1. Introduction
The Gospel of John contains many characters who help guide the narrative to the author’s intended goal (20.31), and the Evangelist depicts these individuals with various roles and dispositions that accent the characterisation of Jesus and his work. Much ink has been spilt exploring these characters, their actions and their function within the Gospel’s framework and themes,Footnote 1 and given the prominence of belief in John, the level of faith characters exhibit is of particular interest. This article focuses on Martha, her engagement with Jesus in John 11 and her character’s contribution to the author’s view of faith. I will argue that the structure of her presence in John 11 reveals a more nuanced, dynamic picture of faith that portrays Martha as an ideal witness to Jesus in light of the Johannine theology of the resurrection.
Martha’s appearances in John are sparse. In chapter 11, Lazarus, the brother of Mary and ‘her sister Martha’, is ill, and the sisters send word to Jesus (11.3). Though Jesus does not immediately leave to tend to Lazarus (11.6), the author indicates his love for this family, naming Martha specifically (11.5). As Jesus and his disciples leave for Judea, the author foregrounds the faith of the disciples, as the inevitable death of Lazarus would serve their belief (11.7–16). By the time Jesus arrived, Lazarus had been dead for four days (11.17). This is the context in which Martha goes to meet Jesus and which frames the bulk of her engagement (11.20–7). There are several notable details in this passage: Jesus’ fourth ‘I am’ statement (11.25), Martha’s confession of the identity of Jesus (11.27; cf. 20.31) and Jesus’ final ‘sign’ (σημεῖον) (11.43–4).Footnote 2 The weight of this passage is clear as the passion of Jesus approaches, and Martha plays a decisive role in the understanding of Johannine faith within this backdrop due to her conversation that leads to her witness in 11.27.
Like many characters in John’s Gospel, Martha’s faith is a central concern of interpreters.Footnote 3 Scholars have presumed Martha’s interaction with Jesus as lacking in faith, or at most, demonstrating partial faith,Footnote 4 for even though she acknowledges that Lazarus would have lived if Jesus had been there (11.21), it appears that she fails to understand Jesus’ statement that he will ‘rise again’ (11.23). Francis J. Moloney has posited that Martha ‘tells Jesus what resurrection means’,Footnote 5 which makes her confession in 11.27 simply an admission of Jesus’ identity, but not in the context of her brother returning to life.Footnote 6 Moloney continues that the perfect tense of her πιστεύω indicates her long-held belief, unmoved by her conversation with Jesus,Footnote 7 which would relegate her faith as static. Similarly, Dorothy A. Lee believes Martha’s comprehension of Jesus’ identity is ‘deficient’ according to the picture presented in the Fourth Gospel,Footnote 8 and in a later work, Lee examines the characterisation of Martha and Mary and maintains that Martha’s faith is ‘growing’ but limited.Footnote 9 Finally, in 11.39, Martha comments on the inevitable odour that would emanate from a deceased body of four days, which some have taken as further evidence that Martha did not have faith to understand Jesus’ power over this circumstance.Footnote 10 Both Lee and Moloney, among others, take issue with Martha’s eschatology in this passage, and as a result, scholars judge Martha’s faith as either incomplete or improper.Footnote 11
Even so, this reading of Martha’s engagement with Jesus is not undisputed. In light of Martha’s declaration, Adeline Fehribach closely ties Martha to faith, maintaining that she represents the community of faith, and acknowledges Martha’s development as a disciple who, literarily, ‘embodies the theology of the implied author’.Footnote 12 To epitomise the Evangelist’s theology implies high praise of Martha’s character according to Fehribach.Footnote 13 Colleen M. Conway considers Martha a true interlocutor with Jesus,Footnote 14 and Sandra M. Schneiders sees strength and resolve in Martha.Footnote 15 Craig R. Koester labels her faith in this pericope as ‘paradigmatic’ and ‘exemplary’;Footnote 16 Margaret M. Beirne likewise considers Martha’s role as one that produces ‘substantial theological dialogue’ in alignment with her remarkable Johannine faith.Footnote 17 Yet, even with these positive readings of Martha, there remains a tension in the narrative, not only in precisely how Martha’s dialogue progresses (cf. 11.24–7) but within the miracle itself, where Martha appears to object to the removal of the stone (cf. 11.39). In other words, the question remains as to how a character can have exceptional faith yet still struggle to understand Jesus’ power in Lazarus’ resurrection.
Notably, Gail R. O’Day evaluates Martha well and provides the best response to mainstream interpretations through her primary focus on the rhetorical purpose and structure of the Gospel of John.Footnote 18 O’Day rightly notes that judgements about the level of Martha’s faith assume ‘what full faith looks like’,Footnote 19 which can present impressionistic interpretations. Given that the Fourth Gospel focuses on witness and testimony so heavily in the portrayal of characters (e.g., Andrew [1.41], Philip [1.45], Nathanael [1.49], Peter [6.68–9], the Samaritan Woman [4.29], the Samaritans [4.42], Martha [11.27]), to propose that their confessions needed correctionFootnote 20 or were partialFootnote 21 is to view the text as having a specific portrait of ‘faith’ of which characters consistently fall short. This is not to say that their testimonies are perfect; rather, these former analyses do not always consider the Evangelist’s rhetoric or intended goal. The strength of O’Day’s contentions lies in the reality that how Martha is portrayed – her words, her actions and their arrangement in the story – impacts what the Evangelist rhetorically communicates regarding her faith.
Therefore, if O’Day’s assessment has weight, Martha’s interaction with Jesus deserves a re-examination, one that focuses less on the completeness of her faith and more on the nature and rhetorical force of her engagement and confession therein. I believe this renewed perspective also comes from O’Day’s proposition that aligns Martha’s words in 11.21–7 alongside Israel’s lament poems. O’Day notes the lament psalms as Claus Westermann engages them, and she identifies Psalm 13 as a clear instance of the framework of lament.Footnote 22 However, O’Day moves quickly through the analysis and leaves the various components of the lament largely underdeveloped,Footnote 23 creating space for objections. In other words, while her proposal is intriguing, without durable expansion, it remains relatively tenuous. Further, and more importantly, understanding Martha’s lament sheds light on how the Evangelist portrays the faith of his characters as they engage with Jesus. Lament not only holds the key to understanding Martha’s faith alongside the overall portrait of John 11, but it also signals to the reader the progression of Johannine faith and discipleship in light of his theology of the resurrection. While O’Day is right to emphasise Martha’s rhetorical role as a character, she misses a larger rhetorical aim of the Evangelist as it affects other characters in his Gospel account. Through Martha, the author frames faith in light of Jesus’ resurrection by implementing the dynamics of lament, which has implications for other characters in the Gospel.
2. Tracing Martha’s Lament
Before assessing how Martha’s characterisation and faith speak into John’s theology of the resurrection, a more robust formation of Martha’s lament is in order. A striking aspect of Martha’s presence in this narrative is her volition and speaking role (John 11.3, 20, 21, 28, 39). It is apparent that Martha’s function in this passage is to communicate, which not only accentuates her influence as a characterFootnote 24 but also positions the reader to identify the dynamics found in the progression of her dialogue. With lament as a lens to view this encounter, it is necessary to briefly survey the structure and purpose of lament to confirm the plausibility of this literary presentation.
Heath A. Thomas defines lament as ‘a kind of prayer that voices a complaint to God about distress, and is uttered to persuade God to act on the sufferer’s behalf’.Footnote 25 Lament can characterise and shape various experiences, and Jeanette Mathews speaks of ‘framing’ in this respect and maintains that lament creates space to interpret and engage with human experience. She acknowledges that ‘in art, drama, and literature the frame lifts the work or event to heightened consciousness and provides a context for practitioners and audiences to interact.’Footnote 26 While some minimise the significance of the frame, it is the frame itself that establishes the need for the interpretation of the art.Footnote 27 The structure of lament carries out the same function. Mathews describes lament as a frame whereby the afflicted find structure for the expression of their pain.Footnote 28 Speaking of lament this way suggests an approach to Martha’s conversation with Jesus that is marked not by the quality of her faith but by the process of her faith expressed as grief, petition and praise before her Lord. When lament is the frame for this pericope, Martha’s words – especially her declaration about Jesus – find new interpretation and engagement.
Lament is a suitable frame for Martha’s boldness in John 11, and this is confirmed by the structure of her dialogue alongside that of lament. The analysis O’Day set forth lays the foundation for the sequence of this passage as lament, and her analysis finds its roots in Claus Westermann’s general lament structure.Footnote 29 My adaptation is as follows:Footnote 30
Lament: ‘Lord, the one whom you love is sick.’ (11.3)
Lament: ‘Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died.’ (11.21)
Petition: ‘But even now, I know that whatever you ask of God, God will give you.’ (11.22)
Confidence: ‘I know that he will rise in the resurrection on the last day.’ (11.24)
Confession/Praise: ‘Yes, Lord; I believe that you are the Christ, the Son of God, the one coming into the world.’ (11.27)
Martha’s words framed within the structure of lament open a window that allows a reassessment of this encounter and its implications for her faith. In order to engage lament in this way, we must acknowledge the legitimacy of lament as ‘a phenomenon of human existence’,Footnote 31 which is especially relevant in Martha’s case.Footnote 32 Westermann observes a threefold dimension to the lament psalms, which include God, the lamenter and the enemy,Footnote 33 and I will take these subjects into account in the proceeding interpretation. Martha’s lament is a ‘lament of the individual’,Footnote 34 and these laments, with their many structural variations, are found in the Psalms as poems and have been recognised with OT narrative texts (e.g., Gen 25.22; 27.46; Josh 7.7–9; Judg 21.3; and Jer 20.18).Footnote 35 With these considerations in mind, it is not unconventional to view Martha’s narrative speech in this way. What follows is a closer examination of her words, initially sketched out by O’Day but ultimately left begging for more development. This treatment substantiates my contention that faith in the Fourth Gospel is to be read dynamically, which is crucial for this character at this point in the narrative with the Evangelist’s theology of the resurrection in mind.
Lament grounds Martha and her speaking role in this encounter, and because of Martha’s involvement in her Jewish community (11.19), ‘for her to speak to Jesus in the cadences of Jewish lament is completely consistent with the way that her character has been presented’.Footnote 36 Further, in line with Israel’s lament tradition, John’s pericope presents Jesus as the Lord who is not only able to hear Martha’s need but also act on her behalf.Footnote 37 Though Martha’s lament is not in a prayer form but develops through the narrative,Footnote 38 the creativity of the Evangelist in characterising Martha’s engagement with Jesus emphasises the importance of this encounter. I consider each of Martha’s statements successively and bring Psalm 13 alongside Martha’s words as a concise example of a ‘Muster eines “Klageliedes des Einzelnen”’.Footnote 39 The clear way in which Psalm 13 arranges and presents the components of lament makes it an ideal counterpart for the structure of Martha’s lament.Footnote 40 This correlation will unpack Martha’s presence and witness in the Gospel of John.
2.1 Lament: ‘Lord, behold, the one whom you love is ill…if you had been here…’
The Evangelist introduces Martha’s character with a complaint before Jesus, and her protest is poignant. Three times, Martha calls Jesus Lord (κύριος; 11.3, 21, 27), opening the conversation through the address of her lament to Jesus. From her initial complaint through her petition and into her confession, she engages Jesus directly. Similarly, Psalm 13 opens with the lament of the psalmist, who directs his sorrow toward the Lord as his grief leads him to reveal his feelings of abandonment and disgrace (13.1–2). Martha’s observation that Lazarus is one whom Jesus loves is also within the address, and a few verses later, the text indicates that Jesus loves both Martha and her sister (John 11.5). His love for her family was not lost on Martha as she sent her lament of Lazarus’ illness to Jesus and is the foundation for her lament. The address is coupled with her opening need for Lazarus’ healing. For the lament of the individual, the ‘enemy’ is not the primary source of the distress; rather, a ‘description of need’ tends to be predominant.Footnote 41 This is what we see in Martha’s case, though as the narrative unfolds, death also emerges as the enemy for Martha. Lament as a call to God provides a backdrop to Martha’s address and introductory petition,Footnote 42 and the deep relationship between Jesus and her family created the quality of Martha’s lament to Jesus: personal, sincere and urgent. The direct address, together with the nature of her grievance, colour the narrative’s unfolding.
Jesus’ two-day delay and ensuing conversation with his disciples (John 11.6–15) allow Lazarus to pass while Martha anxiously waits for his arrival.Footnote 43 Though Martha is left with a gap between her lament and petition, the reader is not: faith in Jesus’ power temporarily takes centre stage. Jesus states plainly that Lazarus has ‘fallen asleep’ when speaking of his death, and Jesus announces his plan to raise him up. This added pericope in between Martha’s lament provides a hint concerning the Evangelist’s larger rhetorical purpose in the account, for here, Jesus underscores the glory of the Son of God because death will not have the final word (11.4). The disciples fail to understand his words initially, and their lack of understanding gives rise to Jesus’ intention to grow their faith. Subtly, the author ties resurrection to the faith of his disciples, and as it will become apparent, Martha’s lament process forms a framework for dynamic Johannine faith. In the meantime, death as Martha’s enemy is allowed by Jesus to inflict its blow on her brother.
Upon hearing that Jesus is on his way, Martha goes out to meet him (11.20), and the next iteration of Martha’s lament emerges: ‘Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died.’ Here, the lament of Martha’s initial call to Jesus blends with her petition. The feeling of withdrawal present in the lament of Psalm 13 is also present in Martha’s protest here, for she knows that Jesus’ absence meant her brother’s death. There is sorrow in this recognition, and alongside her grief is the acknowledgement that Jesus could have affected this outcome. Martha recognises Jesus’ power through her vexation and makes it known directly to Jesus that his failure to act the way she anticipated deeply affected her. Kathleen M. O’Connor emphasises that lament empowers the one who suffers because of the pre-existent relationship between the individual and God, and she recognises the need to express grief in the face of pain as an important aspect of faith: ‘Naming suffering before God reclaims human dignity and power that has been trampled and violated…laments are the beginning of action, a rejection of passivity, and so they can invert despair.’Footnote 44 The role lament plays in the faith of an individual is crucial, and Martha’s complaint to Jesus begs to be interpreted in this light. She trusts Jesus as her Lord but is nevertheless distressed over the absence of Jesus alongside the death of her brother, and it is her faith and relationship that allow for a bold protest over her grief.
When investigating complaints in lament, Westermann notes that the complaint against God as one of the subjects of lament is less dominant in laments of the individual as opposed to communal laments, but is nevertheless present.Footnote 45 Martha’s complaint is presented as a declarative statement, and though complaints are rarely presented in this way, some psalm lamenters appear to hesitate when confronting God and instead adapt the question ‘Why?’ into an admission of confidence, while others announce the complaint rather than accuse God directly.Footnote 46 Martha appears to do the latter: ‘If you had been here, my brother would not have died’, as her words form a ‘negative petition’ to a certain degree.Footnote 47 Martha does not ask Jesus a question but does indeed protest his absence. Her lament blends with her petition, and she, along with the disciples just prior, fails to understand Jesus’ actions and brings this to him.
A further aspect of the development of lament is pertinent here. Westermann’s threefold dimension of lament psalms places emphasis on the enemy as a serious and consequential subject.Footnote 48 It is obvious that the enemy of Psalm 13 is more discernible than the enemy in Martha’s lament, but even so, ‘in Israel, the lament of the individual developed very strongly in the direction of the complaint about the enemy…the transition from the complaint about the enemy to a generalising description of the nature of the enemy constituted a departure from the strict form of the lament.’Footnote 49 Thus, her conversation as lament does not break down due to the lack of a named enemy, for the larger dialogue between her and Jesus reveals death in a descriptive sense as such. In the lament of the individual, the enemy ‘threatens the lamenter’,Footnote 50 and death certainly threatens Martha and has taken over her brother. The focus of and reason for her conversation with Jesus is this enemy, for each element of the lament and broader conversation concerns death or its inverse: life, especially as it is found in the resurrection. The reality of death is ever-present, and Martha is keenly aware of this fact and confronts Jesus with her lamentation.
2.2 Petition: ‘But even now…’
At this point in the narrative, the conversation transitions from lament to petition. After the complaint in the Psalms, a petition or ‘supplication for help’ follows.Footnote 51 The petition is typically an imperative that asks God to ‘notice, attend, and intervene’.Footnote 52 This beseeching speaks to the present – and urgent – need of the one who laments. Even though keeping Lazarus from death is no longer possible, Martha petitions Jesus: ‘But even now, I know that whatever you ask of God, God will give you’ (11.22). She knows Jesus’ power and appeals to it. Though not an imperative, her statement is still presumptive and daring. Walter Brueggemann associates the petition with Israel’s covenant with God, where God has promised support and protection,Footnote 53 and the deep relationship between Martha and Jesus proceeds from the love between them (cf. 11.5). Her boldness before him assumes a closeness, for within the petition is a deep trust, or such an approach would not make sense. In speaking to Martha’s interaction with Jesus, Susan Hylen compares the psalmists’ declaration of God’s power and petition for him to act to Martha’s recognition of the results of Jesus’ absence and power to act even still.Footnote 54 Psalm 13 is again a suitable comparison, for just as Martha directs her words toward Jesus in her request, so too the psalmist restates his addressee as the Lord and petitions his powerful action on his behalf (13.3). God’s power and the sufferer’s relationship to him are the basis for the petition for both the psalmist and Martha.
It is important to note that the Evangelist does not directly identify Martha’s request, and it seems Martha does not believe that Jesus will raise Lazarus presently.Footnote 55 If she believes Lazarus will rise ‘on the last day’ (John 11.24), this could imply that she assumes he cannot be raised now. Regardless of the meaning behind Martha’s words, this verse nevertheless speaks to a petition that Jesus can and will act on her (and Lazarus’) behalf. Further, if death is the enemy of Martha’s lament, her petition would naturally be that Jesus would deal with this enemy through the resurrection of her brother, either now or in the future.Footnote 56 In other words, both impressions of her request are possible with death as the enemy. Regardless of the timing, Martha desires that death be dealt with, and when interpreted as a petition for Jesus to act on her behalf, Martha’s request in verse 22 reinforces the lament form and frames her dialogue and experience.
Finally, both Martha and the psalmist disclose their motivation for action. This resembles what Brueggemann refers to as ‘reasons’ for God to act,Footnote 57 and motivation such as this again betrays the acute intensity of the situation at hand. For Martha, the motivation to act is that God will give Jesus whatever he asks (John 11.22). Martha knows this to be true and uses this to appeal to Jesus’ volition. In this sense, her statement is both a petition and a reason to act. Martha’s petition and motivation for Jesus to act continue her engagement as lament, which anticipates the next component of the lament structure: confidence and trust in Jesus.
2.3 Confidence: ‘I know that he will rise’
Crucial and customary to lament psalms is the shift from complaint to praise. Though deep grief and pain are evident and pronounced, the lament structure tends toward hope, restoration and trust.Footnote 58 Martha’s conversation with Jesus continues to conform to this model as the lament form frames her encounter. In John 11.24, Martha confirms her confidence in Jesus: ‘I know that he will rise in the resurrection on the last day.’ As previously mentioned, scholars have seen this as a reason to doubt her faith in Jesus to act presently on her behalf. Still, whether or not her faith lies in future or forthcoming events, she has confidence that death will not have the final word for her brother. O’Day rightly points out that the default understanding of Martha’s words referencing the future resurrection need not be a lack of understanding or limited awareness of Jesus’ power. That is to say, ‘when Martha’s words are read in the context of the traditions of the prayers of the Jewish faithful, the full impact of her words emerges’.Footnote 59 Martha’s statement of confidence is tied to her faith, which dynamically engages with Jesus.
There is another important aspect of Martha’s words here. Jesus’ ensuing statement (11.25–6) claims that he is the ‘present fulfillment of traditional Jewish eschatological expectations’,Footnote 60 which would seem to imply that Martha did not understand what he meant when he declared that Lazarus would ‘rise’ (11.23). Yet this need not cast a negative shadow over her faith, for it is crucial to the Evangelist’s rhetorical aims through Jesus’ conversation with Martha. John makes it clear in his Gospel that a more complete understanding of Jesus and his work comes after the resurrection (cf. 2.22; 12.16),Footnote 61 and Martha here engages within the framework the Evangelist has set. Further, given the nature of lament as that which is forward-looking and anticipates God’s actions,Footnote 62 Martha’s words fall right in line with this anticipation for her Lord’s action on her behalf. The ramifications of this will emerge in due course.
Because this passage is a narrative rather than a prayer, Jesus speaks into her lament, providing the confidence of her statement. Martha is aware of God’s power, and her remembrance is vocalised at this moment. As the psalmist is reminded of the Lord’s promises (Ps 13.5), Jesus similarly assures Martha that her brother will rise again (John 11.23). The atmosphere begins to move toward praise, and Westermann details this reality thoughtfully: ‘In my opinion, this fact that in the Psalms of the OT there is no, or almost no, such thing as “mere” lament and petition, shows conclusively the polarity between praise and petition in the Psalms. The cry to God is here never one-dimensional, without tension. It is always somewhere in the middle between petition and praise. By nature it cannot be mere petition or lament, but is always underway from supplication to praise.’Footnote 63 At this point in the narrative, the tension is present. The idea of a consistently clear-cut transition or identification of the parts of lament is rarely possible, as is with Martha’s lament. Her petition fades into her confidence in who Jesus is through the development of her lament and her encounter with Jesus. It is this nuance that creates a dynamic within Martha’s faith.
2.4 Confession: ‘Yes, Lord; I believe that you are the Christ’
Finally, Martha’s lament ends with her confession about Jesus: ‘Yes, Lord; I believe that you are the Christ, the Son of God, the one coming into the world’ (11.27). In line with the lament frame, Martha moved from petition to praise, ‘grounded in the assuring presence of God’.Footnote 64 After her confidence in Lazarus’ future resurrection, Jesus declares that he is ‘the resurrection and the life’, where those who believe in him will yet live (11.25–6). Jesus’ disclosure about himself follows his affirmation about Lazarus and gives Martha resolve that leads to her confession. Similarly, the psalmist confidently declares the Lord’s abundance, praising him for his salvation by the end of his prayer (Ps 13.5–6). When observing the psalmist’s transition in verse 6, James Luther Mays comments,
So certain is his confidence of the reality of God’s salvation that he summons his heart to sing of it… The hymn lays bare the foundation upon which the whole prayer is based. Somewhere, sometime, the psalmist has encountered the graciousness of God, and confidence in that grace has become the ground and support of his life. It is the reality that no other experience can diminish and with which he undertakes to live through every other experience.Footnote 65
The same could be said about Martha in John. While there is no reference in the text to a time when Martha experienced Jesus’ graciousness or goodness,Footnote 66 neither is there an explicit previous experience for the thirteenth psalmist. Yet the discussion until this point leads to the same conclusion as Mays: Martha’s foundation of her lament is her trust in Jesus’ character, along with the love and depth of their relationship.
It appears that many scholars observe a consistency in Martha’s posture in this account that rests on her protest and petition: because her faith is incomplete through her complaints to Jesus, and because she does not repeat Jesus’ words about his identity back to him, her declaration about Jesus still lacks proper faith.Footnote 67 Yet we should see her trust in Jesus throughout the entire encounter as the true consistency of this pericope. There are still dynamics within Martha’s words, but when compared to the tone shift in Psalm 13, Beat Weber’s recognition of trust present through each section of the psalm is relevant here.Footnote 68 A discernible move from lament to praise is present in Psalm 13,Footnote 69 yet there is a strong argument for the continuity of the psalm, as is the case with the conversation between Martha and Jesus. Martha need not repeat his declaration word-for-word for her faith to be thoroughly Johannine, for rhetorically, the Evangelist draws out a full picture of who Jesus is through both Jesus’ words and Martha’s. Faith has been present with Martha from the beginning, for lament is not the absence of faith but an expression of it. This is no more confirmed than through her equally bold confirmation of who Jesus is in distinctly Johannine terms.
In Martha’s confession, the Evangelist establishes Jesus’ identity and work of coming into the world. Jesus’ words have shifted Martha’s petition, and in this case, Westermann’s words are fitting: ‘They are no longer mere petition, but petition that has been heard. They are no longer mere lament, but lament that has been turned into praise.’Footnote 70 Jesus engages with Martha, demonstrating his love for her as he hears her concerns, and her confession is her response of praise concerning who Jesus is, according to the Evangelist. Lament psalms find their culmination in the character and promises of God, despite present circumstances and grief, and through the development of Martha’s conversation with Jesus, his character and promises settle in Martha’s mind, despite the death of her brother, which guides her to the notable confession of this verse.
This examination of Martha’s interaction with Jesus as an expansion of O’Day’s organisation of the account has demonstrated that her faith takes a journey of lament similar to that of Israel’s lament poems, with Psalm 13 as a test case. Martha’s journey expressed through lament underscores her final place of trust in the person and work of Jesus. Jesus’ presence and engagement impact this unfolding lament and give rise to the pinnacle of confessions in the Gospel of John. Martha’s witness is not static or dense but rich with Jewish worship that finds development through the Johannine understanding of Jesus, and the Johannine theology of the resurrection plays a vital role in both Martha’s characterisation and her lament.
3. The Impact of Martha’s Faith and Lament in View of the Resurrection
Martha’s presence as lament in John 11 uncovers a different picture of her faith than previous commentators have suggested, and her final confession in verse 27 demonstrates the great extent of her faith. Scripture reveals the importance of lament in one’s faith,Footnote 71 and given the previous analysis of Martha’s engagement with Jesus, especially her confession, the depth of her faith can be seen through her lament. Though not all speak constructively about Martha’s confession, others consider her confession within the broader scope of the Fourth Gospel and see the significance of her declaration, and rightly so. Bennema considers Martha an ‘ideal Johannine confessor’, as her words mirror the aim of John’s writing (John 20.31).Footnote 72 A literary inclusio forms from Nathanael’s affirmation of Jesus as the ‘Son of God’ in 1.49 and the Evangelist’s purpose statement in 20.31, with Martha as the hinge between these two movements. It is this hinge that becomes crucial to moving beyond O’Day’s analysis and identifying the influence and significance of Martha’s character for the Fourth Gospel.
While other interpreters offer a positive reading of Martha without identifying the lament structure in her speech, lament as a process adds a specific character to her faith. As I have demonstrated, lament is an evolution that includes grief and vexation before reaching a place of confidence, and this means it is a dynamic process. Examining the individual pieces of Martha’s engagement with Jesus surely yields positive interpretations, but the nature and strength of her faith crystallise when her words are considered together as lament. O’Day acknowledges the implications for Martha’s faith based on her lament, but I seek to add new meaning to this initial presentation: Martha’s lament impacts how the Evangelist intends his readers to understand faith, particularly as it relates to the resurrection, and this has implications for interpreting other characters and their faith. Several features in the account demonstrate the point.
First, it is curious that Martha does not repeat Jesus’ words when answering his question in 11.25–7. O’Day insists that Martha’s confession is the positive answer to Jesus’ question in 11.40 as the one who has truly ‘seen the glory of God’ (cf. 11.4),Footnote 73 but this is only the beginning. I have articulated that Martha’s confidence in 11.24 need not rest on an understanding of what Jesus is about to do; in fact, given Jesus’ words in 11.25–6, it becomes clear that her knowledge is indeed masked. Her faith, however, is not ‘partial’ because she does not understand; only her understanding is as such. Lament allows for faith to be dynamic, which shifts the conversation away from measuring faith and instead refocuses on the theology discussed between Martha and Jesus. It is at the point of Jesus’ declaration about his identity as the resurrection and the life that her understanding of Jesus’ person and work becomes complete. The paradigmatic nature of her confession as distinctly and fully Johannine begs the question of what shifted from her statement of confidence in 11.24, and the answer is the revelation of Jesus as the resurrection. Jesus speaks into Martha’s confidence at that point in the lament and develops the Evangelist’s theology of the resurrection right in the middle of Martha’s faith progression. John has already indicated that clarity concerning Jesus becomes clear post-resurrection (2.22) and will again shortly (12.16), so when Martha receives the revelation that Jesus is ‘the resurrection and the life’, the author shows – through the rhetoric of their dialogue – that the resurrection of Jesus is what leads to complete recognition of his person and work. Without the development of the lament structure, which inherently ebbs and flows, this would be far more veiled.
Second, Martha’s lament and John’s resurrection theology account for Martha’s expression in 11.39: ‘Lord, there will already be a stench, for he has been dead four days.’ Wendy E. Sproston North ventures into the assertion that Martha’s response here is ‘horrified’ – despite the text’s simplicity and Jesus’ response as, at most, mildly confrontational.Footnote 74 O’Day notes that grief would not simply end if she had faith in Jesus’ identity,Footnote 75 and Bennema identifies the salience of her observation: ‘Martha’s newfound or deepened belief may have cringed in the face of reality – a body that had been rotting for four days.’Footnote 76 Similarly, Schneiders attributes this response to Martha’s journey of realising that Jesus’ resurrection is for her brother.Footnote 77 Indeed, the progression of lament in Psalm 13 is also a process.Footnote 78 Martha’s literary presentation is no different, as lament is a journey of faith.
Yet beyond simply associating Martha’s journey alongside her comment in 11.39, Johannine theology concerning the clarity of Jesus’ person and work because of his resurrection is recapitulated at Lazarus’ tomb. Interpreters largely see 11.39 as problematic for Martha,Footnote 79 but when cast in light of John’s overall resurrection trajectory, her words rhetorically advance his picture of understanding that comes post-resurrection. Jesus’ response in 11.40 is in the form of a question: ‘Did I not say to you that if you believed, you would see the glory of God?’ Conway brings up an important point that ‘Jesus’ reminder to Martha…effectively recalls the whole of it for the reader…their conversation becomes key to interpreting Jesus’ sign at the tomb.’Footnote 80 Further, this scene of Lazarus’ resurrection brings clarity not only to Martha but also to all present – including the reader – for this resurrection foreshadows Jesus’, emphasised by the Evangelist since it is Jesus’ final ‘sign’. Whether or not Martha or the others knew this anticipated Jesus’ resurrection is irrelevant, for John frames his resurrection theology through the rhetoric of Martha’s remark and Jesus’ question. They fail to understand, but will not shortly. Through this aspect of Martha’s characterisation, the author is not creating a fickle ‘personality’ in Martha, but emphasises through her character that the resurrection is what ultimately brings clarity to the person and work of Jesus. John doubles down on this through the rhetoric of Jesus and Martha’s earlier conversation and the events at the tomb. When Martha goes to Jesus, she seeks understanding as she expresses her faith through lament, and after Jesus reveals himself as the resurrection and life, Martha exhibits full Johannine understanding; at the tomb, Martha expresses the reality of the odour of a corpse, representing the misunderstanding of those present, and Jesus demonstrates that he is the life by bringing Lazarus back to life, displaying his glory.Footnote 81 Thus, resurrection, according to John, brings definition to Jesus’ person and work, and at this crucial moment in his Gospel, the author implements Martha’s faith journey of lament to demonstrate the dynamics of Johannine faith and understanding as they are impacted by the resurrection.
4. Summary and Implications
This article focused on Martha’s conversation with Jesus in John 11, demonstrating that her presence and engagement mirror that of Israel’s lament psalms, and argued that John’s resurrection theology is clarified through Martha’s characterisation, lament and faith. The rhetoric of a lament structure,Footnote 82 through the progression of complaint, petition, confidence and confession/praise, reveals the dynamics of faith that emerge through engagement with her Lord. The fact that her faith is a process does not mean it is limited or partial, for Martha arrives at a confession that stands as the model Johannine witness to Jesus. When considering the depth and progression of Martha’s faith that leads to her idyllic confession, lament and trust coalesce to create a rich faith full of complexity. Lament is ‘faith’s response to loss’Footnote 83 and ‘reveals a radical faith in God’.Footnote 84 When John puts Martha against this backdrop, the strength of her faith becomes more robust and compelling. While others have positively understood Martha in the Fourth Gospel, lament is particularly important for a constructive portrayal of Martha because it demonstrates the dynamics of Johannine faith that round out in light of the resurrection of Jesus. Jesus’ affirmation that he is the resurrection and the life moves Martha’s faith to reflect the Johannine portrait of Jesus in her confession, and the lament structure makes this possible through portraying her faith as active and vibrant.
Still, there is more than can be said concerning Martha’s faith in this pericope. It is upon this story that the Gospel narrative hinges, moving toward Jesus’ death and resurrection, and this has implications for how the reader interprets the faith of other characters. Martha’s character and dynamic faith presentation as lament indicate a way to read the faith of other characters. Even if readers seek to affirm that ‘full Johannine faith’ reflects the author’s statement in 20.31, according to Martha’s declaration, this is what Martha exhibits, particularly in light of the resurrection. Martha’s affirmation that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, who is coming into the world is the apex of her engagement with Jesus, which results in her characterisation as a pivotal witness to Jesus. Both the rhetoric of lament and the proposed ‘full faith’ suggest that Martha truly is exemplary in her lament engagement with Jesus. Keener notes Martha’s confession as ‘the climactic confession proceeding Jesus’ passion’,Footnote 85 for this is not only the final sign of Jesus’ Johannine ministry but also precedes the transition between his ministry and his passion week. Martha stands in this gap through her witness to the identity of Jesus, and the remainder of the Gospel proves she is not wrong. Thus, Martha sets an example for how John’s audience is to read other disciples and their faith progression in his account, but also how he believes his audience ought to respond to Jesus because of his written account (cf. 20.30–1). The faith of the disciples in the Fourth Gospel is not meant to be read as static but dynamic. Martha’s faith moves through lament, and there is space to examine other characters and how their faith does the same when considering the resurrection (examples include Nicodemus, Peter, Mary Magdalene, and Thomas).
With this in mind, the dynamics of a character’s faith throughout their encounter(s) with Jesus should be reassessed, taking the resurrection into account. Due to the simple dimension of the analyses of other characters, current perceptions of characters plot them on a faith-plane that ranges from inadequate to ambiguous to complete. I have endeavoured to demonstrate that Johannine faith is not simple but, as in Martha’s case, demonstrates active dynamics that engage with Jesus, which – in the wake of the resurrection – leads to clarity concerning his person. This allows characters to ebb and flow within the dynamics of the Gospel’s literary rhetoric without the authenticity of their faith being brought into question, with the resurrection theology of the Evangelist acting as a frame. Ultimately, this work has merged and added to various perspectives on Martha and her faith to construct a stronger, more durable portrait that opens new possibilities for other characters in the Fourth Gospel.
Competing interests
The author declares none.
