Local Preachers’ Group on John's Gospel
Notes of meeting held 12th March 2010
John’s Gospel 20: 1–10
For the first time we disputed the planned split of the lectionary passage into two parts. In previous meetings we have lengthened the lectionary reading, but for this passage which should have been John 20: 1- 18 a decision was made to tackle this in two sections dealing with 20: 1 – 10, then 20: 11 – 18 at a subsequent meeting. Several group members disputed this approach arguing that the lectionary passage was correct in the way it dealt with the story of the empty tomb and resurrection, and to split it in this way was wrong. They felt that the emphasis should be on the later part of the passage, the first verses being merely a prologue and that if they were preaching they would choose verses 11 – 18 not 1 -10. However, in the event, our discussions of the issues in verses 1 – 10 did take up the whole hour so, even though we were going to tackle the whole passage, we could not for lack of time. So verses 11 – 18 will follow on another occasion.
After the usual read through, with all the usual problems of punctuation and verse numbering, we began. Before setting out our discussions in more detail it is worth saying that this meeting was one of the most animated and emotional we have had. We were after all discussing the great tenet of our faith, the resurrection story, and it was immediately apparent that this chapter of John’s gospel meant more than anything we had discussed before to all present, although in a variety of ways. Everyone had something to say, we all related to this story differently, but with much the same emotional response.
Two of our number had visited Israel and the tomb site, and had a real feeling of involvement with this story. It was acknowledged that the geographical location of the grave was impossible to find after years of destruction and war. A question was asked as to why people visited the possible site of Jesus’ grave when we believe that he has risen from the dead! We briefly discussed how important seeing the area is to believers. We concluded that some took far too much of an interest in exactly where the tomb might have been, but for others it was merely a remembrance and the general ambiance of the place as a whole that informed and helped them on their spiritual journey.
The first thing we discussed was why Mary had run back to Jerusalem to find Simon Peter. Why was Peter still thought of as the leader of the disciples? Is it because, despite his failing and denial of Jesus, he had at least followed Jesus when the others had run away? Was this an instance of the disciples taking up Jesus’ command to forgive? Why did Mary go when it was still dark? We thought that this may have been because she could not wait any longer. Many grieving people find the grave of their loved one an ideal place to express their grief. Perhaps Mary felt she had waited long enough to express her sorrow? Or was she worried about being followed? One of our group suggested that perhaps Mary or the wife of John had written this. Does Mary go alone or in a group? We decided that very probably this use of Mary was John’s way of writing. John often uses a singular person to stand for a group and this may have been his modus operandi here. By using Mary John manages to convey much more emotion through Mary’s very personal anxiety. Mary would be able to see from a distance that the stone had been removed and her first thought would probably have been that grave robbers had taken Jesus’ body, as this was not an unusual practice. John does seem to assume that his readers would have prior knowledge of Luke’s Gospel, where a group of women go to the tomb.
One of our group who had been to Israel told us that graves would not have been easy places to enter as they were very small. However, we felt that this story of the two male disciples looking in and seeing the grave cloths represented two of the different ways that people come to faith. We felt that the whole lectionary passage could be used to show how different people come to faith through visual, emotional or scriptural evidence. These verses, 1 – 10, are about the empty tomb, and for some the empty tomb is a comfort. The story of the Beloved Disciple who believes simply on the evidence of the empty tomb can bring comfort to many people today because we can no longer see or touch Jesus. An empty tomb is something we can all understand it is part of our experience but resurrection is not.
The evidence of scripture can sometimes be overlooked by people. We get to know the stories too well and stop listening: sometimes a visual or emotional trigger is needed before scripture suddenly becomes new and insights are gained. To Peter and the Beloved Disciple Jesus’ death must have seemed wrong, as it did not fit with what they expected from the messiah: but suddenly, on seeing the empty tomb, they understood. Two of our group had found Tom Wright’s commentary very helpful on this passage.
The detail of how the grave clothes were left shows that there is no possibility of the tomb having been raided by robbers, but we could not find a reason for the head cloth being folded. We felt that this in some way referred back to Lazarus being raised, as in John 11: 44 there is a description of Lazarus coming from his tomb with a cloth wrapped round his face. Although Lazarus is raised from the dead, this is not the same as Jesus’ resurrection because Lazarus must die again. Jesus’ resurrection is an act of God. Does John include Lazarus to emphasise Jesus is God? One of our group questioned whether in fact Lazarus was really dead.
Once the two disciples have left the tomb they go home. This seems like a very prosaic reaction to what they have just seen and come to believe, but we thought that this expressed very succinctly the difference between men and women in their reactions to the same event. The two men believe, so they have no more need to be there. Mary has a lot of emotional investment in Jesus and takes longer to understand; she is the only one of the three who sees the angels. Is this because, of all of them, she needs this comfort and consolation? The men believe, so can go home. Mary needs more. This is the same for believers today; some need more convincing than others. We will discuss this in more detail at our next meeting.
Where is home for the two men? We assume Jerusalem, because later they are there. We also assume they go to different homes as this is plural. Is this important? A question was asked: had we spent too much time on small details? This passage is the story of the basic tenet of our faith, the resurrection, so the grave cloths and where the men might have gone home to were not important. Our congregations expect a huge significant message at the great festival of Easter.
In an earlier meeting we had concluded that John wrote in much detail and that it was all significant, but here we felt that too much attention to the detail took us off-piste and we came close to missing the point entirely. We did not look at what we might preach on; we may look at that when we discuss John 20: 11 – 18. As most of us would not be called on to preach on Easter Sunday (due to Holy Communion being a necessity for Easter morning) we wondered if it would ever be possible for the Plan to allow a Local Preacher who wished to take whole series of Sundays to cover these great themes.
SC