I have been pondering the account of Jesus' visit to the home of Martha, Lazarus, and Mary (Luke 10:38-42). The main question- "Why did Luke include this event in his gospel?" How does this account fulfill Luke's purpose of letting his friend Theophilus know the certainty of the things he had been taught. (Luke 1:1)
Picture the scene with me. Mary and her sister and brother were most likely in Jerusalem for the celebration of a Jewish feast. (These being the main times Jesus traveled to Judea.) Since their house is not far away, they take the opportunity to invite this fascinating teacher into their home. Undoubtedly they were impressed with his teaching and were on their way to believing that he was the long promised Messiah of Israel (a fact both Mary and Martha openly testify to in John 11).
And so as a result of Martha's invitation THE LONG AWAITING MESSIAH is a guest in their home. This had to be exciting! I will not contrast Mary and Martha's response to Jesus' presence. This has been done by many before me. I simply want to point out that Mary's desire to "sit at Jesus' feet and listen to what he said," seems to me perfectly logical. After all, this was a man who people traveled great distances going without food just to hear speak. And he is "HERE IN OUR HOUSE!" Wow, who could help themselves.
Yet Mary gets rebuked. She doesn't get called aside and reprimanded in hushed tones. No she gets called out in front of everyone including the guest of honor. Actually, the lady of the house (undoubtedly her older sister) asks the guest of honor to publicly rebuke her. Can you imagine that split second between Martha speaking and Jesus replying. How did Mary feel? Had she done wrong? Had her sister misunderstood her intentions? Had other?
I'm sure I'm not the only one who can relate to Mary in this situation. I am sure there are others who have been misunderstood and perhaps openly rebuked for choosing Jesus in a way or at a time that others felt was inappropriate.
That brings us to Mary's second rebuke. Again there is a gathering at her home. Jesus is there with the twelve. Tensions are high as Jesus may be arrested at any moment. Martha is serving and Lazarus was at the table. Mary pours expensive perfume on Jesus feet and wipes them with her hair. The rebuke is quick and direct. She is accused of being wasteful and uncaring towards the poor. Since Mary was surely a woman of wealth, this rebuke was calculated and precise. A rather low blow. Again we can relate. Our attempts at offering and worship misunderstood and used as fodder for calculated insults.
Yet I have only told half the stories. You see both times Mary was rebuked someone came to her defense. That someone was the Lord himself. He did not sit by and think to himself, "I'm sure this will work itself out." He spoke up, just as boldly as the rebuker. Martha he answered with compassion and defended Mary's choice as better. "It will not be taken from her." Judas received a slightly stronger rebuke. After all his intentions were far from pure.
“Leave her alone,” Jesus replied. “It was intended that she should save this perfume for the day of my burial. You will always have the poor among you, but you will not always have me.” Could it be that Jesus was defending not just her act but her intention? Could it be that Mary perceived something most failed to see? Something to think about.
And so I come back to my original question, "why did Luke include the account of Mary and her siblings?" Was it to let Theophilus know that choosing Jesus may earn him rebukes even from those close to him? Was it to let him know that he might be misunderstood and maligned? Was it to encourage him and other believers that in those times Jesus would be their defender?Whatever his reasons, he's sure encouraged me and I hope you too.
