Mary of Bethany: Her Leadership Uncovered SBL Atlanta Mary Stromer Hanson
S22-330 Maria, Mariamne, Miriam: Rediscovering the Marys 4:00 PM – 6:30 Nov 22, 2015
Alexander, Loveday C. "Sisters in Adversity: Retelling Martha's Story." In A Feminist Companion to Luke, edited by Amy-Jill Levine, 197-213. Cleveland: The Pilgrim Press, 2004.
Beavis, Mary Ann. “Mary of Bethany and the Hermeneutics of Remembrance.” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 75, (2013): 739-755.
_____. “Reconsidering Mary of Bethany.” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 74, (2012): 281-297.
Graham Brock, Ann. Mary Magdalene, The First Apostle: The Struggle for Authority. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003.
Caird, G.B. The Gospel of St. Luke. Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1963.
Conway, Colleen M. Men and Women in the Fourth Gospel: Gender and Johannine Characterization. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 1999.
Carter, Warren. “Getting Martha Out of the Kitchen: Luke 10:38-42 Again.” In A Feminist Companion to Luke, edited by Amy-Jill Levine, 214-231. Cleveland: The Pilgrim Press, 2001.
Collins, John N. “Did Luke Intend a Disservice to Women in the Martha and Mary Story?” Biblical Theology Bulletin 28 (1998), pp; 104-11.
D'Angelo, Mary Rose. "Women in Luke-Acts: A Redactional View." JBL 109 (1990): 441-461.
Goodacre, Mark. “The Magdalene Effect: Misreading the Composite Mary in Early Christian Works.” Unpublished, 2015.
Hutson, Christopher. “Martha’s Choice: A Pastorally Sensitive Reading of Luke 10:38-42.” Restoration Quarterly 45, no. 3 (2003): 139-150.
Reid, Barbara E. Women in the Gospel of Luke: Choosing the Better Part? Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1996.
Schneiders, Sandra M. "Death in the Community of Eternal Life: History, Theology, and Spirituality in John 11." Interpretation 41 (1987): 44-56.
Schüssler Fiorenza, Elisabeth. "A Feminist Critical Interpretation for Liberation: Martha and Mary: Lk. 10:38-42." Religion and Intellectual Life 3 (1986): 21-36.
Seim, Turid Karlsen. The Double Message: Patterns of Gender in Luke-Acts. London:T&T Clark International,1990.
Spencer, F. Scott. “You Just Don’t Understand or Do You?” In A Feminist Companion to John. Vol. 1, edited by Amy-Jill Levine, 15-47. Cleveland: The Pilgrim Press, 2003.
Yamaguchi, Satoko. Mary & Martha: Women in the World of Jesus. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 2002.
38 Ἐν δὲ τῷ πορεύεσθαι αὐτοὺς αὐτὸς εἰσῆλθεν εἰς κώμην τινά· γυνὴ δέ τις ὀνόματι Μάρθα ὑπεδέξατο αὐτόν. 39 καὶ τῇδε ἦν ἀδελφὴ καλουμένη Μαριάμ, [ἣ] καὶ παρακαθεσθεῖσα πρὸς τοὺς πόδας τοῦ κυρίου ἤκουεν τὸν λόγον αὐτοῦ. 40 ἡ δὲ Μάρθα περιεσπᾶτο περὶ πολλὴν διακονίαν· ἐπιστᾶσα δὲ εἶπεν, Κύριε, οὐ μέλει σοι ὅτι ἡ ἀδελφή μου μόνην με κατέλιπεν διακονεῖν; εἰπὲ οὖν αὐτῇ ἵνα μοι συναντιλάβηται. 41 ἀποκριθεὶς δὲ εἶπεν αὐτῇ ὁ κύριος, Μάρθα Μάρθα, εριμνᾷς καὶ θορυβάζῃ περὶ πολλά, 42 ἑνὸς δέ ἐστιν χρεία· Μαριὰμ γὰρ τὴν ἀγαθὴν μερίδα ἐξελέξατο ἥτις οὐκ ἀφαιρεθήσεται αὐτῆς.
Christopher R. Hutson, “Martha’s Choice: A Pastorally Sensitive Reading of Luke 10:38-42” Restoration Quarterly 45 no 3 2003 139-150. The h[ (who) is found in a 1 A B* C D W Q Y and others. The h[ is omitted by p45 p75 א * B2 L X and others. It is interesting to note that the Alexandrian scribes who copied both a and B were conflicted about their decisions. The evidence is evenly divided, and a decision is difficult. p145
John Nolland, The h[ is read in א 1 A, B, C, D, W, Θ, Ψ and others. The h[ is omitted by p45, p75, א, L, and others. If it is accepted, then it should probably be linked to the following kai which should be taken as indicating that what Mary does is in addition to what Martha has done. p600 note d
D’Angelo: Women in Luke-Acts According to K. Aland et al., 1985 the relative pronoun h[ is found in Vaticanus, in the first corrector of Sinaiticus, in Alexandrinus, in Ephraemi rescriptus, in Bezae, in Regius, in the Freer Gospels, Koridethi, and Athous Laurae, as well as families 1 and 13. It is omitted in Sinaiticus and by the second corrector of Vaticanus, as well as by papyri 45 and 75. p454
This paper is posted on stromerhanson.blogspot.com