GINGER OR MARY ANN?
Does anyone remember an old T.V. show called Gilligan’s Island? The show only ran for three years – from 1964 until 1967 – and there was a grand total of 98 episodes made. The show really made its biggest mark on T.V. audiences once it got into syndication. It was a show about a group of seven people who went on a three-hour tour and ended up stranded on a desert island. Every single episode, it seemed, focused on their valiant efforts to get off the island, only to be thwarted time and time again by Gilligan’s ineptitude.
An urban legend tells us that the idea for the show came from a Sunday morning sermon. The show’s creator Sherwood Schwartz once heard a minister talking about who you’d like to be stranded on a desert island with. The minister’s answer was Jesus, of course, but this got Sherwood Schwartz to thinking. He thought about desert islands and the humorous situations that could arise from different people being stranded on one, and the rest is television history.
In fact, a question referring to Gilligan’s Island has made its way into popular American culture. There is a game that asks people to choose which of two options they prefer. Hot dogs or hamburgers? Chocolate or vanilla? Fried eggs or scrambled eggs? It’s an either/or proposition and most of us can answer the questions rather quickly. The old Star Trek or the new Star Trek? McDonalds or Burger King? Clinton or Reagan? Ginger…or Mary Ann?
Obviously, that last question is probably aimed more at men than it is at women. Someone told me that I need to be nonsexist in my reference to Ginger or Mary Ann. But somehow, asking the question, “The skipper or Gilligan?” loses some of its luster. Ginger was the sultry Marilyn Monroe look-alike, while Mary Ann was more like the girl-next-door. Ginger or Mary Ann: which do you prefer? In this context, it’s clearly an either/or proposition.
It’s a game that popped into my head as I thought about the passage we read from the gospel according to Luke. Jesus went to visit a couple of sisters named Mary and Martha. They had a brother named Lazarus as well, but he’s not mentioned in this particular passage. So Jesus and his disciples went to the home of Mary and Martha. Imagine thirteen dinner guests showing up at your house unannounced. Martha tried to play the consummate hostess. She probably rushed around the house picking up whatever was strewn about. Then she set about getting a huge meal together. Martha was doing everything she could to provide for her guests.
What was Mary doing? Well, apparently Jesus sat down and started to teach. Mary sat down at his feet and listened to what he was saying. It didn’t take Martha long to notice that Mary was not helping her. I can almost picture the scene in my mind: Martha, frantically working in the kitchen, trying to get the table set. As she walks out into the dining room carrying a stack of plates, she slams each one down on the table and glares at Mary as she does so.
Finally, Martha lodged a complaint with Jesus. She said, “Lord, do you not care that my sister has left me to do all of the work by myself? Tell her then to help me!” Jesus likely smiled, looked at Martha and said, “Martha, Martha, you are worried and distracted by many things. There is need of only one thing. Mary has chosen the better part.”
This is what got me to thinking about an either/or proposition. Mary or Martha: which one would you rather be? Or, perhaps better put, Mary or Martha: which one are you more like? Martha was busy making preparations for her guests. Mary was attentive to the primary guest. Martha had chosen to DO, while Mary had chosen to BE. Again, Martha had chosen to DO, while Mary had chosen to BE.
Jesus himself actually said that Mary had chosen the better part. But think about it. Only men think meals magically appear. Didn’t someone have to get a meal together? Didn’t someone have to set the table? Didn’t someone have to straighten up? Isn’t it perhaps true that both Mary’s role and Martha’s role were necessary?
If you think about it, Mary and Martha’s roles are similar to the tracks that the Eastern Church and the Western Church have taken. In the year 1054 A.D., the church underwent what we call the Great Schism. The Eastern Church became the Eastern Orthodox Church while the Western Church became the Roman Catholic Church. Protestants wouldn’t come along for another 500 years. The Church split primarily over what we call the Filioque. Speaking of the Holy Trinity, the Eastern Church said that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father. The Western Church said that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. Filioque is Latin for “and the Son.” That’s why the East and the West split in the year 1054 A.D. We may think of that as splitting theological hairs, but they took their theology much more seriously 1000 years ago than we do today.
But here’s my point about how Mary and Martha’s roles are similar to the tracks that the Eastern Church and the Western Church have taken. The Eastern Orthodox Church tends to focus on being. They emphasize prayer and their churches are filled with icons. The Roman Catholic Church and Protestant churches in general tend to focus on doing. That’s why we talk incessantly about mission. The Eastern Church, like Mary, focuses on being, while the Western Church, like Martha, focuses on doing. Is one better than the other? Is this an either/or proposition, or is this perhaps a both/and proposition?
I believe this is a both/and proposition. I believe we need to learn how to BE, but I also believe that we are called to DO. We learn to BE through worship and through prayer, and we DO when we work to make the kingdom of God a reality in our little corner of the world. We are called to do both and both are vitally important.
Listen to this. Last week I did a funeral for a woman named Helen Truran. In June of 1951, Helen and a friend were driving in a car in Columbus, Ohio. They came across another car at a stop sign that contained two servicemen stationed at Fort Hayes. One of those servicemen asked Helen where she and her friend were going. She said, “On a picnic.” The serviceman asked, “Can we come along?” Helen said, “Sure!”
The serviceman who asked Helen if he and his buddy could come on that picnic was Dick Truran. They had their picnic in June of 1951. By September of 1951, Dick and Helen were married. It was all because Dick asked her, “Can we come along?” and she said, “Yes.” What if she had said, “No?” If she had said no, I can think of five children who would never have been born, not to mention countless grandchildren and great-grandchildren.
My point is this. Do you see how important one little decision can ultimately be? One seemingly harmless or simple decision can alter the entire course of our lives, not to mention the lives of countless others. It is vitally important that we choose wisely. So I say we need to learn to BE before we go out and DO. Again, we need to learn to BE before we go out and DO. In other words, we need to prayerfully discern who God is and what God wants before we try to go out and try to change the world. Prayer necessarily precedes action.
I recently came across a fascinating essay of sorts entitled “Lost Generation.” It was written by a young man named Jonathan Reed. It was written in response to a challenge by the American Association of Retired Persons to college students to imagine themselves at the ripe old age of 50. This essay actually came in second in the contest. I’d like to see the essay that came in first! In any case, listen to an essay entitled “Lost Generation.”
I am part of a lost generation and I refuse to believe that I can change the world. I realize this may be a shock but “Happiness comes from within” is a lie and money will make me happy. So in 30 years I will tell my children they are not the most important thing in my life. My employer will know that I have my priorities straight because work is more important than family.
I tell you this, once upon a time families stayed together. But this will not be true in my era. This is a quick-fix society. Experts tell me 30 years from now I will be celebrating the 10th anniversary of my divorce. I do not concede that I will live in a country of my own making. In the future environmental destruction will be the norm. No longer can it be said that my peers and I care about this earth. It will be evident that my generation is apathetic and lethargic. It is foolish to presume that there is hope.
Pretty depressing, wouldn’t you say? Then the essay says, “And all of this will come true unless we choose to reverse it.” Then when you reverse the lines of the essay, it reads like this:
There is hope. It is foolish to presume that my generation is apathetic and lethargic. It will be evident that my peers and I care about this earth. No longer can it be said that environmental destruction will be the norm. In the future, I will live in a country of my own making. I do not concede that 30 years from now I will be celebrating the 10th anniversary of my divorce. Experts tell me this is a quick fix society. But this will not be true in my era.
Families stayed together once upon a time. I tell you this, family is more important than work. I have my priorities straight because my employer will know that they are not the most important thing in my life. So in 30 years, I will tell my children, “Money will make me happy” is a lie and “happiness comes from within.” I realize this may be a shock but I can change the world. And I refuse to believe that I am a part of a lost generation.
That essay is really quite profound. I have a sneaking suspicion, however, that it will never come true apart from worship and prayer and Bible study. We first must BE before we attempt to DO. For only God can provide the solutions to what ails our society.
We were talking last Wednesday morning at the men’s breakfast at Perkins about what ails our society. Our nation is fast approaching a debt of 14 trillion dollars. The national debt increases at a rate of 4.15 billion dollars a day, and each individual citizen’s share of the national debt is $42,905.31. Small towns all across America are collapsing as their industry gets shipped somewhere else. And 69% of the Crawford Central School District is on the free or reduced lunch program. I kept trying to say, “Where is the hope? Where is the hope?” Finally someone said, “The hope is going to have to come from the Presbyterian pulpit!”
All right, here’s the hope. Only God has the answer to what ails our society. Worship God in the hopes that he will not turn his back on us. Study the Bible to come to understand what it is God wants from us. And pray that God will somehow intervene. Then we must do what we believe in our hearts God is leading us to do.
Now back to the word game. I read a story about someone who was playing that word game we talked about earlier. You know, hamburgers or hot dogs? McDonalds or Burger King? The question was asked, “The Ten Commandments or the Beatitudes?” Everyone quickly said, “The Beatitudes, of course!” But a dedicated Catholic woman named Elizabeth refused to answer the question. She said, “You can’t have one without the other.”
Elizabeth was right. It’s not an either/or proposition, it’s a both/and proposition. We must learn to BE and we must learn to DO. We must turn to God first to find out who he is, who we are, and what he wants from us. Then we must do what we believe in our hearts God is leading us to do. So I ask you again: “Ginger or Mary Ann?” Perhaps the best answer…is both. Amen.
