The Three "R's" of the Resurrection

A Scriptural Reflection on the Readings for Easter Sunday, Solemnity of the Resurrection of The Lord | April 24, 2011 | Carl E. Olson

Readings:
• Acts 10:34a, 37-43
• Psa. 118:1-2, 16-17, 22-23
• Col. 3:1-4 or I Cor. 5:6b-8
• Jn. 20:1-9 or Mt. 28:1-10

“Hidden first in a womb of flesh, he sanctified human birth by his own birth. Hidden afterward in the womb of the earth, he gave life to the dead by his resurrection.” This beautiful reflection on the Resurrection is from the pen of Hesychius of Jerusalem, a fifth-century priest, monk, and theologian revered in the Eastern churches.

Throughout the Gospels there is much about Christ that seems hidden, mysterious, and difficult to comprehend. The disciples are repeatedly depicted as misunderstanding Jesus, in constant need of further explanation about the deeper meaning of His parables and teachings—especially as they related to His approaching Passion, death, and Resurrection. Their three years with Jesus were filled with fits and starts of understanding, as though the light of their Master’s words would sometimes break through and briefly burn away their limited, lacking notions of who He was and what He meant to do.

And yet, until what seemed to be the very end, the glorious, stunning truth about their Master’s death was beyond their grasp.

This is evident in today’s Gospel reading, from the Fourth Gospel. It was Mary of Magdala who went to the tomb “while it was still dark.” Why? Perhaps to mourn. Perhaps she was sent by some of the Apostles. We don’t know for certain. But the mention of darkness is deliberate, pointing as it does to the darkness of vision still afflicting the followers of the Crucified Christ.

Seeing that the stone was moved, Mary Magdalene ran back to Peter and John, “the beloved disciple.” We can surmise that by the time they arrived at the tomb there was some morning light in the sky, for Peter is able to see inside. And yet, the Evangelist points out, “they did not yet understand the Scripture that he had to rise from the dead.” After they had returned home, it was Mary—“weeping outside the tomb”—who saw the two angels before seeing Jesus, who she initially mistook for a gardener (Jn 20:10-18).

This Gospel reading and the reading from the tenth chapter of Acts make a clear and vital connection between belief and witness. Belief in the Resurrected Lord is not just intellectual assent or sentimental longing, but a way of seeing, living, and acting rooted in complete communion with God the Father, made possible through the Son’s work and the power of the Holy Spirit. And this belief, by God’s grace, is based on witness. “How does one arrive at this present of the past, at this always of the once and for all, at the today of Easter?” asked Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger in Images of Hope (Ignatius, 2006). “As a first ground rule we can say: on this path we need witnesses. … [Jesus] shows himself to witnesses who accompanied him on a part of his path to death. In accompanying them, one can encounter the truth.”

There are, to borrow from the realm of education, three “R’s” that flow in succession here.

First, there is the reality of the Resurrection—the fact that, as Peter proclaimed, “this man God raised on the third day.”

Secondly, there is the reliability of the witnesses, the men and women who were there and who saw, touched, and spoke with the Risen Lord: “We are witnesses of all that he did.”

Third, there is the responsibility that each of us is given as a follower of Christ. “If then you were raised with Christ,” Paul exhorted the Christians in Colossae, “seek what is above.” That includes living as though there really is an “above”—that is, heavenly glory—and not as though this world is all that exists or matters.

“On this day,” wrote Hesychius of Jerusalem, “ the divine call is heard, the kingdom is prepared, we are saved and Christ is adored.” The life-changing, soul-saving reality of Easter is hidden to many. May we, filled with love like Mary Magdalene, Peter, John and all the saints, be light-bearing witnesses to the truth of the Resurrection.

(This "Opening the Word" column originally appeared in the March 23, 2008, edition of Our Sunday Visitor newspaper.)

• The Truth of the Resurrection | Excerpts from Introduction to Christianity | Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
• Balthasar, his Christology, and the Mystery of Easter | Introduction to Hans Urs von Balthasar's Mysterium Paschale | Aidan Nichols O.P.
• The Cross — For Us | Hans Urs von Balthasar
• The Question of Suffering, The Response of the Cross | Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
• The Resurrection Puts Everything Together Again | Fr. James V. Schall, S.J.
• Easter: The Defiant Feast | Fr. James V. Schall, S.J.
• Immortality, Resurrection of the Body, Memory | Fr. James V. Schall, S.J.
• Easter Delivers Us From Evil | Carl E. Olson
• The Easter Triduum: Entering into the Paschal Mystery | Carl E. Olson
• The Paradox of Good Friday | Carl E. Olson
• The Mystery at the Center of Our Faith | Hans Urs von Balthasar
• The Divinity of Christ | Peter Kreeft
• Jesus Is Catholic | Hans Urs von Balthasar

Comments

[Eric Giunta]

Uh . . . actually, we *do* know why the women went to the tomb: the Gospels tells us they were there to anoint Jesus' body! Please edit this post before some Evangelical reads it and is confirmed in their prejudices about Catholic Biblical illiteracy . . . ;-)

[Carl E. Olson]

A fair enough point, Eric, about the women going to anoint the body, but there is more to it than you indicate.

John's account, which I am referring to in my column, differs from that of the Synoptics (cf. Mt. 28:1ff, Mk. 16:1ff, Lk. 23:55-24:3), which also differ from each other in some details.

While Mark and Luke expressly state that the women (plural) came to the tomb at "when the sun had risen" (Mk. 16:2) and "early dawn" (Lk. 24:1) in order to "anoint him" (Mk. 16:1) and "taking the spices which they had prepared" (Lk. 24:1), Matthew says only that Mary Magdalene and "the other Mary" went to "see the tomb" (Mt. 28:1). John indicates that Mary Magdalene was alone and that she went to the tomb while it was "still dark", which almost all commentators agree refers to sometime between 3:00 and 6:00 am. John makes no reference to Mary Magdalene bringing spices; in fact, he suggests that the preparation of the body was complete already (see Jn. 19:39-42).

So, commentators (both Catholic and otherwise) have speculated as to why Mary Magdalene went to the tomb. St. John Chysostom wrote: "For being entirely full of loving affection toward her Master, when the sabbath was past, she could not bear to rest but came very early in the morning, desiring to find some consolation from the place" (Homilies on the Gospel of John, 85.4). Sanders and Mastin (Anglicans) concludes that even if the burial and preparation was complete, "there is no improbability in the women going to weep at the tomb (cf. xi.31)" (Harper's New Testament Commentary [1968], p. 417). A.M. Hunter (also Anglican) states that "Mary Magdalene makes her way to Joseph's rock-tomb to render the last offices of love", without indicating if he means simply mourning or further preparation of the body (The Cambridge Bible Commentary [1965], p. 184). The New Jerome Biblical Commentary (1990), flatly states, "Since the anointing of Jesus was completed in the Johannine burial scene, it is not the motive for her visit (cf. Mark 16:1; Luke 24:1)" (p. 983). Fr. Raymond Brown goes over all of this is excruciating detail in his massive two-volume commentary, noting, "John does not specify why" Mary Magdalene went to the tomb at the early hour she did, but is sympathetic to the idea that she went to mourn further (cf. Jn. 11:31).

There is, then, room for some differing ideas about John 20:1. My opinion is that Mary Magdalene went earlier, before the other women, in order to grieve; this seems very consistent with John's indication that the preparation was finished and also with his emphasis on the special place of Mary Magdalene (no, not "special" as in how Dan Brown depicts her, but as an "apostle to the apostles").

Of course, it could be that although I was an Evangelical prior to becoming Catholic, my being Catholic has now completely addled my once brilliant intellect. ;-)

[Eric Giunta]

Truth be told, I think we do have outright factual contradictions in the Resurrection narratives that are impossible to reconcile. Which tells me that, although the Gospels are historical, they are not written according to modern canons of historiography, and we probably do violence to authorial intent by forcibly harmonizing them. Happy Easter, Carl; Christ is risen; alleluia!