Better than Best - Mary and Martha

Ninth Sunday after Pentecost (Ordinary Time/UM Kingdomtide), C

July 21, 2013

Luke 10:38-42

An Orthodox icon with St. Lazarus, Jesus, St. Mary of Bethany, and St. Martha. (Art courtesy of EasternGiftshop.Com)

 I have not been able to post any “Pray” posts for the past month owning to my busyness at my new school. Also for this year, I was not given a church appointment (my teaching job being my “appointment”) so I have moved from the pulpit and Table to the pew. I was not even able to publish my last few sermons, which I delivered during the first three weeks of June (I pitched in for a colleague who was coming from Davao City for her training). I will not be preaching regularly, but I will still be posting my exegetical notes on the Sunday Gospel readings. Owning to illness, I was able to snatch some time away from work and write a few notes. Somehow, the Gospel reading today is most apt for my situation at present.

Introduction

Today’s Gospel reading, the visit of Jesus to the home of Martha and Mary in Bethany (Luke 10:38-42), immediately follows the Parable of the Good Samaritan. A “certain scribe” asked Jesus on how to inherit eternal life. He answered his own question: To love God and to love one’s neighbor (v. 27). Apparently, the scribe had no problem of “loving” God but he had a problem of loving his neighbor: “But he willing to justify himself, said to Jesus, And who is my neighbor?” In his characteristic fashion, Jesus answers with the Parable of the Good Samaritan. When Jesus asked who was the one who was neighborly to the person in need, the scribe could not even say the “S” word!

The story of the visit of Jesus to the home of the sisters Martha and Mary may be thus seen in the context on who loved Jesus more.

I. Martha: Being encumbered with much serving

The Gospel reading describes Martha as being “incumbered with much serving” (v. 40). The Greek word used for “incumbered” is περισπαω, perispaō, which means ‘to walk around’ or (according to Thayer) metaphorically, ‘to be driven about mentally, to be distracted’, or ‘to be over-occupied, too busy about a thing’. John Wesley notes that the word “properly signifies to be drawn in different ways at the same time, and admirably expresses the situation of a mind, surrounded (as Martha’s then was) with so many objects of care, that it hardly knows which to attend first.

Because of this, Martha came to Jesus and said, “Lord, dost thou not care” “that my sister hath left me to serve alone? bid her therefore that she help me” (v. 40). (In our time, Martha would have said, “Lord, don’t you care? Mary has let me to serve alone. Tell her to help me.”)

Jesus did not censure Martha. “Martha, Martha”—there is a tenderness in the repetition of the name. John Wesley notes, “There is a peculiar spirit and tenderness in the repetition of the word”. Jesus used two words: “Careful”, which in Greek is μεριμναω, merimnaō which does not mean ‘to exercise great care’ but (according to Thayer) ‘to be anxious’, or ‘to be troubled with cares’. Inwardly, Martha was full of cares! The other word is “hurried” (John Wesley New Testament) or “troubled” (KJV), which in Greek is τυρβάζω, turbazō, which means ‘to be troubled in mind, disquieted’ (from this word we get the English words to make turbid and turbulence). Outwardly, she was hurried. She was in stark contrast to Mary, who was “sitting at the feet of Jesus” (v. 40).

II. Mary: Sitting at the feet of Jesus

While Martha was “incumbered with much serving”, Mary was “sitting at the feet of Jesus…[hearing] his discourse” (v. 40). This is the posture of a disciple, which was unusual for a woman at this time. As it is said in the Mishnah,

Yossei the son of Yoezer of Tzreidah would say: Let your home be a meeting place for the wise; dust yourself in the soil of their feet, and drink thirstily of their words. (Pirkei Avot 1:4)

Women of the time were thought of as serving in the kitchen, just like Martha; and not listening to the discourse of a teacher, just like what Mary was doing.

Martha apparently thought the Mary was doing something useless and asked Jesus to bid Mary to help her in the kitchen. Martha was tenderly rebuked by Jesus (v. 41) and said,

But one thing is needful: and Mary hath chosen the good part, which shall not be taken from her. (v. 42)

Jesus did not rebuke Martha for being busy per se, but in her busyness she has neglected him, their Guest. Mary has chosen the good (or shall we say, “better”) part, and it “shall not be taken away from her”. Mary (according to John Wesley), was concerned with the salvation of her soul so she sat at the feet of Jesus to listen to his teaching. “Reader, hast thou?”

Conclusion

Serving the Lord through work is commendable. There are many people who serve the Lord with their labor: teaching children, watching over the church parking lot, cooking in the soup kitchens, cleaning the church sanctuary, being in solidarity with the poor, advocating social justice, & c. But sometimes we can be so full of care and trouble with our work that we lose focus of Jesus himself. How many pastors—me included—have been so busy with the work of ministry that we don’t have time anymore to pray and read the Bible? We need to assume the posture of Mary of Bethany, sit at the feet of Jesus, listen to his teaching, and simply just be with him.

For another sermon contrasting the busyness of Martha and the worship of Mary, refer to my sermon “Mary or Judas?” on this blog.

Play Review - "Sandosenang Sapatos"

Tanghalang Pilipino opens its 27th season (2013-2014) with “Sandosenang Sapatos”, the heart-warming story of the love between a father and a daughter which transcends even death.

It was Sunday, July 14, when I was in Cubao, Quezon City to attend the 61st anniversary of St. John United Methodist Church, where my cousin is the associate pastor. At around lunch time, “Tinay”, a former student of mine, texted me inviting me to watch “Sandosenang Sapatos” at the CCP. This was the same student who invited me to watch the staged reading “Jun Ispater” which was previously reviewed on this blog. I was just half-hoping to see “Sapatos” but there was no invitation for me to watch. Then suddenly, out of the blue, an invitation landed on my lap.

I arrived at the CCP around 15 minutes after the play began. I introduced myself as the guest of “Sequins”, which is Tinay’s role in this play. I must have been expected, or I made an imposing figure all clad in black sporting a pectoral cross and a clerical collar. I was promptly given a ticket, signed in a sheet (listing down who is whose guest) and ushered into the theater. I was ushered into the Tanghalang Huseng Batute and seated on an upper seat on the balcony. The protective handrails kept obscuring my view of the action below.

According to the playbill, which “Sequins” asked me to buy, “Sapatos” is a children’s book written by multi-award winning author “Tito Doc” Luis Gatmaitan. The play’s libretto was written Layeta Bucoy and directed by Tuxqs Rutaquio, the same people who gave us “Jun Ispater”. The music was composed by Noel Cabangon, known for the song “Kanlungan” and Jed Balsamo.

A promotional picture for "Sandosenang Sapatos" featuring Susie and the Shoes. (Photo courtesy of Lhorvie Ann Nuevo on Facebook.)

“Sandosenang Sapatos” stands in stark contrast with "Jun Ispater" If “Ispater” was painted in dark colors of black and red, “Sapatos” is painted in cheery pastels. I instantly recognized the cast of “Ispater” in the play—instead of wearing black, they were now dressed in gaudy, colorful costumes. “Ispater” was staged at the smallish Tanghalang Amado Hernandez, which was more of a room than a theater. “Sapatos” is staged at Huseng Batute, which is small as far as theaters go but definitely bigger than the Amado Hernandez.

The Huseng Batute is a “theater-in-the-round” (in this play's set-up), where the audience is seated in front and both sides of the stage, but some of the audience is actually seated to the back of the stage. The stage was composed of a figure eight with two sloping platforms in the center of the circles. A trio—a piano player, a percussionist, and an acoustic guitarist—provided the superb live music to the play.

Susie with the Shoes in dreamland. (Photo from Carmela Manuel on Facebook.)

I entered just as “Susie”, the main character, was having a dream sequence. It turns out that the colorfully-dressed characters are the Shoes, who serve as the chorus in the play. (My student, clad in a golden brown outfit with Chun-Li style hair, plays a Shoe named “Sequins”.) The Shoes went around on inline skates—which is hard considering that the stage was small and they had to sing, dance, and act. Hats off to the Shoes!

Susie is a girl who was born without feet. Her dream was to have feet so that she can make her father’s dream come true—to have a daughter who is a ballerina. Every eve of her birthday, the Shoe Fairy would visit her in her dreams and give her a pair of feet and a pair of shoes so that she can dance for one whole night. Her father’s birthday was arriving but she has nothing to give him. She asks the Shoe Fairy if she can have feet for her father’s birthday but the Shoes tell her that she can only talk with the Shoe Fairy on the eve of her birthday. When she wakes up, she gives her father a music box with a dancing ballerina.
 
Trixie Esteban, who plays Susie, is a very adorable girl with a fair complexion and round cheeks. (She’s fourteen, according to “Sequins”.) Her voice has a certain purity and innocence in it—not the vaulting, crystalline voice of Charlotte Church (before she fell into the Dark Side)—but that of a young Sharon Cuneta (think of “Mr. DJ, may I have a request…?”). I think she does strain her voice a bit on the high notes but she pulls off her role very well. I hope when she grows up, she'll have a voice like Hayley Westenra. I had the opportunity to have a photo op with her after the play, and boy, was I smitten! She was really cute and adorable. I wanted to put her in my pocket and take her home!

Back to the play, it turns out that her father, a shoemaker, was sick and he eventually dies. (The lights flickered ominously signaling his death.) Susie sank into a pit of despair, not even wanting to talk with the Shoe Fairy on the eve of her birthday and to accept the pair of shoes. But it was revealed that the shoes were actually from her father, who appears to her in the dream. (He was apparently resurrected by the Shoe Fairy using the Blue Gemstone and given full buffs like Agi-Up, Kyrie Eleison, Impositio Manus, Gloria, and Blessing. LOL.) She was able to dance with her father the whole night—a scene that made me wipe tears from my eyes. :’-)

Susie glazing in wonder at a dozen shoes floating above her. (Photo courtesy of Trixie Esteban on Facebook.)
When Susie wakes up, her mother and older sister find a box in her father’s workshop containing a dozen shoe boxes—one for every year of her life. (The shoes were ingeniously rigged to a set of cables from the ceiling, creating a mobile.) The line between the waking world and dreamland becomes blurred when her father, the Shoe Fairy, and the Shoes appear and they launch in a song which says that love even conquers death.

Tinatawid ng pagmamahal ang panaginip
Sa mga sandaling akala mundo’y naiidlip
May isang pusong hindi mapakali
Upang pangarap ng minamahal ay tuparin.

(My translation:)

Love bridges even dreams
In moments that you think the world’s asleep
There is a heart that is yearning
To fulfill a loved one’s dream.

I cannot help but wax theological. In the Catechism of The Book of Common Prayer (1979) of the Episcopal Church USA, there is a question on praying for the dead:

Q. Why do we pray for the dead?
A. We pray for them, because we still hold them in our love, and because we trust that in God’s presence those who have chosen to serve him will grow in his love, until they see him as he is.

Protestants generally dismiss the concept of praying for the dead. But one of the most popular Protestant hymns, “For the Beauty of the Earth”, describes the “mystic harmony” of the church on earth and the church in heaven:

For the gift of human love,
brother, sister, parent, child,
Friends on earth, and friends above;
For all gentle thoughts and mild:
Lord of all, to thee we raise,
this our hymn of grateful praise.

After the play, the audience had a chance to meet and greet the cast of the play.

"Sequins" and I. Taken from the crummy front-facing camera of my tablet.

“Sequins” was glad to see me; I congratulated her and planted a buss on her cheek. I was one proud teacher. I also had a chance to have a photo op with Trixie.

Me with Trixie Esteban--I have since seen her Facebook account but am too shy to add her as a friend. I opted to "follow" her instead.

The following conversation ensued:

ME: Ang galing mo dun sa play ah. Pwedeng magpa-picture?
TRIXIE: Opo.
(I took out my tablet and turned on the front-facing camera.)
TRIXIE: Saan po ako titingin?
ME: (Laughs) (Aba, conscious na siya pag picture!)
(Points toward camera and snaps picture)
ME: (Pointing to Lhorvie) Alam mo si Ate Lhorvie mo? Ako ang teacher n'ya.
TRIXIE: Saan po?
ME: Sa college.
TRIXIE: Mabait po s'ya?
ME: Mabait. (Laughs) Thank you sa picture. God bless!

That was such an adorable girl, that. Did I mention earlier that I was smitten?

The jaded and the cynical among us may dismiss the play as playing on a child’s fleeting fantasy. Some social justice advocates may be up in arms, denouncing the social structures that discriminate “differently-abled” children. Heck, the feminists may even denounce the daughter for not overthrowing structures of patriarchy for reasons I can’t even imagine.

But it all boils down to seeing things in the eyes of a child. No wonder Jesus said, “Assuredly, I say unto you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 18:3). We have become so “grown-up” that we have forgotten to be a child; where the line between fantasy and reality is blurred and that there is nothing more reassuring than the love of a Father.

A YouTube video of the final song, "Tinatawid ng Pagmamahal ang Panaginip":
 
* * *
UPDATE BOARD:

July 17, 2013: Miss Trixie Esteban has since "liked" our picture on Facebook and even left a comment: 

Play review - Jun Ispater

Last July 5 (Friday), I went to the Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP) to watch “Jun Ispater,” a staged reading by Tanghalang Pilipino upon the invitation of a former student of mine, who I shall refer to as Tinay. The event was part of “Virgin Labfest 9”, which features “Untried, untested, unstaged plays.”

So right after my class at Philippine Christian University-Dasmariñas, I hopped on a bus straight from Cavite to the CCP. I didn’t know where the Tanghalang Amado Hernandez is. It turns out that to get to it, I had to take an entrance on the right side of the CCP, pass through a warren of offices, and get into a relatively small room at the end. I got there just in time for the Philippine National Anthem.

The experience was a stark contrast with my watching of SOAR: The Musical at De La Salle – Health Sciences Campus. A set of black curtains hung on back of the low stage. There were six music stands on front and six chairs where the actors will sit. The room contained around a hundred seats of so.

The event is termed a “staged reading” where the actors read their parts from a script. But far from being a radio play, the actors occasionally leave their scripts on the stands and act out their parts.

The play opens with the three male characters. The title role is held by Jun Ispater (‘spotter’), a hustler who makes a living by conning out other people in billiards. His friend is a dim-witted buffoon named Boying. The third character is Danny, a foul-mouthed, gun-toting security guard. Jun is in a bind to find money to pay for the tuition fees of his sister, April.

The female characters are April (played by a lovely, chinky-eyed girl), Jun’s sister, who wants to join a singing contest in order to have money to pay for her tuition. Her friend is Grace, who encourages her to join and win the contest. The cast is rounded off by my student Tinay, a “vocally-challenged” girl who works as a cook and cleaner at the nightclub/billiards hall where Jun works. (In the play, Tinay is described as “pipi”; but she is not mute. Her Wookiee-like vocalizations are among the comic reliefs of the play. I wonder what her lines in the script look like?)

Danny hatches a scheme to steal from the nightclub/billiards hall and enlists the help of Jun, Boying, and even of Tinay. Jun is torn between engaging in an “honest” living as a billiards hustler while Boying is sorely tempted by the offer so he could have money to celebrate his anniversary with Tinay, his girlfriend.

Danny, Jun, and Boying eventually carry out their robbery of the nightclub but they had to take Grace because she was a witness to the crime. Danny eventually murders Grace.

Jun gives the money stolen from Grace to April for her tuition, but she instead spends it to buy medicine for their ailing mother. Blaming herself for getting Jun in desperate straits just to have her finish college, April commits suicide. (The noose lowered from the ceiling is the only prop in the play.)

“Jun Ispater” is a story of the tensions within society. The conflict is not so much as “Man vs. Society”, a picture that Danny wants to paint: rich versus poor. The true conflict is “Man vs. Himself” as exemplified by Jun and  Boying. In the face of human need, does one remain in the path of “sipag at tiyaga” (‘industry and patience’) or contemplate a life of crime?

* * *

The soundtrack of the play is “Basta’t Maghintay Ka Lamang” by Japanese singer Ted Ito (see YouTube video here). In the play, the song is said to be a favorite of the father of Jun and April. It’s the song that Jun plays in the billiards hall (“Eh yan lang ang laman ng CD eh!”), the song in Grace’s cell phone, and April’s entry into the singing contest. It exemplifies the ideals of Jun and his father: no matter how hard things get, just wait.

Fatayin ang "Filipinas"

Ano kaya ang masasabi ni Pres. Manuel Luis Quezon dito?

Sa unang pagkakataon ay magsusulat ako ng blog entry sa Tagalog. Ngayon, huwag na muna nating pag-usapan kung ano nga ba talaga ang tawag sa Wikang Pambansa: Tagalog, Pilipino, o Filipino. Sa isip ko, ang Tagalog ang orihinal na wika ng mga Tagalog na walang halong mga salitang banyaga. Ang Filipino naman ay ang wika na  base sa Tagalog at may mga dagdag na mga salitang-hiram mula sa Español at Ingles. Pero kung iisipin, sa ibang mga buhay na wika (living languages), ang mga salitang banyaga na hiram ay itinuturing na ring bahagi ng wikang iyon. (Halimbawa, walang letrang “K” sa Español, pero sa mga salita tulad ng karaoke at karate—na mga salitang Hapones—ang mga ito ay itinuturing na ring “Español”.) Kaya, ang Tagalog na may mga salitang banyaga ay Tagalog pa rin.

Naglabas ng Resolusyon (Blg. 13-19 Serye ng 2013)  ang Komisyon ng Wikang Filipino “na ibalik ang gamit ng 'Filipinas' habang pinipigil ang paggamit ng 'Pilipinas'. (Tignan din ang webpage na ito.)

Sumulat ng isang editoryal na pinamagatang “Patayin ang ‘Pilipinas’” si Komisyoner Virgilio Almario (na unang inilathala sa Diyaryo Filipino noong 1992) na nagpapaliwanag kung bakit dapat “Filipinas” ang ating bansa. (Si Kom. Almario ay isang Pambansang Alagad ng Sining at karapat-dapat lamang ng aking paggalang. Patawarin niya nawa ang mga sasabihin ko.)

Una, gusto niyang “burahin” ang pangalan “Philippines” sa ating bansa. Ayon sa kanya, ang mga dating kolonya ng España tulad ng Puerto Rico, Cuba, Mexico, Chile, atbp. Ay di napalitan ng Ingles ang pangalan. Pero para sa akin, bakit kailangang “burahin” ang pangalang “Philipines” kung ito naman talaga ang pangalan natin sa Ingles? May mga bansa na may pangalang Ingles  at katutubong pangalan, tulad ng India (Bharat), Greece (Hellada), Austria (Österreich), China (Zhōngguó) at marami pang iba. Kung may pangalang Ingles ang ating bansa, problema ba iyon?

Dagdag pa rin, sinabi ni G. Almario na ang orihinal na pangalang ibinigay sa atin ng mga Kastila ay “Filipinas”. Ito rin daw tawag ng ating mga bayani sa ating bansa. Ang pangalang “Pilipinas” ay unang ginamit raw ni Lope K. Santos noong unang bahagi ng ika-20 siglo. Kaya ibinabalik lamang ang pangalan ng ating bansa sa orihinal. Kung tinanggihan ang pangalang “Philippines” dahil binyag nito na mga “imperyalismong” Amerikano, bakit naman hindi tanggihan ang pangalang ibinigay ng mga “imperyalismong” España?

Ikalawang, para kay G. Almario, “kakatwa” na ang wika natin ay “Filipino” at ang bansa ay “Pilipinas”. Ano pong “kakatwa”rito? Pero nasanay na ako na tawaging Filipino ang wika at Pilipino ang tao (“Ako po ay Pilipino at Filipino ang wika ko”). Pero sa English, ang tao at ang wika ay pareho ang tawag, tulag ng Filipino, Korean, Japanese, at Chinese. At ang pambasang wika ng India ay hindi “Indian” kundi Hindi.

Inaamin din ni G. Almario at ng Resolusyon ng KWF na magiging magastos ang pagbabago ng mga pangalan ng mga ahensiya at pagpapalit ng mga karatula, pera, notepad, atbp. At asiwa nga kung ang UP ay tatawaging *”University of Filipinas” (o, *“Unibersidad ng Filipinas/Pamantasan ng Filipinas”?). :-/

Wala po akong makitang dahilan upang palitan ang pangalan ng ating bansa ng “Filipinas”.

“Pilipinas” ang pangalan ng bansa ng mga Pilipino. Di na kailangang baguhin ang ispeling n'yan. 'Ika nga sa Ingles, “If it ain't broke, don't fix it.”

* * *

Ang pagpapalit ng KWF sa pangalan ng bansa na “Filipinas” mula sa “Pilipinas” ay maaring maging labag sa Konstitusyon.

Ang Kongreso, sa pamamagitan ng batas, ay maaaring magpatibay ng isang bagong pangalan ng bansa, isang pambansang awit, o isang pambansang sagisag, na pawang tunay na naglalarawan at sumisimbulo ng mga mithiin, kasaysayan, at mga tradisyon ng sambayanan.  Ang nasabing batas ay dapat magkabisa lamang pagkaratipika ng sambayanan sa isang pambansang referendum. (Artikulo XVI, Seksyon 2. Dinagdagan ng diin.)

The Congress may, by law, adopt a new name for the country, a national anthem, or a national seal, which shall all be truly reflective and symbolic of the ideals, history, and traditions of the people. Such law shall take effect only upon its ratification by the people in a national referendum. (Article XVI, Section 2. Emphasis added.)

Lumalabas sa Saligang Batas na tanging ang Kongreso (Ang Senado at ang Kamara de Representantes) ang maaring magpasa ng batas upang baguhin ang pangalan ng bansa! At ang batas na ito ay dapat pagtibayin sa isang referendum—kailangang ito ay pagbotohan sa isang pambansang eleksyon! Sa opinyon ko, nalampasan ng KWF ang kanyang saklaw sa pagpalit ng pangalan ng bansa, dahil ito ay nasa kapangyarihan lamang ng Kongreso at ng mamamayang Pilipino!