IL AN EVIDENCE OF THE NECESSITY AND POWER OF CHRIST’S ATONEMENT. Even good men like Peter, if left to themselves, will grievously err and sin. How are men in such a position to be recovered? 1. There must therefore be @ saving principle outside, and independent of, ourselves. It is by virtue of his completed sacrifice in spirit that Christ by a look recalls his fallen disciple, and thus shows: 2. The power of his Spirit to redeem. In connection with such a power over spirit and conscience the greatest sins may be made the turning-points of repentance. Memory was appealed to, and the outward signs predicted by the Saviour served as a spiritual index or clock of conscience. The cockcrowing has also an element of hope in it; it marked the dawning of a new day of penitence and enlightenment.—M.
Ver. 6.—* She hath wrought a good work on me.” Tescribe the feast in the house of Simon the leper, and distinguish the incident from that which is recorded in Luke vii. Indicate Mary’s reasons for loving the Lord, with all her heart and soul and strength, and show that this act of exquisite self-abandonment was the natural expression of her love. Learn from the subject the following lessons :—
], THAT AN ACT WHICH I8 PLEASING TO OUR LORD MAY BE MISCONSTRUED AND CON- DEMNED BY HI8 DISCIPLES. All the disciples were guilty of murmuring against Mary but John points out that Judas Iscariot began it. Entrusted with the bag in which the common fund was kept, he had carried on for some time past a system of petty thievery. It has been suggested that, as our Lord knew his besetting sin of avarice it would have been kinder not to have put this temptation in his way. There is, however, another aspect of this question, Evil habits are sometimes conquered by a tacit appeal to honour and generosity, An outward habit may be got rid of by removal of temptation, but absence of temptation does not root out the sin. In effect our Lord said to Judas, “I know your sin, but yet I put this money in your charge; for surely you would not rob the poor, defraud your brethren, and dishonour me!” ‘This appeal might have saved Judas; but he yielded to his sin till it damned him. Such a
on, x1v. 1—72.] THE GUSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MARK. 259
man would be likely to feel aggrieved at this generous act of Mary’s. He felt as if he had been personally defrauded. He knew that if this spikenard, which had vanished in a few minutes of refreshing fragrance, had been sold he would have had the manipu- lation of the proceeds. Therefore he was angry with Mary, and angry with the Lord, who had not rejected her offering, We can easily understand the feeling of Judas. But how was it the disciples re-echoed his complaint? They sided with him, although they certainly were not actuated by his base motive. Well, we all know that if a word of censure be uttered in the Church it swiftly spreads, and is like leaven, which soon . leavens the whole lump. Suspicion and slander find easier access to men’s hearts than stories of heroism and generosity. Weeds seed themselves more rapidly than flowers. The disciples had more to justify their fault-finding than we sometimes have. They were plain peasants, who had never known the profusion of modern life, and they were aghast at the idea of such a prodigality of luxury as this. From all they knew of their Lord they supposed that he would have preferred the relief of the poor to any indulgence for himself, and that he himself would have been disposed to say, “'To what purpose is this waste?” Many now imagine that they can infallibly decide what will please or displease their Lord, yet in their condemnation of others they are often mistaken. Mary, no doubt, was discouraged and disappointed. Her gift had been the subject of thought and prayer, and now that her opportunity had come for presenting it she eagerly seized it. She was prepared for the sneers of the Pharisees; but surely the disciples would be glad to see their Lord honoured. At their rebuke her heart was troubled; her eyes filled with tears as she thought, “ Perhaps they are right. I ought to have sold it.” Then Jesus looked on her with loving approval, and threw over her the shield of his defence.
IJ, THat ANY SERVICE WHICH IS THE OFFSPRING OF LOVE TO THE LORD IS ACCEPTABLE To HIM. He perfectly understood and approved her motive, and therefore was pleased with her offering. Whether it came in the fragrance of this ointment, or in the form of three hundred pence, was of comparatively little consequence. It meant, “I love thee supremely,” and therefore he was glad. Naturally so. When a child brings you the relic of some feast which you would rather not have, yet because it has been saved from love to you, you eat it with as much gusto as if it were nectar from Olympus. Why? Because you judge of the gift from the love it expresses; and this, in an infinitely higher sphere, our Lord also does. Unlike us, he always knows what the motive is, and about many an act condemned by his disciples he says, “She hath wrought a good work on me.” Kaady, translated “ good,” means something beautiful, noble, or lovely. Mary’s act was not ordered by the Law, nor dictated by precedent, nor suitable to everybody; but for her, as an expression of her love, it was the most beautiful thing possible. She poured her heart’s love on Jesus when she poured the spikenard from the broken cruse.
II]. THat A GIFT OR ACT PROMPTED BY LOVE TO THE LORD MAY HAVE FAR MORE EFFECT THAN WE DESIGN. ‘She is come aforehand to anoint my body to the burying.” Some argue from this that Mary knew Jesus was about to be crucified, and would rise again from the dead, so that this would be the only time for such anointing. I doubt that. Probably she had no distinct, ulterior design when she simply did what her love prompted. But in commending her Jesus in effect said, “In this ac, che has dene more than you think—more than she herself imagines; for she is anointing me for my burial.” In God’s Word we find that we are credited for the good or for the evil latent in our actions, by Divine justice or in Divine generosity. We read of some standing before the Judge of quick and dead who are amazed at the issues of their half-forgotten acts for or against the Saviour. ‘‘ When saw we thee an hungred or athirst ?” etc. This was the principle on which Christ attributed to Mary’s act a result she could not have foreseen.