Mary's act was in marked contrast with that which Judas was about to do. What a sharp lesson Christ might have given him who had dropped the seed of criticism and evil thinking into the minds of the disciples! How justly the accuser might have been accused! He who reads the motives of every heart, and understands every action, might have opened before those at the feast dark chapters in the experience of Judas. The hollow pretense on which the traitor based his words might have been laid bare; for, instead of sympathizing with the poor, he was robbing them of the money intended for their relief. Indignation might have been excited against him for his oppression of the widow, the orphan, and the hireling. But had Christ unmasked Judas, this would have been urged as a reason for the betrayal. And though charged with being a thief, Judas would have gained sympathy, even among the disciples. The Saviour reproached him not, and thus avoided giving him an excuse for his treachery.

Marias handling var en udpræget modsætning til det, som Judas var ved at gøre. Hvor kunne Kristus ikke have talt hårde ord til ham, som havde sået kritiske og onde tankers frø i disciplenes sind! Hvor ville det have været retfærdigt, om anklageren selv var blevet anklaget! Han, som læser alle hjertets tanker og forstår enhver handling, kunne ved gæstebuddet have afsløret mørke punkter i Judas liv. Det falske hykleri, som dannede grundlaget for forræderens ord, kunne være blevet draget frem; thi i stedet for at have medfølelse med de fattige stjal han de penge, der var beregnet til at lindre deres nød. Der kunne have været vakt harme imod ham, fordi han var hårdhjertet over for enker, faderløse og daglejere. Men hvis Kristus havde afsløret Judas, ville dette være blevet benyttet som årsag til hans forræderi. Og selv om Judas var blevet beskyldt for at være en tyv, ville han have fået medfølelse, selv fra nogle af disciplene. Frelseren irettesatte ham ikke og undgik således at give ham nogen undskyldning for hans forræderi.