It was this glimpse of Mary that Charles Wesley had in mind when he wrote. Both sisters made their contribution to the Master.” But the “good part” Mary chose was that of a fuller appreciation of the necessity of mystic communion with her Lord. George Matheson says, “We see Martha preparing the feast we see Mary sitting quiescent at the Master’s feet and listening to His words, and we say, ‘The one is an outward worker and the other an internal mystic whose sympathies are all beyound the veil.’ Mary’s sympathies are nothing of the kind. Probably this was Mary’s position as with all teachableness she hearkened unto the Lord. Usually the rabbis, or teachers, sat on a high chair, and their scholars on the ground, and so they were literally at their master’s feet. David sat before the Lord, and listened for His voice (1 Chronicles 17:16). Like his Master before Him, the apostle sat in the midst of learned men, learning and answering questions (Luke 2:46). She sat at His feet as a disciple, eager to learn of His will and word fell at His feet in worship and grief anointed His feet with precious ointment and wiped His feet with her lovely long hair-all of which is in keeping with her spiritual character.īelieving Jesus to be the Prophet, she drank of the teachings He alone could impart as “the Truth.” Paul wrote about being “brought up at the feet of Gamaliel” (Acts 22:3). Mary, more than any other individual in the New Testament, was associated with His feet, betokening her humility, reverence and hunger for spiritual knowledge. More than anything else she loved to sit quietly and peacefully at Christ’s sacred feet, and become lost in His unfolding of the truth. This inner world charmed her more than it did her sister Martha, as the particulars we have of her testify. She was a woman who cultivated deep, spiritual inner thoughts, and who was busier internally than she was externally. There are four profiles of Mary who occupied her own peculiar place among the inner groups of Christ’s friends. Among the women mentioned in the gospels she occupies a prominent position, for she it was who won the golden commendation from the Lord she dearly loved when He said, “She hath done what she could” (Mark 14:8). But we hold that Mary of Bethany cannot be identified with any other New Testament woman of the same name. There are those writers who suggest that these two Marys are the same &– that once the Magdalene was fully emancipated from demonic possession which drove her from home, she returned and became the Mary who loved to sit at the feet of Jesus. (See further the chapter on Nameless Women.) We likewise dissociate Mary of Bethany from Mary Magdalene. Although the two anointings had the same outward form, they were not duplicates. The former’s anointing expressed the gratitude of a forgiven and cleansed penitent-the latter’s anointing was an act of gratitude for a much-loved brother brought back from the dead. Certainly both anointed the feet of Jesus, but the language used to describe the sinful woman is utterly out of harmony with what we know of the commendable character of Mary. In this cameo of her, then, let us try to sketch her as she was, as an individualist.Īt the outset we affirm our disagreement with those expositors who connect Mary of Bethany with the woman who was a sinner (Luke 7:36-50 with John 11:2 12:1-8). Bustling around a house was not native to her deep emotion. Martha sat at His feet but “her love and piety alike found adequate and satisfying expression at all times in the ordinary kindly offices of hospitality and domestic service.” Mary also sat at Jesus’ feet and was content to linger there because her disposition and inward, silent brooding made it hard for her to be at home in the world of affairs. Both loved the Master and were loved by Him. Comparisons and contrasts between the two sisters have already been noticed.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |