The Middleburgh post. [volume] (Middleburgh, Snyder Co., Pa.) 1883-1916, 1901-01-03


From Jericho Jesus went to Beth.
any, arriving there Friday afternoon,
March 81, A. d. 30. This marks the
beginning of the last week of Jesus
life. On Saturday Jesus had supper
at the house of one Simon the
leper." This man could not have
been leper at this time, having prob
ably been healed by Jesus. He had
cause for exceptional gratitude, and
this supper was an expression of that
gratitude.
LESSON ANALYSIS.
The Amounting OF Jesus .............Vs. G.
False Criticism of DiSCplos.......Ns. S- 8
Mary's Act Commended ed............Ns. 1913
STRIKING contrast .................Ns. ll-l6
The Amounting of Jesus. - While
Jesus was at supper in the house OF
Simon, Mary came to Jesus to do an
act of loving homage. This Mary was
the sister of Martha and Lazarus. Her
act was to anoint the head, and, ac-
cording to John, also the feet. OF
Jesus, with oil. 1t was not uncum-
mon for rabbis to be so honored and
Mary chose this method of honortng
her Master. Ahointng the feet was
not so usual as amounting the head,
and Mary's act showed extreme hui
mility as well as affection. Another
point brought out was the costlincSS
of the ointment. To Mary nothing
within her power to secure was too
costly to give to Jesus.
The Criticism of the Disciplcs.-It
was the costliness of the spikcnard
that furnished the basis of the criti-
-cism of the disciples. They were in.
dignant and asked: "To what pur-
pose is this waste?" 1t is interesting
to note that, while all Tor at the least
most) Of the disciples shared the feel
ing, it was Judas lscarot who put
this question to Jesus. This fact we
learn from Johns. record (John 12:
4-j). Judas had no love in his heart,
and could not therefore sympathze
with Mary's loving act. Judas, too,
was the treasurer of this little COM
pany of disciples. He asks why the
ointment had not been sold, and the
proceeds given to his bag. He gains
the sympathy of the other disciples
by suggesting that it ought to have
been given to the poor.
Mary's Act Commended.-Juda ar
gument was plausible, to most people
it would be convincing. The weak point
in it was that the emphasis is laid on
the gift, not upon the spirit which
prompted the gift. Jesus improved
-iNp tn NIngi gi.y, l,, ;,
behind the act. \ gift to the poor is
commendable if love prompts the gift
it is better by tenfold. Mary's deed was
an act of love, therefore commendable
in itself. But another reason for COM
mending the deed was the fact that
Jesus in the physical man could not al
ways be with them. The indefinite
poor the world would always have. An
other point to be noticed is the fact
that the standard of Judgment has
much TO do with whether such an act
would be waste. 1t would undoubtedly
have been waste had ii not been the
spontaneous outburst of a loving heart.
Following the natural impulse was in
1initely better for Mary; to another
ICSub N'ulN uIlNbupttNlN nav taken II |
gift to the poor as a sign of homage to
Himself, for at another time He said:
''Inasmuch as We did it unto one of
these, my brethren, even these least, ye
did it unto me-"
A Striking Contrast last three
verses of the lesson present striking
contrast to the loving act commended
by Jesus. Judas, who had been the
leader of the criticism against Mary at
this time barganed to deliver Jesus in
to the hands of His enemies. This deed
was undoubtedly provoked by the i'm
piled rebuke of Jesus, for Jesus COM
mendation of Mary was surely re-
buke to Judas. Another suggestion is
that Judas had aspired to be treasurer
of the kingdom Jesus was to establish.
He saw his hope was not well-founded,
for Jesus here spoke of His burial"
and on other occasions had foretold
His death. Disappointed Judas sold his
Master, and for a sum that was equal (
to only two-tifths of the value of the
spikenard.