Gospel of the Sixteenth Sunday in Ordinary Time
“Now as they went on their way, He entered a village; and a woman named Martha received Him into her house. And she had a sister called Mary, who sat at the Lord’s feet and listened to His teaching. But Martha was distracted with much serving; and she went to Him and said, ‘Lord, do You not care that my sister has left me to serve alone? Tell her then to help me.’ But the Lord answered her, ‘Martha, Martha, you are anxious and troubled about many things; but one thing is necessary. Mary has chosen the better part, which shall not be taken away from her.’” (Lk 10:38-42).”
I – God created us for eternity
Because of our human nature, we tend to focus on material things which are accessible to the senses, rather than on spiritual realities.
Yet God has created us for eternal happiness, and to attain this, our external acts are not as important as our merits, virtues and correspondence to gifts received from God. We must, therefore, conquer this instinctive leaning toward the inferior and always seek the transcendent.
Does this imply that we should scorn all that is palpable and apply ourselves exclusively to study and prayer? Should we put aside any and all concrete activity, including the most noble and necessary, in order to never lose contact with the supernatural?
This dilemma is at the heart of today’s Gospel. In just a few inspired lines, St. Luke presents the figures of Martha and Mary, symbols of the active and contemplative life, respectively.
II – Martha and Mary
“Now as they went on their way, He entered a village; and a woman named Martha received Him into her house.”
Lazarus, Martha and Mary were siblings belonging to one of the most prominent families of Palestine. Their affluence included the opulent estate of Bethany, some three kilometres from Jerusalem.1
The episode narrated in today’s Gospel occurred during one of Jesus’ sojourns in this village. En route from Jericho to Jerusalem, He was taking the opportunity to visit this family bound to Him by close friendship. Martha’s home in Bethany was a pleasant and secluded place, appropriate for Our Lord to rest, as the Jesuit exegete Truyols indicates: “In the peaceful setting of saintly amenity reigning in the house of Martha, Mary and their brother Lazarus, and in the intimacy of an innocent trust, Jesus found some repose from the constant animosity, snares and hatred of His enemies.”2
We can easily imagine this family’s happiness in receiving their divine Guest and surrounding Him with the best care.
Mary is only concerned with the Divine Master
“And she had a sister called Mary, who sat at the Lord’s feet and listened to His teaching.”
After the warm greetings and habitual ablutions of his arrival in Bethany, Jesus must have reclined, as was customary, on a type of divan. Or perhaps, as Truyols imagines, He sat under the vine trellis in the garden, while the meal was being prepared.
Mary immediately sat at his feet, taking in the divine teachings with loving admiration. Here was the Man whose word the storms obeyed, who abated the winds with a threat, who quieted oceans with a look, who banished leprosy with a command, and who opened the ears of the deaf with a touch…
Mary forgot all else in her enchantment with the Divine Master. Leaving aside all other concerns—including those regarding the care of the Lord—she remained with Jesus, her eyes fixed on Him.
It is noteworthy, as Maldonado aptly observes, that Christ “had scarcely entered the house, when He began His duty of teaching divine matters, desiring to nourish with spiritual delicacies those who were providing him corporal food.”3 From this attitude, St. Cyril draws a beautiful lesson: Jesus’ example “teaches His disciples how to behave in the houses where they are received; that they should not remain there idly, but rather give sacred and divine teaching to those who receive them.”4
Martha strives to give the Master a fitting reception
“But Martha was distracted with much serving.”
As the eldest sister, it fell to Martha to wait on the guests. In her sense of good manners, she desired to provide an excellent reception for Jesus, not wishing to leave this duty to the servants. Furthermore, according to prevailing etiquette, a visitor of eminence was served by the hosts.
St. Augustine affirms that Martha “displays generous hospitality in receiving Jesus in her home; this is a great work, for she is preparing the meal for the Holiest One and for His holy men.”5
Our Lord travelled in the company of the Apostles and disciples, and perhaps arrived without notice. There was no time to lose in furnishing a fitting reception, which explains why Martha “was distracted with much serving” and felt the absence of other hands with whom to share the duty. Yet Mary, enraptured with joy at the presence of the Lord, had completely forgotten her obligations as hostess, leaving the entire task to her sister.
Reception should start in the soul
“And she went to Him and said, ‘Lord, do You not care that my sister has left me to serve alone? Tell her then to help me.’”
It would not be in keeping with good manners for Martha to reproach her sister before a visitor, especially when that visitor was Our Lord. She therefore addressed Him with a certain feminine delicacy, using a question that implored His intervention. The request, totally reasonable under the circumstances, is carefully formulated, since it acknowledges the Master’s authority and leaves the last word in His divine hands.
However, it is likely that Martha was unconsciously placing more importance on practical concerns than the Divine Guest Himself. Thus, her complaints regarding Mary indirectly touch Jesus, “who, in speaking with her, seems to approve of her behaviour,” as the celebrated Fillion clearly points out.6 Perhaps without noticing, Martha was neglecting the First Commandment of the Law of God. And Our Lord will very gently admonish her.
The elder of the two sisters, St. Augustine notes, “was well engaged in ministering to the bodily wants of the Lord […]; meanwhile, He who was clothed in mortal flesh, in the beginning was the Word.”7
When receiving someone superior to ourselves, our main concern should be to fully profit from his presence in our home, rather than practical provisions. Since this guest was the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, the good reception should have begun in the soul, acknowledging who He is. The desire to offer Him a good meal will afterwards follow as a consequence.
On this occasion, St. Augustine points out that “Mary was absorbed in the sweetness of Our Lord’s words. Martha was thinking of how to feed Our Lord […] but Mary, rather, in how to be fed by Him. Martha was preparing a feast for Our Lord, in whose feast Mary was already rejoicing.”8 And St. Bernard rightly comments: “Both received the Word: Mary in spirit, Martha in the flesh.”9
Jesus’ loving admonition
“But the Lord answered her, ‘Martha, Martha.’”
Our Lord had perfectly seen Martha’s trouble, but had said nothing. However, when she tried to take Mary from His side, He admonished her saying: “Martha, Martha.”
How would Jesus have said these words? With what inflection of voice? It must have been solemn and majestic, but filled with affection! Certainly, it would have touched her soul with the grace for her to deeply understand the meaning of the divine response.
It is intriguing to note that, after the Resurrection, when Our Lord addressed Mary Magdalene, He did not repeat her name. He only said: “Mary”. And she immediately exclaimed: “Rabboni!” (Jn 20:16). It was enough for her to hear her name just once to feel complete consonance with the Master. However, in Bethany, He felt it necessary to repeat: “Martha, Martha.”
There is nothing superfluous in Sacred Scripture; therefore, small details such as this reveal a world of doctrine.
Why did Jesus say to one, “Martha, Martha”, and to the other only “Mary”? The episodes concerning the two sisters reflect two almost contrary states of spirit. In the first, Our Lord needs to repeat the name of Martha as a “sign of affection and admonishment regarding an important point,”10 because people absorbed in practical questions generally tend to be inattentive. They are, so to speak, asleep to their interior, and it is not enough to call them once. Jesus must have repeated Martha’s name with varying vocal modulations, like music, touching her to the depths of her soul.
“Resurrection” – Manresa Cathedral (Spain)
Was she serving only Jesus, or also herself?
“You are anxious and troubled about many things.”
Although concerned with serving Our Lord in the best way possible, perhaps Martha’s intention was also to maintain the great prestige of the house. Thus, she was troubled, taken by concerns which were not entirely in harmony with love of God; for the family name was at stake. And when God is not in the centre of our considerations, agitation easily gains entry.
Let us be mindful that the supernatural value of every action depends on the intention with which it is done. What was Martha’s goal here? To the measure that she sought to uphold her reputation, she was not serving Our Lord, but herself. In this way she was concerned with earthly, rather than eternal goods, and served Him more with her hands than her heart.
Martha’s pragmatic and naturalistic psychology is much more widespread than one might imagine. She wanted to please Our Lord, but with her attention partly focused on worldly motives. Perhaps she even desired to call attention to herself, hoping to receive praise for her readiness to serve.
“But one thing is necessary. Mary has chosen the better part, which shall not be taken from her.”
In admonishing Martha, Jesus affirms, “Mary has chosen the better part.” With great sensitivity, He does not express the consequence, which was nevertheless undeniable—to her had fallen the lesser part…
III – “Martha” souls and “Mary” souls
Let us now consider the important question that arises from this—one that is so often misinterpreted.
Can we infer from the Lord’s response that He condemned looking after concrete matters as not deserving our attention, since we cannot carry them into eternity? Should we all, then, not dedicate ourselves exclusively to the contemplation of eternal truths?
This is not the lesson we should draw from this Gospel passage, because, as St. Teresa of Avila notes with her lively common sense, if Martha “had been absorbed in devotion [all the time], as the Magdalene was, there would have been no one to prepare a meal for this divine Guest.”11
With characteristic energy, St. Augustine shows that Christ does not affirm here that Martha should forsake those indispensable occupations: “Do we imagine that Martha’s serving was blamed, whom the cares of hospitality had engaged, upon receiving the Lord Himself into her house? How could she be rightly blamed, who was gladdened by so great a guest? If it were like this, then let men give up their ministrations to the needy; let them choose for themselves ‘the better part’, which shall not be taken from them; let them give themselves wholly to meditation upon the word, let them long after the sweetness of doctrine; be occupied with the saving knowledge; let it be no care to them, the stranger in the street, who may want bread, or clothing, or to be visited, to be ransomed, to be buried; let works of mercy cease, and earnest heed be given to knowledge only. If this be ‘the better part,’ why do not all do this, having the Lord Himself as our defender in this behalf?”12
Jesus’ answer was subtle and, as Cardinal Gomá notes, “encompasses an entire way of life which is the fulfilment of the supreme equilibrium of Christianity in the order of action.” The Divine Master left a lesson for all of humanity in the persons of Martha and Mary.
Operative contemplation and contemplative action
Contemplation and action are not mutually exclusive realities. St. Thomas teaches that the former is, undoubtedly more excellent and meritorious than the latter, when each is considered individually.14 Yet, he adds that action that proceeds from the plenitude of contemplation is preferable to contemplation alone.15 Fillion echoes this teaching of the Angelic Doctor: “Although Mary’s part has something more heavenly, it is however, in ordinary situations, optimal to unite the condition of Martha with that of Mary.”16
Therefore, perfection is found in the union between contemplation and action. The Holy Family gives the greatest example of this. Our Lady cared for the house in Nazareth with unequalled diligence, and St. Joseph was surely the most conscientious of carpenters. Both worked and completed their duties. Nevertheless, their attention was always focussed on Jesus and the highest aspects of reality, to the point that St. Louis Grignion de Montfort affirms that Our Lady gave more glory to God by sewing than St. Lawrence did in suffering the terrible pains of martyrdom while being grilled alive.17
In the same way, we can also give much glory to God in our daily concrete actions if we fulfil them with our mind fixed on heavenly things, and not merely earthly ones. This is what Jesus Christ did during His public life: He was always very busy and active; however, He was also always imbued with a spirit of prayer and contemplation.
“The Holy Family” – Church of the Holy Name of Jesus, Rome
The naturalistic solicitude of Martha
How should Martha, then, have acted in this episode?
As we have seen, she was responsible for the house and for making provisions for the proper care of Our Lord. Therefore, she began well by wanting to serve and please Him. However, without realizing it—as often happens—this praiseworthy goal was gradually replaced by a naturalistic concern, accompanied by the desire of impressing Him and the others.
If she had carried out her duties, giving Jesus her primary attention, she would also have maintained the better part and the fruits of her work would have had another beauty and substance. It was not necessary for her to leave her activities and go and sit, like Mary, at Jesus’ feet, but rather, as Fillion accurately points out, she had to remember that, “the only thing necessary is to prefer the interior to exterior things, to give oneself to Christ without restrictions, adoring and loving Him and living solely for Him.”18
The imperfect love of Mary
The Divine Master said that Mary chose the better part, but He did not state that she acted out of perfect love.
Our Lord is mindful of the obedience due to intermediary authorities and, therefore, Mary should have yielded to her elder sister’s decisions, fulfilling the obligations that fell to her, without losing her devotion, keeping her heart set on Our Lord. “Do not imagine—the Seraphic Doctor cautions—that your love of quietude permits you to escape, even in the least things, from the practice of holy obedience or the rules established by superiors.”19
It may be concluded, then, that Mary did not act in the most excellent way, inasmuch as she scorned the lesser part, failing to take the necessary responsibility for the proper care of Jesus.
A lesson for both
This Gospel contains a lesson for both “Martha” and “Mary” souls. Jesus teaches the former that one thing alone—love of God—is necessary, because only charity crosses the threshold of eternity, while all else is secondary. We should fulfil our daily duties with our hearts turned toward higher things, aware that we depend upon divine grace for everything. And Jesus shows the latter that they should not scorn the lesser part, nor disregard the necessary measures for the proper ordering of life. Because, as Theophylactus points out in commenting on this passage, “Our Lord does not forbid hospitality, but the troubling about many things, that is to say, hurry and anxiety.”20
In both action and contemplation, it is necessary to maintain peace of soul, devotion and a spirit completely focused on the supernatural.
IV – Being perfect in action and in contemplation
Since Martha was virtuous, she undoubtedly received Our Lord’s words well and noticed that she had indeed been in error.
How did she act after the divine admonishment? Certainly she continued to serve Him, but without agitation. Filled with peace, joy and consolation, she must have thanked Him for the lesson received, which grace helped her to fully accept. “Reprove a wise man and he will love you” (Prv 9:8). Thus, she loved Our Lord even more after this affectionate correction.
We should imitate the two sisters by fulfilling all our daily actions with the love of Mary, but, like Martha, with due care. Man’s life has moments of action and contemplation, and in both it is necessary to be “perfect as the heavenly Father is perfect” (Mt 5:48).
Action results from contemplation
Our earthly life should be marked by a primary concern for eternal things. As Father Romano Guardini clearly explains, human existence develops on two parallel planes—the interior and exterior, with the most important being the interior, because ultimately the exterior flows from it. “Thus, in man’s daily life—he continues—it is evident that the interior predominates over the exterior. It has the character of ‘a necessary’, which must clearly appear first. If the roots rot, the tree can continue growing for a time, but it will eventually die. This is even truer with the life of faith. In it there is also an exterior domain—talking and listening, working and struggling; there are projects and institutions, but the ultimate sense of everything resides in the interior. The work of Martha is justified by Mary.”21
In answering the call made to us in this Gospel passage, let us make the necessary efforts to raise our sights, deformed by the naturalistic spirit, to Heaven. Entering there, we leave the things of this earth behind us. Our faith will be transformed into the vision of God, face-to-face, our hope into definitive possession of the Greatest Good, and charity will reach its plenitude.
Benedict XVI administers Holy Communion in the Basilica of St. John Lateran during the 2010 Corpus Christi Mass
More fortunate than Martha and Mary
Today, we are much more fortunate than Martha, because we receive Jesus not in our homes, but into our hearts. He gives Himself to us in the Eucharist, and instead of having to work to prepare a meal for Him, He feeds us with His Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. Therefore, it is an even happier situation than that of the family of Bethany who so often received Our Lord!
Let us thank Martha for her zeal in welcoming Jesus, and praise Mary for her example of love of God, but let us especially thank Jesus for showing us the best way, and for all He does at every moment to help each one of us to practice it. ◊
Everything at the Service of the Divine Guest
Saint Martha was holy, but we are not told that she was a contemplative. What more do you want than to be able to grow to be like that blessed woman, who was worthy to receive Christ Our Lord so often in her house, and to prepare meals for Him, and to serve Him and perhaps to eat at table with Him? If she had been absorbed in devotion [all the time], as the Magdalene was, there would have been no one to prepare a meal for this Divine Guest. Now remember that this little community is Saint Martha’s house and that there must be people of all kinds here. Nuns who are called to the active life must not murmur at others who are very much absorbed in contemplation. […]
Remember that there must be someone to cook the meals and count yourselves happy in being able to serve like Martha. Reflect that true humility consists to a great extent in being ready for what the Lord desires to do with you and happy that He should do it, and in always considering yourselves worthy to be called His servants. If contemplation and mental and vocal prayer and tending the sick and serving in the house and working at even the lowliest tasks are of service to the Guest who comes to stay with us and to eat and take His recreation with us, what should it matter to us if we do one of these things rather than another?
(ST. TERESA OF AVILA. The Way of Perfection,
chap.17, New York: Image, 1964, p.126-7.)
Notes
1 Cf. FILLION, Louis-Claude. Vida de Nuestro Señor Jesucristo. Vida pública. Madrid: RIALP, s/d., v.II, p.334.
2 FERNÁNDEZ TRUYOLS, SJ, Andrés. Vida de Nuestro Señor Jesucristo. 2.ed. Madrid: BAC, 1954, p. 417-418.
3 MALDONADO, SJ, Juan de. Comentarios a los cuatro Evangelios – II. Evangelios de San Marcos y San Lucas. Madrid: BAC, 1951, p.554.
4 St. cyril, apud ST. THOMAS AQUINAS. Catena Aurea.
5 ST. AUGUSTINE. Sermon 255, 2, apud ODEN, Thomas C. e JUST, Jr., Arthur A. La Biblia comentada por los Padres de la Iglesia – Evangelio según San Lucas. Madrid: Ciudad Nueva, 2000, v.III, p.258.
6 Cf. FILLION, op. cit., p.335.
7 St. augustine. Sermon 104, 3, apud ST. THOMAS AQUINAS. Catena Aurea.
8 ST. AUGUSTINE. Comentarios de San Agustín a las lecturas litúrgicas (N.T.). Valladolid: Estudio Agustiniano, s/d, p.1073.
9 ST. BERNARD. Obras completas. Madrid: BAC, 1953, v.I, p.712.
10 GOMÁ Y TOMÁS, Isidro. El Evangelio explicado. Barcelona: Casulleras, 1930, v.III, p.134.
11 ST. TERESA OF AVILA. The Way of Perfection. New York: Image Books, 1967, c.17, p. 126.
12 ST. AUGUSTINE. Sermon 104, 2. In ODEN, JUST, e A., op. cit., p.1073-1074.
13 GOMÁ Y TOMÁS, op. cit., p.134.
14 Cf. ST. THOMAS AQUINAS. Summa Theologica, II-II, q.182, a.1 and 2.
15 Cf. Idem, II-II, q.188, a.6, r.
16 FILLION, op. cit., p.336.
17 ST. LOUIS DE MONTFORT. Treaty of True Devotion to Mary, n.222. 9.ed. Petrópolis: Vozes, 1978, p.214-215.
18 FILLION, op. cit., p.335.
19 ST. BONAVENTURE. Meditaciones de la vida de Cristo. Buenos Aires: Santa Catalina, p.184.
20 THEOPHYLACTUS, apud ST. THOMAS AQUINAS. Catena aurea.
21 GUARDINI, Romano. O Senhor. s/l: Agir, s/d, p.196.