If you have the amount of money equivalence
to 300 days’ wages of a worker (300 denarii), how would you spend? Would you
agree with Mary spending this amount of money for Jesus? Or would you agree
with Judas that the money should be spent for the poor? Ethically speaking,
utilitarianism would consider that the happiness spending 300 denarii on the
poor is happier than on Jesus, for more people would be benefited. Besides, the
need of the poor is more urgent than the need of Jesus. Therefore, spending the
money on the poor is a good choice. On the other hand, deontologists would consider
right that matters. Right here is applied to a universal principle. Helping the
poor is morally right, while spending the money on perfume is one’s right, but
this is not a matter of morally right. Being morally right is more worth than
an emphasis on one’s right. Although one’s right should not be violated, we
have the right to criticize. This happens to the most recent TV show 《叻哥游世界》, and he is criticized as extravagant.
Most probably, Jesus would agree with utilitarianism and deontological ethics,
but he defends Mary’s doing by saying that ‘she bought it so that she might
keep it for the day of my burial. You always have the poor with you, but you do
not always have me.’ Does Jesus agree that it is right to have an expensive
funeral?
Jesus’ comment reflects that it is
understandable to spend extra money for the deceased, but this is not about the
necessity of having an expensive funeral. However, I am puzzled that Mary has had
any vantage knowledge of Jesus’ death so that she brought the perfume for his
burial. In fact, Mary used the perfume for Jesus during his meal, not his
burial. Why does Jesus say that ‘she bought it so that she might keep it for
the day of my burial’? First, it is a way to defend what Mary has done. Second,
Jesus makes use of it as a reminder to his disciples that he is soon to be
killed. Now, we return to the basic question: How does Mary justify spending
300 days’ wages of a worker for perfume for Jesus if this is not a matter of
exercising one’s right? Why does Jesus allow her to do it?
Since Mary’s brother Lazarus was in the
feast (John 12:1-2), I would say that what Mary did was an act of thanksgiving,
for Jesus brought her brother’s life back. An ethic of thanksgiving is beyond
an ethic of utilitarianism and deontological ethics. First, an ethic of thanksgiving
is about a conversion from a life of calculability to a life of appreciation. Thanksgiving
is not a result of a rational calculation of return to what someone has done
something for you, but a sense of appreciation of what someone has done
something for you. Basically, a life of calculability is a kind of consumer’s
mentality. Since a consumer’s mentality is about the right to receive what I
have paid, there is no thank you. One may say thank you is possible, because it
is free. There is no room of appreciation. Judas is dominated by the life of
calculability, and as a result, he is not only unable to appreciate what Mary
has done for his Master, but also full of discontent. On the contrary, Mary
knows exactly how much she has done for Jesus cannot repay what Jesus has done
for her and her family. She learns to say thank you, appreciate and feel happy.
Second, an ethic of thanksgiving is about
one’s conversion from a stranger- relationship to an encounter-relationship. A stranger-relationship
has no intention to build up any kind of relation. A stranger-relationship is
dominated by rules and principles, and lack of人情味. This is something like the blindfold of Lady Justice, but everyday
life is not the court. 人情味 allows one to treat other in a way not necessarily bound by
principles and rules, but in a flexible way. Due to人情味, the shop-owner in the market does not
collect the exact amount of money I am supposed to pay. Besides, the shop-owner
will keep something good for me. An encounter-relationship requires one not
only to see the other as a communicable person, but also a person calling me. I
would say that God’s forgiveness is a kind of人情味. It is illogical and irrational, but treats me human. Jesus shows
appreciation to Mary’s doing, for it is人情味 between them.
Would you agree with Mary spending this amount
of money for Jesus? Or would you agree with Judas that the money should be
spent for the poor? The issue is not the decision-making, but an ethic of
thanksgiving featured by a life of appreciation and a encounter-relationship. Such
kind of life can choose to spend the money for Jesus as well as for the poor.
The matter is whether you share this life.
