Mis—read Mis—applied Mis—represented
One of the most misrepresented characters on the pages of the New Testament is that woman Martha, sister of Mary and Lazarus, who lived at Bethany.
The misrepresentation of Martha results from a misreading of the words that we have concerning her, and, sad to say, this often results in a misapplication of her case to our hearts and minds.
The incident that seems to settle the case of Mary and Martha in a lot of people's minds is the incident that we read about in the 10th chapter of Luke's gospel. The Lord comes to their home, Mary “sits at His feet,” but Martha busies herself with the household chores, being “cumbered about with much serving.” When she solicits the Lord's support against Mary, the Lord speaks a famous and tremendously true word to Martha:- “Martha, Martha, thou art careful and troubled about many things: but one thing is needful: and Mary hath chosen that good part, which shall not be taken away from her.” That is a tremendously true word; how could it be anything else, seeing that it came from the lips of Him who spake as never man spake? But, this is the burning question: have we any right to make that word concerning Mary and Martha the last word on their persons, and deduce from it a whole outlook which has no support whatsoever in the word of God? The application of the case of Mary and Martha goes something like this: Martha represents mere service in the church, while Mary represents that desire to attend to the “deep things of the faith.” Therefore, service tends to be downgraded as a second best, while the really spiritual woman (or man) is the one who attends as many extra “meetings” as possible – choosing the “better part” of the Christian life and calling. Who wants to be a Martha? Better to be a Mary.
Now then, there is one thing that ought to be first borne in mind when we refer to Luke chapter ten, and it is this; just when did the events occur? In other words, was Martha anything like a believing person when Jesus spoke to her as He did? Her sister had certainly “chosen that good part;” she had not. Was that “good part” the gospel? Was Christ not applying the gospel to Martha at that point of her life? To fail to take that into account is to establish an unsure foundation for the rest of the building we are going to erect. However, whatever particular time the words were spoken, one thing is clear, they were spoken well before the events of the 11th chapter of the Gospel of John – the raising of Lazarus – and that is the chapter that must compliment and complete any full picture of Martha that we might want to have. The events of the chapter are full of interest:-
Christ is on his way to Bethany, having received word that Lazarus is sick; however, in the meantime, Lazarus has died, and in verse 20 we read this; “Then Martha, as soon as she heard that Jesus was coming, went and met him: but Mary sat still in the house.” Typical, we are told; that is typical of both women: Martha bustling about, Mary sitting “still” in the house: composure as opposed to restless activity. But, unless we had already settled the characters of both women in our minds it is doubtful if we would read it like that. You see, the expression for Mary sitting in the house is an expression used in connection with deep mourning as known among the Jews. It is a time of deep mourning in the house at Bethany; verse 19 tells us that “many Jews” had come to comfort the two sisters. In verse 31, when Mary learns “secretly” from Martha that Jesus has come, and goes forth to meet Him, the Jews in the house assume that Mary has gone to the grave of Lazarus “to weep.” They were mistaken, of course. But, from Mary's whole behaviour and attitude during those days of bereavement, those visitors to the house assumed she had flown away in distress to the tomb of Lazarus to weep there – something that she had probably already done before. But, the general picture of Mary is clear: she has “collapsed” under the crisis that has struck the household – she sits a mourner, preoccupied with the blow that has fallen upon them. And Martha? Martha has obviously “risen above” the situation; and when the news of the approach of Christ comes, she is in a position to go forth to meet Him.
Note her words in verse 21: “Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died.” Do we need any better evidence of a heart and mind of faith than that from Martha? Of course, she wavers, and ebbs and flows throughout the chapter; but don't we all in the things of faith? But. here is faith from Martha - “if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died.” In fact, that is exactly the same word that Mary speaks when she goes out to meet Jesus in verse 32 - “Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died.” “Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.” If the words are commendable in Mary, they are commendable in poor old Martha; if they are not a full enough expression of faith from Martha, they then cast a doubt on the depth of Mary's faith also. But one thing is clear, Martha's next word to Christ rises to the very heights of faith, and it is not repeated by Mary when she meets the Saviour:- “then said Martha unto Jesus, Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died. But I know that even now, whatsoever thou wilt ask of God, God will give it thee.” Not bad for a woman whose spiritual stature is hardly recognised. As we say, Mary makes no such addition to her statement.
The words concerning the “resurrection” follow, and again, there is an ebbing and flowing of faith with Martha – which again, we say, belongs to us all, - Mary included. But they too, are good basic words: “I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection of the last day.” Not everyone in Israel in those days would have made such a statement; Sadduceeism was prevalent; the resurrection was denied by many. But, Martha again soars to the heights in verse 27: “She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world.” Mark that confession well; she confesses who He is, what he is, where He had come to, and why He had come; He is The Lord, the Son of God, the Christ, the One who should come, the One who should come into this world. In that confession, Martha stands absolutely apart from the whole of Jewry almost, which in a short time will take and nail the Saviour to the cross. She is a woman of full stature in that day when the revelation of God was yet only partial to the hearts of the faithful.
But so, she comes to tell Mary, in verse 28 and following that “The Master is come, and calleth for thee.” and it's at this point that we find dear old Martha absolutely maligned, even by those commentators who rank among the best in our evangelical and reformed tradition. Their comments make sad reading: “Why does she go to Mary after the words concerning the resurrection and the Life?” One commentator asks: and the answer he gives: “She didn't fully grasp the fulness of that truth, so she goes to Mary; she will be able to understand.” Another comments: “Martha now makes amends; as she had tried to pull Mary away from Jesus on an earlier occasion, now she will endeavour to draw her to Him.” We could go on and on; a glance at many commentaries will show the same emphasis. And when it comes to Martha at the actual tomb of Lazarus with Jesus, she again comes under fire. She draws back, you remember, from the idea of the tomb being opened: “Lord, by this time he stinketh; for he hath been dead four days.” Her faith has ebbed; she has forgotten that Christ is the resurrection; don't we all! But note this, she at least has come to grips with the reality of the death of her brother “four days” after the event, and has begun to gather up the threads of life and get on with the task of living. And Mary? Well, four days after the event, Mary is still being “comforted” within the walls of the house at Bethany where she “sits” in the position of deep sorrow, yet to draw out the solace of the truth of the gospel to her soul. Is this to “down” Mary, or any who sorrow deeply over a loved-one departed? Indeed, no: but it is an appeal to re-dress the balance of truth in our minds.
But so the miracle of the raising of Lazarus from the dead is completed, and then, when you come into chapter 12 of John, you are confronted with a heartsome picture. A “supper” has been served in the house of “Simon the leper” at Bethany, (see other gospel accounts:) and John tells us that “Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with Jesus.” So, sitting at the table with Jesus is this leper, Simon, who has now of course, been cleansed of his leprosy, and this man Lazarus, who has been raised from the dead in that miracle of resurrection when Christ “cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth.” And what you have there, at that supper, of course, is a “token” of that coming day when Christ shall appear from heaven “with a shout” etc., and when the dead in Christ shall be raised and those that remain on the earth in their old leprous bodies shall be changed.” Then, we shall all sit down at the supper above where “the king sitteth at his table.” it's at that supper at Bethany that Mary anoints Christ's feet and earns the everlasting memorial for what “she hath done;” Note that – what she hath done: - Mary is remembered for a sacrificial service. And it's at that supper that we read, “And Martha served.” “The same old Martha,” say some. We would say, Amen, for she completes the resurrection picture - “And they shall serve him day and night in his temple,” in sanctified service.
This is Martha:- No mean saint.