“Martha, Martha, you are worried and distracted by many things...”   I affirm this classic interpretation as a timely and relevant theme that speaks to each of us.  It is a call to make cultivating relationship with God the highest of priorities in a world where we are faced with dozens of options and choices everyday.

Another classic interpretation of this story is the theme of the balancing of service (represented by Martha) and devotion (represented by Mary).   The story is seen as symbolizing these two aspects of the life of faith and a need for them to be in balance.    

I want to go beyond those classic interpretations this morning.  I think this story is about much more than these classic interpretations – much more!   The classic interpretations are derived from reading this story backwards from our 21^st  century point of view – from our life experience of a million options all clamoring for our attention and commitment.   But is that what this passage meant to 1^st century people when it was written?  Is that what it meant to Luke’s community, since this story only appears in Luke’s gospel?   When we look at this passage from the point of view of the 1^st century world, it changes the meaning and focus of the story completely.  So, let’s do just that.  Let’s look at it from a first century point of view.

We begin by understanding of the status of women in first century religion and culture.  Jewish women in Jesus day were not considered full members of the covenant community.  Women were only a part of the covenant community through men, their husbands or fathers.  The prevailing, majority paradigm was that women could not study the Torah.  In most rabbinic circles it was strictly forbidden and explicitly stated so - even harshly so! 

The Mishnah (a written interpretation of the Torah) explicitly stated, and I quote “If any man gives his daughter knowledge of the Torah it is as though he taught her lechery.” [i]   Yikes!  Holy Cow!  So what was that all about?   Well, just this: to teach a woman the Torah would have been to break down the prevailing religious and social institutions of the day that affirmed male superiority over female inferiority.  It would have been to erode the foundation of male supremacy upon which the religion and culture was built.  The male dominated hierarchy of culture and religion could collapse and the playing field would be leveled.    

If women were allowed to be equal students of the Torah alongside men, it would have made it possible for women to have attained the status of teacher alongside male teachers and rabbis, and in most circles that would have been intolerable – as intolerable as lechery.  Whew!  Heavy stuff! 

So, with our understanding enlarged with just that basic information about their life situation, transforms this story to take on radical new dimensions of meaning.  Instead of helping with the obligations of household hospitality, which was a women’s expected gender specific role in biblical times, Mary felt free, in the presence of Jesus, to step out of that role and to sit at the feet of Jesus, leaving Martha behind to fulfill the gender role of the dictated duties of hospitality.  You see, sitting at a teacher’s feet was the accepted posture of discipleship and learning, a posture reserved only for the men.  Mary assumed the forbidden student role of being taught by a teacher, in this case, Jesus.   Repeatedly in the gospel of Luke Jesus is addressed by others as “teacher.”

And, she was encouraged and affirmed by Jesus, when Jesus said, “Mary has chosen the better part, which will not be taken away from her.”  And with that we have a culturally and religiously subversive story on our hands

Notice that Jesus doesn’t denounce the old ways of gender hierarchy and oppression by preaching an admonishing sermon, but rather he gently models and affirms a whole new way.  Mary felt free and encouraged by Jesus to step out of her traditional gender role to sit at the feet of Jesus – assuming the posture of learning and discipleship reserved only for the men.

Jesus words to Martha, “Martha, Martha you are worried and distracted my many things,” was not an admonishment of Martha, but a clear recognition of the fact that Martha was caught in the iron grip of social and religious gender roles from which she could not extricate herself as Mary had done.  That was likely the source of Martha’s agitation with her sister when she said, “Lord do you not care that my sister left me to do all the work?”    Jesus did care, but based on how Jesus affirmed Mary, what is more likely is that Jesus cared that Martha was enslaved in her gender role and was unable to break free from hundreds of years of social and religious traditions and follow her sister’s lead into sitting at Jesus feet. 

Jesus punctuated the whole thing by affirming Mary’s initiative, “(this) will not be taken away from her.”   Wow!  It was if Jesus was saying, “Way to go Mary!  By moving toward me and sitting at the feet of my teaching you have taken the first step toward a greater fulfillment of your personhood and womanhood, stepping past the confining prohibitions, that up until now, have marginalized you and reduced your humanity and worth as a human being.”

One more thing:  Even though Jesus said it would not be taken away from Mary, resistant forces that have raged down through the centures ever since have tried to do just that!  There were a few rabbis in Jesus’ time that allowed women to study the Torah alongside the men.   And those rabbis were a in minority and were in direct conflict with the dominant cultural and religious paradigm.  These two paradigms were in conflict in the Jewish community in Jesus’ day.  A similar conflict existed in the early church and does in church and culture to this very day.

If you read the New Testament with discernment you will see this conflict as plain as the nose on your face, particularly in the epistles.  There is no time to go into depth here, but we can read passages that declare the total worth, dignity and equality of all, crossing racial, ethnic, religious, social and gender divisions; passages like Galatians 3:28, “There is no longer Jew or Greek, slave or free, male or female; for all are one in Christ Jesus.”  Or 1 Corinthians 7 where the relationship between husband and wife is portrayed as a relationship of total equality.  Or in Philemon where Paul returned the slave Onesimus to his master Philemon, not as a slave but as a beloved brother.

But then we can turn to other passages that reinforce hierarchy and narrow gender and social roles.  What it indicates is that in the early church there was a conflict;  there was more than one operative paradigm and they were in disagreement with one another.  The interesting thing is that biblical scholarship reveals that the church got more conservative and reinforced narrow gender and social roles as time went on; and by the second century women were totally excluded from teaching and preaching roles in the church. 

We could say, it finally was "taken away" from Mary in direct contradiction with Jesus’ affirming words to Mary, and it took only about 100 years from the time of Jesus to do so. 

This conflict has continued down through the centuries, even in the history of our own nation where religion was extensively used to justify slavery, exclude women from the vote and blacks from civil rights; in our own denomination where it took until 1970 to ordain women.

But it was not so in Luke’s very early community of faith.  Luke’s community departed from culturally and religiously imposed gender and social roles:  Luke’s Jesus, in spades, repeatedly affirmed and empowered those that had indeed been marginalized by culture and religion.  It is in Luke’s gospel that a despised Samaritan is held up as model of compassionate discipleship; it is in Luke’s gospel that a young peasant woman, Mary mother of Jesus is held up as a role model of trust; it is in Luke’s gospel that the prophetess Anna preached about the infant Jesus in the temple; it is in Luke’s gospel that a prostitute is portrayed as a model of servant-hood and repentance; it is in Luke’s gospel that Jesus tells parables with women as the central figures; it is in Luke’s gospel where women are named in the same list alongside the 12 male disciples; it is in Luke’s gospel that a despised Jewish collaborator with Rome, Zacchaeus, is held up as an example of generosity; it is in Luke’s gospel that a little child, one at the bottom of the hierarchical totem pole, is affirmed as greatest in the Kingdom of God.   

Luke’s community experienced Jesus as a force of love and justice that set people free from institutional religious and cultural marginalization and affirmed their status as full and equal members of the faith community.  When we set others free to attain their fuller humanity, we also set ourselves free into our own fuller humanity. 

There have been, are and will be powers at work that would reverse and smother the liberating energy of Jesus.  In my view every act of personal or institutional marginalizing of another human being that occurs on this planet nails Jesus to the cross all over again, and crushes Mary’s audacious act of assuming a role that culture and religion said was unavailable to her.  There are millions of people on this planet who are still marginalized along gender, racial, ethnic and social lines. 

Today Mary is our role model, especially when for whatever reasons any of us wants to hold our ground with Martha and not step across the barriers and boundaries used by some to suppress and reduce the humanity of others.  

“Martha, Martha, you are worried and distracted by many things; there is need of only one thing.  Mary has chosen the better part, which will not be taken away from her.”  

In the face of all those forces that would snuff out Jesus’ liberating message, I say “Resurrection!” Jesus is alive – in us when we assume “the better part” with Mary and affirm and advocate for human equality and dignity those who have been left out and pushed to the margins.