Welcome to the Saintly Sixteen! From 32 saints we have narrowed the field to 16. For this round, rather than the basic biographical information we enter the realm of Quirks and Quotes. Our brilliant Celebrity Bloggers will provide unusual information or legends surrounding their saints along with quotes either by or about their saints.
Don’t forget, you can always go to the Bracket Tab, deftly managed by Bracket Czar Adam Thomas, to easily find previous battles if you need to refresh your basic knowledge on these saints. This is yet another free courtesy extended to you, the Lent Madness Global Public.
In yesterday's Santa vs. Rudolph Showdown, okay Beatdown, Nicholas of Myra trounced Rudolph of Gubbio by the historic margin of 92% to 8%. Yes, the bracketologists have diligently researched this topic and determined that this has indeed surpassed the previous largest margin of victory. That was just last year when Maria Skobtsova, the Russian Nazi-fighting nun, defeated Quiteria, the early Christian nonuplet warrior 91% to 9%
The Saintly Sixteen gets started with a Biblical battle between Martha of Bethany and Nicodemus. At stake? The very first spot in the Elate Eight. Let's get to it.
Martha of Bethany
Who was Martha of Bethany? Domestic busybody and foil for her enlightened sister or Daenerys-Targaryen-like tamer of dragons and symbol of female power? Perhaps the medieval biographer Pseudo-Marcilia said it best. In her life, “Martha chose to perform her own ministry, which pleased God greatly.”
Little is known of Martha beyond her portrayal in Luke as the counterpart to her sister. Thanks to early church fathers like Origen and Augustine, the sisters became symbols of classical dualism--Martha, with her earthly concerns as a hostess and Mary, the contemplative. However, she is also a theologian in the Biblical text, confessing her faith in Jesus as a savior in John the same way Peter does in the Synoptics. For this reason, contemporary Biblical scholars see Martha as one of the disciples in Jesus’ inner circle. She has this role in the gnostic gospel Pistis Sophia, where she and other female disciples receive knowledge of the highest mysteries from the resurrected Jesus.
Martha took on an increasingly important role in the middle ages when legend credits her with many fascinating miracles that range from the Christlike to the bizarre. Once a boy drowned in a river across which he was swimming in an attempt to hear her preach, and Martha brought him back to life. Like the perfect hostess she was, she is also credited with changing water into wine at a banquet in her honor. Another legend tells that Martha knew the date of her death and eight days before it arrived she had a vision of her sister Mary’s soul ascending to heaven, held aloft by choirs of angels. After she died, Bishop Fronto of Périgueux fell asleep during a mass at his church and was miraculously carried to Tarascón to officiate over Martha’s funeral.
Devotion to Martha through the middle ages led to an evolving view of her, one where her life of austerity and service reconciled the dualism the early church ascribed to her and Mary. She was seen as an exemplar of both actio and contemplio, two complementary ways of being, both dependent on the other. In this wholeness, Martha becomes a symbol of the church, where spiritual insight fuels worldly service to others.
For this reason, in the church dedicated to her in Tarascón, she is shown with a dragon at her feet. The symbolism is not merely of the miracle attributed to her--the salvation of the town from the Tirascurus, a huge half animal/half fish beast. Martha is shown as the Apocalyptic Woman (Revelation 12), a multi-faceted symbol of female power associated with the Church, and the Virgin Mary, women who confront evil serpents and become a new Eve to partner with Christ the new Adam, and through their active work and generative power help transform the earth into the new creation.
Nicodemus
Nicodemus appears three times in scripture. Once to hear Jesus’ teaching by night (John 3:1-21), then as a member of the Sanhedrin who suggests that the accused deserved a trial before judgment (John 7:5-51), and finally at the Crucifixion where he not only provides the spices for embalming the dead body of our Lord, but also to assist Joseph of Arimathea in burying his body (John 19:39-42). There is scant, canonical material that suggests he said much of anything at all.
So let’s get Apocryphal. Apocryphal. I wanna get Apocryphal!
He has an entire gospel attributed to him and perhaps some of the most interesting parts of the Gospel of Nicodemus are where he describes the Harrowing of Hell. Just before Jesus arrives at Hell’s Gates, Satan, the Prince of Death, has an argument with Beelzebul, the Prince of Hell, about just who Jesus is. They keep going back and forth, arguing about whether he’s actually powerful or not, until suddenly “there was a voice as of thunder and the rushing of winds, saying, Lift up your gates, O ye princes; and be ye lift up, O everlasting gates, and the King of Glory shall come in.” Jesus really knows how to make an entrance. The Prince of Hell then tells Satan to leave unless he is powerful enough to fight the “King of Glory” (Satan leaves), and then Beelzebul instructs his hellions to bar the gates.
Upon hearing the voice announcing the coming of Christ, the dead begin to revolt, yelling at the Prince of Hell “Open thy gates that the King of Glory may come in.” David, Isaiah, and other prophets and prominent Hebrew Bible figures begin reciting their prophecies of the coming Messiah. After again refusing to open the Gates of Hell, the Prince of Hell falls right into the trap of asking “who is this King of Glory?” King David responds with “the Lord strong and powerful, the Lord mighty in battle: he is the King of Glory” and just then Jesus “appeared in the form of a man, and enlightened those places which had ever before been in darkness, And broke asunder the fetters which before could not be broken; and with his invincible power visited those who sat in the deep darkness by iniquity, and the shadow of death by sin.” Jesus then proceeds to lay the holy smackdown in Hell and leaves with the souls of the righteous.
[poll id="255"]
124 comments on “Martha of Bethany vs. Nicodemus”
The Harrowing of Hell with Muppets.... Oh, you are BAD, Micah! I'll never be able to think of that now without Oscar the Grouch in a major role!
The outrageous talent displayed in these comments continues to blow me away. While I chose Nicodemus and Mary in the Saintly 16, I'm now swinging my vote to Martha. Amber Belldene's write-up won the day for me, dragon and all.
To quote the townsfolk in the wonderful TV series Northern Exposure "No more show tunes Maurice!"
The Harrowing of Hell was moving but Martha is the Lady of the day!
I went with Nick who not only had faith though struggles of reasoning and doubts, but risked position and personal assets to challenge authority with which he identified and honored.
I voted for Nicodemus because I thought he probably didn't have a chance in hell, except that his apocryphal gospel says that he does.
I think Amber Belldene meant to say that Martha was considered in the Middle Ages to be a model of both "actio and comtemplatio," not "contemplio." I don't believe the latter word exists in Latin. I say it without "contemptio."
Martha has never been a cartoon character for me.
I agree that Michael's offering today to the tune of "I am Sixteen, Going on Seventeen” is my favorite show tune so far. The line “Lazarus dies and/Mary just cries and/Martha does all the work” is one of my favorite Forbidden Lent parody lyrics. Thank you, Michael, for the best & funniest Lent Madness of all times.
I love the story of the Harrowing of Hell, but went with Martha.
I am so grateful that both Martha and Photina are representing the women who knew, listened to, and believed in Jesus. Mary too, though she got eliminated in the first round sisterly smackdown (there can only be one). I don't suppose the brackets are structured in such a way that Martha and Photina could go all the way?
Fabulous to learn more about both of these great Saints. However, I have always loved the story of the harrowing of hell - that wonderful passage where Isaiah, sitting in the darkness, sees his prophecy come true as the light of Christ shines upon them. For this beautiful image my vote goes to Nicodemus.
Perhaps it depends on one's understanding of the Resurrection . . . I, too, voted for Nicodemus.
Nicholas spoke when it was dangerous, sought knowledge that was antiestsblishment, and acted in kindness when he could have suffered greatly to do so. He had power and risked it. Nick for me, though I have always been a Martha fan.
I'm loyal to my Martha.
I love Martha and honestly expect her to win, but having recently sung an arangement of the psalm quoted in the Gospel of Nicodemus with my university choir I have to vote for him.
The union of actio and contemplio did it for me.
I was originally going to vote for Martha, however after the comment on Nicodemus representing the small, I couldn't help but agree. I also saw him literally going through an internal fight within his soul when push came to shove and he was performing his role in the Sanhedrin. First comes to Jesus at night open, wanting to learn and it seemed and possibly even thinking about following yet fearful of being part of the crowds during the day due to his position, as well as possibly being in a position which made him very despised by others, not within his social status. The pressure of his day job- a member of the Sanhedrin probably was also probably in such conflict with what his spirit knew he was absolutely hungering for deep within that after he left, he decided he absolutely couldn't become a believer, and a follower. Who knew would happen if it got out that a member of the highest court of Jerusalem had come late at night to find Jesus and learn from him- possibly even death. When Christ was then arrested, there was the same member of Jerusalem's high court probably still feeling the late-night visit deep within his heart. He knew on the outside that he absolutely couldn't try to convince of innocence due to expectations of his role, those around him in the high court, and the gargantuan pressure of all surrounding him at the time absolutely expecting a negative fate for Jesus. So, in the end he offered a compromise- instead, he only convinced Christ's accusers and the court as a whole that the accused first needed a trial before anything else thus at least offering some chance that the innocence which he also knew within that Christ was deserving of might be the verdict. Lastly when he brought the spices, and oils to help prepare Christ's body for burial it was almost like he was finally allowing God in as well as well as offering an apology to his beloved deciples, and followers for bending to the huge pressures he was under to go with the masses instead of being true to the seeds of faith and belief that Christ had planted that night during his late-night visit.
What happened to Friday the 29th???