'Mammy, Jane is not helping with the dishes.' 'Daddy, Sam has left me to do it all by myself.' We can easily imagine such a scene happening in the house of Martha and Mary. Jesus found himself caught up in a very ordinary, domestic, moment. One of his hostesses was busy preapring the meal and she complained that her sister was not helping out. She was just sitting, listening to him.
The story follows a pattern which is characteristic of St Luke's gospel.
Many incidents and parables, as he recounts them, involve two poeople
between whom there was some kind of conflict or separation, e.g. the
Pharisee and the publican, the prodigal son and his elder brother, the
rich man and Lazarus - these are all characters we only come across in
the gospel of Luke. These parables put us on the spot because almost
inevitably we find ourselves identifying with one or other of the
characters. Who is the 'goodie' and who is the 'baddie'? But perhaps
that is too simplistic a reading and what a parable really challenges us
to do is to find all its characters somewhere in ourselves, in our
attitudes or actions or aspects of our character.
The two sisters, Martha and Mary, show us two ways of being with Jesus,
two ways of serving him. Martha wanted to welcome him into her house in
the normal way, by offering him a meal. This was her way of loving him.
Mary sat and listened to what he had to say. She was keen to learn from
him and this was her way of loving him.
In the Christian tradition Martha and Mary were not the only pair of
women to represent action and contemplation. Leah and Rachel, wives of
Jacob, were also often used in the same way. Dante, for example, in
Canto 27 of his Purgatorio, introduces us to Leah who talks about
the difference between herself and her rival: 'she with seeing, and I
with doing am satisfied'. These two women are found on either side of
Moses on the tomb of Pope Julius II, made by Michelangelo. The way they
are represented there is comparable to the representation of Plato and
Aristotle in Raphael's famous painting, the School of Athens, Plato
(Rachel) looking towards heaven, Aristotle (Leah) looking towards the
earth.
Head in the clouds and feet on the ground, we might be tempted to say.
Likewise for Mary and Martha. The sisters came to symbolise two ways of
living the Christian life and stand for two paths to Jesus (or two ways
of travelling with him). Martha stands for those called to serve Christ
in practical and concrete ways - through acts of charity, through
involvement in the life of the world. Mary stands for those called to
serve Christ as contemplatives - through lives dedicated to prayer,
through standing back from the world.
Many of the great teachers of the Church have used Martha and Mary to
stand for the 'active' and the 'contemplative' paths. But unfortunately,
too many have also decided that Mary's way was better. After all, Jesus
does seem to dismiss Martha's complaint when he says that 'Mary has
chosen the better part'.
Meister Eckhart, the medieval Dominican theologian, is the only one I
know who proposed that Martha's way was better, because it was the more
mature. Is he wiser than Jesus then? No, just that he understands Jesus'
remark to mean 'Mary has chosen what, for now, is best for her'. Martha
is the more grown up of the two. Her union with Jesus and her
understanding of him make her ready for works of compassion and service.
Mary is at an earlier stage in the Christian life. She had yet to grow
and more to learn, she needed to spend more time absorbing what Jesus
had to teach, before she could give herself, like Martha, to the
generous service of her brothers and sisters. It was Martha, then, who
was further along the path to Jesus, and this, says Eckhart, is what
Jesus was helping Martha to understand.
But Eckhart was the exception that proved the rule. Most Christian
teachers believed that Masry was following a better way than Martha. And
others (Thomas Aquinas, for example) have suggested that a mixed way
would be even better, a way that combines the prayerful attention of
Mary with the compassionate service of Martha. To be a teacher in the
Church, for example, not just contemplating but passing to others the
fruits of one's contemplation.
Perhaps such a stark choice is not really necessary, not really
possible. A complete activism would be no longer human. There has to be
thought and prayer to support action, there has to be reflection and
evaluation afterwards if our action is to be fully human. 'Don't just do
something, sit there', we might be tempted to say to someone in danger
of losing themselves in unreflective action. 'Don't just sit there, do
something' is what we will be tempted to say to the Marys who prolong
their contemplation when the needs of charity require them to turn
towards their neighbour.
Perhaps the contrast between Mary and Martha, Rachel and Leah, (Plato
and Aristotle?), is one we find within ourselves. Everyone who seeks to
follow Jesus must have something of each within them. How can you be a
Christian without listening to Jesus who is the Word, and without
seeking to be with him in prayer? How can you be a Christian without
caring for your neighbour in whatever practical way is needed (last
week's gospel of the good Samaritan reminded us of this)?
The story of the two sisters encourages us to think about our
faithfulness to these two aspects of following Christ. Whether we are
good at praying or good at serving we should work at it with all our
hearts and minds. We must also, of course, take care of Christ in the
needy and the poor. We must use our gifts to serve others. But we must
pray so that our actions have a properly human and Christian depth, we
must pray and be with the Other if we want to be truly with, and for,
others.
No comments:
Post a Comment