The so-called sinful woman in today’s Gospel was the only person in that particular group capable of expressing what appears to be pure unrestricted love. She ignored what people might think and was willing to take the risk of being ridiculed. Which ever way one looks at her deeds, she certainly made an impression then and she still makes an impression today.
It is interesting to note that the anointing of Jesus’ feet occurs in all four synoptic Gospels. In Matthew, Mark and John’s account of this story the woman is named Mary and here it is alleged that Mary is the sister of Martha. Only Luke has her depicted as a sinful woman – some assuming this woman as being Mary Magdalene, but this is pure speculation as nothing really points to that being the case. Who this woman actually was doesn’t really contribute to the message and it is therefore better not to allow her identity to become a distraction.
Many questions arise for me from this reading. However I shall just name a few: Why is the anointing performed by a woman? Why does Luke place so much emphasis on the woman being a sinner? What lessons does he have for his community? What is going on between the woman and Jesus that everyone seems to be missing?
Though the so-called sinner is depicted as a woman, I believe she is representative of all human beings – men and women alike. However, I do wonder if we can pick up something here that gives us a clue of a woman’s journey to faith?
Somehow I don’t think Luke wanted to emphasise the sinfulness so much of a woman; I believe his intention is to highlight the hypocrisy of the Pharisee. Simon was being judgemental and he based his judgement – as we all do – on his own experiences and values. How often do we look at the deeds of others and make comments such as:
“How could she possibly stay with that man?” or “How is it possible that he puts up with her tantrums?” In other words, these types of comments are an expression of our incapacity to understanding the motives of others.
Why, then, was this particular woman being classified as a sinner? What was her sin? Her branding does not come from her being a prostitute, as is usually assumed in order to make the story more colourful and to put the emphasis on how far this person had fallen from grace. The opposite seems more likely. Perhaps she was a widow. We know that in Jesus’ time widows had no standing within society. Perhaps people envied her because her husband was extremely rich and influential from trading with the Greeks or consorting with the Romans. Perhaps her so-called sin is the mere fact that she did not follow the Law put in place by the Pharisees. For example, she may have ignored the distinctions between clean and unclean. In doing so she automatically found herself to be outside of their circle of righteous believers and, therefore, was not entitled to any form of association with anyone remotely connected to their group, let alone to a prophet of God. Simon, like most Pharisees of his time, believed that by simply following the Law they were classified as good. Those who didn’t follow the Law were sinners. My view is that this is the reason she was branded a sinner. Herein lies an important teaching well worth thinking about.
Luke’s reading emphasises the way we judge others. We all have the tendency from time to time to play Judge and jury over our fellow men and women. Simon has his own ideas about how a true prophet should act and speak and Jesus is clearly not living up to those expectations. It’s a highly contagious virus that can infect whole societies: there is something in us that enjoys playing what we now call the ‘the blame game’.
Jesus does not set out to defend his own actions but to vindicate those of the accused woman. There is no condemnation from Jesus just the opportunity to view the actions of the woman from another angle. Jesus hopes to gently but firmly correct Simon’s perceptions of himself and the woman, not through playing Simon’s game of judge and putting him in the dock but by inviting him to see things from a different angle and, in the light of that, to revise his earlier judgement.
If we look honestly at ourselves we may discover that we too can be hypocritical in our words and deeds. Simon likes to portray himself as being perfect as he sees himself as a law-abiding citizen. It’s about keeping up appearances – focusing on the external rather than the internal. People like Simon may view themselves as good and holy yet at the same time they remain hypocritical by placing judgements on others. What is required is less focus on the other and more focus on the self. This is an important first step to becoming less hypocritical and opening ourselves to love and forgiveness. This is something that cannot be achieved in isolation – we need the loving support of a community to point out when we are missing the mark.
A potentially powerful implication in the exchange between Simon and Jesus is that if he can see the actions of the woman in their true light then he will have a better understanding not only of Jesus but of himself as well. The actions of the woman ‘reveal’ the identity of Jesus as the true prophet, the messenger of God’s peace and forgiveness. In this role she invites us to consider how our words and deeds can be powerful mediators of the Gospel or damaging obstacles. But she also stands for Simon himself, revealing to him how he should act in the presence of Jesus. Although he thought himself a generous host, Jesus’ comments show that, even though this woman has been classified a sinner, she is the more generous host.
A puzzling element in this Gospel is Jesus’ statement that ‘it is the one who is forgiven little who shows little love’. Does this mean that in order to become a great lover in the Gospel sense, one needs to have been forgiven ‘great’ sin – hence to have committed such sin? I don’t think so. Two thoughts come to mind. One is that it may serve as a warning to readers who, like Simon, think they are minor offenders, not like that woman. If this is the case they are thoroughly trapped in self love and therefore cannot love others much. Another thought is that Jesus has in mind those who are well aware that they are not perfect and how completely dependent they are on God’s mercy. These are the ones who love much because they know how much love has been shown them by the One who forgives.
I think Simon would have felt confused as the penny dropped: The one who has been forgiven little, loves little. And just what such poor love entails, Jesus had spelt out in embarrassing detail: you did not give me water for my feet, you did not give me a kiss, you did not anoint my head with oil - ordinary courtesies to an honoured guest. I wonder did Simon ask himself: Why didn't I do these things? What is wrong with me? I hope he did, for that is the purpose and goal of this whole affair. It is this form of self-questioning that brings us to the moment of metanoia.
So what does all this mean for us? Two thirds of Jesus’ teachings are about forgiveness. In fact, all of his teachings focus on forgiveness and inclusivity. In forgiving we accept the other. Forgiving also relates to seeing reality for what it is – we cannot hide the fact that we live in an imperfect world. There happens to be a fly in the ointment of reality. In the struggle with this wound (being the paradox of all we are) we move from the unconscious into the conscious.
Inclusivity means not setting up boundaries of ones group. Those at the edge of any system and those excluded from any system ironically and invariably hold the secret for the conversion and wholeness of that very group. They always hold the feared, rejected, and denied parts of the group’s soul. You see, therefore, why the church was meant to be that group that constantly went to the edges, to the “least of the brothers and sisters,” and even to the enemy. Jesus was not just a theological genius, but he was also a psychological and sociological genius. When any church defines itself by exclusion of anybody, it is always wrong. It is avoiding its only vocation, which is to be the Christ. The only groups that Jesus seriously critiques are those who include themselves and exclude others from the always-given grace of God.
Only as the People of God receive the stranger, the sinner, and the immigrant, those who don’t play our game our way, do we discover not only the hidden, feared, and hated parts of our own souls, but the fullness of Jesus himself. We need them for our own conversion.
The Church is always converted when the outcasts are re-invited back into the temple. You see this in Jesus’ commonly sending marginalised people that he has healed back into the village, back to their family, or back to the temple to “show themselves to the priests.” It is not just for their re-inclusion and acceptance, but actually for the group itself to be renewed.