We all know the story of ‘Frankenstein’:

the tale of a scientist who assembles a man out of body parts…

then brings him to life…

only to be disgusted by his creation;

then abandons him…

and is killed by him.

Written by Mary Shelley in the early nineteenth century…

it’s a story that has been appropriated and popularised especially within contemporary cinematic culture.

But what does the story actually mean?

According to some, it argues that science, especially divorced from morality, is dangerous.

Some have seen it as a commentary on the Atlantic slave trade;

Or, a critique of Victorian prejudices towards ‘difference’…

either in relation to ‘class’ or ‘disability’.

It has been suggested that it’s a symbolic tale reflecting Mary Shelley’s guilt over the death of her mother…

or her miscarriage.

And some have even suggested that it’s simply a morality tale about the dangers of poor parenting.

Sometimes, it’s hard to know what a story means…

especially when it comes from a distant time…

and we lack the cultural and temporal awareness that the author assumes.

We can end up imputing meanings that were never intended. 

 

Naturally, that happens frequently when we read the Bible as well.

Take, for example, this morning’s reading from Luke’s Gospel.

Here we have a fairly well-known story––

the story of Martha and Mary––

one on which I’m sure that we have all heard sermons over the years…

where the point that’s frequently made is that we shouldn’t get caught up in busyness;

that we should focus on being rather than doing––

or something like that.

And yet… 

when it’s understood within the context of its original culture and time…

that’s not really what this story is about––

at all!

 

Let me explain.

 

In this story––

which we only find in Luke’s Gospel–– 

the author portrays Jesus as a guest in the home of a woman, named Martha.

The fact that he describes it as Martha’s home––

and makes no mention of any man––

strongly suggests that Martha is probably a widow…

and she doesn’t have any children.

That also suggests that Martha is the older of the two sisters.

And the way that Mary is portrayed suggests that she is quite a bit younger…

and probably not yet married.

The story also implies that… 

not just Jesus… 

but all his disciples are welcomed as guests as well. 

That suggests that Martha’s house is rather large…

and that the women concerned are probably quite wealthy…

which means that Martha would not have been doing any of the food preparation herself––

let alone actually serving the food.

That would have been done by servants.

As such, Martha’s role was to organise and oversee the servants who were doing that.

In the absence of a significant male relative, Martha acts as the host and offers hospitality… 

and there were very strict rules regarding hospitality in the ancient world.

For example…

a host was not meant to insult or offend the guest.

Indeed, the host was meant to protect the guest and his honour at all cost…

even at the expense of family members.

A host was meant to be attentive to their guests… 

showing great concern for their needs and wishes…

and offering their guests the very best that they had…

with no expense or trouble spared.

Thus, in fretting and fussing––

in stressing over every single detail––

Martha was doing exactly what was right and expected of someone in her position.

She was properly offering hospitality to her guests…

and fulfilling her duty as a host in caring for their needs.

She was preoccupied with the preparation and serving of the meal.

In so doing, she was fulfilling her culturally expected role as a woman of means:

supervising her staff…

ensuring that everything was right…

but leaving the men to themselves…

to eat… 

and to talk.

Because, back then, it wasn’t “proper” for a respectable woman to attend a meal involving guests––

especially where the guests were non-relatives;

and especially if they were not accompanied by a husband or a father. 

 

On the other hand, Mary sat at Jesus’ feet. 

Now…

while that might be a normal posture for a male disciple… 

it was highly unusual for a woman to do so… 

and it was especially unusual in the context of a meal involving guests.

In fact… 

for a woman to sit silently at a man’s feet during a meal… 

was for her to adopt the normal position and posture of a wife.

Mary’s actions, then, are highly provocative… 

even outrageous.

And they’re open to misunderstanding and misinterpretation––

either she’s behaving as if she’s Jesus’ wife…

or she’s behaving as if she’s a man.

And, as the author weaves the story…

Mary’s behaviour clearly rankles her older sister.

Unfortunately, Martha’s gruffness doesn’t necessarily come across in our English translations.

When she comes to Jesus she doesn’t ask politely.

In fact, the sense of the Greek is that she came and interrupted Jesus… 

took charge of the situation…

even stood menacingly or somewhat confrontationally. 

And there’s a strong sense of rebuke in the way that she addresses him––

and in the comments that she makes––

as if Jesus ought to be mindful of what’s going on…

and he ought to be concerned about it.

Then, she literally orders Jesus to tell her sister to do what’s right…

to fulfil proper cultural expectations––

as well as her social obligations––

and to stop acting in such a provocative… 

inappropriate…

and ambiguous manner.

Mary sat and listened––

defying expectations––

while Martha kept fussing and fretting…

striving to fulfil the obligations expected of her…

and, no doubt, worried what the neighbours would think… 

if they were to hear how her sister had behaved.

 

So, when the author has Jesus gently rebuke Martha…

and hold up Mary’s provocative actions as praiseworthy…

the original readers would have been stunned and shocked…

even offended.

Because all sorts of social, cultural, and religious taboos were being stomped on.

In a culture that expected women to be in the background––

producing babies and managing a household…

but not taking an active role in public life––

this story says, “no, think again”.

In a culture that regarded women who overstepped gender boundaries as wanton and promiscuous––

and labelled them as whores––

this story says, “no, think again”.

Here, the author has effectively redefined the place and role of women within the Jesus movement…

and it’s not one that’s merely restricted to offering material support…

or blending into the background.

Rather, it’s on the same terms as men.

And the author would have us believe that Jesus wouldn’t care if that upset anyone…

or offended any social, cultural, or religious sensibilities.

 

It’s a shame, isn’t it… 

that, even in the twenty-first century…

some branches of the Christian church still haven’t come to terms with that?

As some parts of the Anglican Church continue to wrestle with the consecration of women as bishops…

and, as the Catholic Church continues to bar women from any form of ordained ministry…

and most churches still struggle to come to terms with the place and role of LGBTI+ people within the church…

Mary just sits at the feet of Jesus…

quietly smiling.