah whilst their wives ran the household (See Proverbs 31: 10-31); such devotion to Torah was certainly deemed the highest vocation. Moreover, it was reserved to men only. Most rabbis forbade women to be taught the Scriptures because it could only lead them into sin—because they would have to study with men. There was a gender gap rather than an ascetic one. So the evangelist had to be making another point.

But before we move onto that, let us look first at how Martha is introduced. Like Mary Magdalene, Martha is an independent woman not defined by her relationship to husband or father. The text states:

“Now, as they went on their way, he entered a village; and a woman named Martha received him into her home. And she had a sister called Mary, who sat at the Lord’s feet and listened to his teaching.”

This is clearly a woman headed household. It is her home, she is first named and her only named relative is Mary. This text is in harmony with John 11: 1 which states:

“Now a certain man was ill, Lazarus of Bethany, the village of Mary and her sister Martha.”

Again the text groups Mary and Martha but not Lazarus, Indeed, at this stage, Lazarus seems to be the less well known friend of Jesus. Bethany is the village of Mary and Martha, and he is introduced as their relative, not the other way around. So it would appear that by describing Lazarus as living in Martha’s village, the evangelist was giving the first century reader some of the “back story.”

Accordingly, we have Martha welcoming Jesus and the twelve into her home and offering them hospitality, when it became too dangerous for them to stay in nearby Jerusalem (Jn 11:18). Martha must have been courageous as well as a devoted disciple. Then she prepares the table. In English, traditional translations express it thus: “she was distracted with much serving” which is usually taken to mean she is preparing a meal. However, some scholars read this as preparation for a Eucharistic meal or agape feast, because the Greek text uses the language of diaconal service, used in the New Testament for those with Eucharistic ministry.

In the years after Jesus death, there were no clerical orders, as we know them. Communities, which met in house-churches, elected their Eucharistic presiders. If we do not allow gender bias to colour our translation, then we have to translate the Greek here the same way it is translated in the Acts of the Apostles (Acts 6:1-2, 4). In this light, we have a radically different picture. Martha is preparing the Christian communal meal; Mary is studying Torah with Jesus. It would have seemed natural for Martha to preside at a religious meal. Jewish women always did so. That is why it was deemed humble service for Christian men to take a woman’s or slave’s role. But a woman studying Torah with a rabbi was not just innovative; it was also scandalous. Certainly, when Martha, found herself with 13 extra men to feed, she clearly thought that Mary’s role was to serve also, and not to sit studying. Note that she did not object to her learning on the ground of scandal, but on the grounds of service. Jesus makes it very clear that women who study Scripture have a place with his other disciples and “it shall not be taken from her” even by the mandate for service.

Therefore, rather than reinforce medieval spiritual stereotypes, Luke was actually affirming radically new roles for women. Leadership of the community meal and study of the Torah and Christian teachings were not roles or activities to be decided on the basis of gender.

In the Johannine texts, we learn far more about Martha. In John 11:5, we have the extraordinary statement:

“Now Jesus loved Martha and her sister and Lazarus.”

Again, Lazarus comes third in a list where customary exegetical rules would assume that the first mentioned person is the most important. It is Martha who goes out to meet Jesus when she hears that he is on his way, while Mary remains mourning in the house. Here we come to an extraordinary passage whose full meaning is simply overlooked at best or erased at worst. Martha questions Jesus about his delay. She clearly believes without question that he could have healed her brother. Indeed, she affirms that should he ask his father to raise the dead Lazarus, God will answer his prayer. She clearly assumes Jesus is speaking of the Last Days when Jesus tells her that Lazarus will rise again, and thus we know of her faith in the resurrection of the body. Jesus then asks her if she believes in him as the resurrection and the life. To Martha, this can have only one meaning:

“Yes, Lord. I believe that you are the Christ, the Son of God who is coming into this world.”

John, like Luke, offers us a radical new view of gender and faith. In the synoptic gospels, when Peter recognizes Jesus as God's Son, his faith statement is the basis for his leadership of the young Christian community. In John's tradition, Martha is the one who recognized Jesus’ true nature as Son of God, the Way to resurrection and life. What is more, she does not tell Jesus not to approach Jerusalem as Peter did. Indeed, for Lazarus’ sake, she has asked him to come from a safe house to her village on the outskirts of Jerusalem, barely a week before Passover. It was this very miracle that confirmed to Jesus’ opposition that he was simply too dangerous to live (Jn 121:45-53). Her faith might seem shaken when Jesus asks them to roll away to stone before he raises Lazarus, because she reminds him how putrefied the corpse will be after four days in the heat. But Jesus does not chastise her sharply as he did Peter. Rather, he reminds her of his promise that she will see the glory of God.

The Sabbath before the day that we call Palm Sunday, Jesus again stayed with Martha and Mary. Again, the text specifically notes, “Martha served” [dinkónei] and that Lazarus was a guest at the table with Jesus. It is during this Eucharist that Mary anoints Jesus with spikenard ointment, earning Judas’ reproof. Again, Jesus defends Mary against criticism. Often, Mary is confused with the repentant prostitute who washed Jesus feet with her tears and she, in turn, is often assumed to be Mary Magdalene, so that Mary of Bethany, Mary of Magdala and the repentant woman are all rolled into one who displaces all other women followers, like Martha of Bethany. Thus is women’s discipleship in the Gospels diminished and our penchant for wanting women in our scriptures to be repentant whores says more about us than about them.