Easter Vigil (B)

Readings:

1. Various Readings
2. Romans 6.3-11
3. Mark 16.1-7

[Note:  Many parishes use the readings from Cycle A during Lent and Easter. In that case the Gospel for the Vigil would be Matthew 28:1-10.  The Gospel for the Mass of Easter Day is always John 20:1-9.]

Reflections on the Gospel Reading

Mark was almost certainly the first person to write a continuous story about Jesus’ death and resurrection.¹  Prior to his writing various traditions were alive in his community. (See Taylor 1959, 602-603.)  They included the proclamation that Jesus was buried and rose from the dead on the third day (e.g. 1 Corinthians 15.3-8); traditions about appearances of the risen Jesus (See Harrington 1990, 628-629.); and remembrances that women had visited the tomb and found it empty.

Mark concluded his passion/resurrection narrative with a story of a visit of women to the tomb.  Writing some forty years after the events, Mark did not attempt to write what we would call a historical account.  Nor was he trying to prove that the resurrection took place.  Rather, he took the tradition about the women’s visit to the tomb and wove together a story intended to strengthen his readers’ already existing faith in the crucified and risen Jesus.  He wanted to help his Christian readers enter more deeply into the mystery of the death and resurrection of Jesus by recalling their own baptism.

As St. Paul says in the Epistle for the Vigil Mass:  “Are you unaware that we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?  We were indeed buried with him through baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might live in newness of life.” (Romans 6:3-5)

For a few moments, then, let us try to put aside our fixation upon literalistic history and enter into Mark’s symbolic world.  Let us examine some of his themes so that we can understand what he is telling us about Jesus and about ourselves as Christians in his story about the women at the tomb.

The Women

From the very beginning of his Gospel Mark articulated the theme of women who served Jesus. (See Mark 1.29-31.)  Jesus entered the house of Simon and Andrew along with James and John.  After Jesus healed Simon’s mother-in-law, she began to serve them.

Two other women who served Jesus and his disciples might well have been in that little group in the house of Simon and Andrew.  Paul alludes to Cephas’ wife who accompanied her husband in his journeys; (1 Corinthians 9:15) and Matthew tells us that the Salome mentioned in today’s gospel reading was the mother of James and John. (Matthew 27:56)

Now at the end of his Gospel Mark mentions a group of women three times: first at the crucifixion looking on from afar, (Mark 15.40-41) then observing the burial, (Mark 15.47) and finally buying spices and going to the tomb to anoint Jesus. (Mark 16.1)  Each group has a slightly different list of names with only Mary Magdalene being clearly mentioned in all three.

Mark is less interested in the specific names than he is in the function of these women in his story.  Women followed Jesus in Galilee and to Jerusalem; they were present at the crucifixion, at least from afar, when the male disciples fled and Peter denied Jesus; they witnessed Jesus’ burial; they entered into the tomb in a prefiguration of baptism; (See LaVerdiere 1999.2, 319-320.) and they received the commission to proclaim the risen Jesus to the disciples and Peter.

Day One

Mark has no less than four time designations in his story of the women’s visit to the tomb.  The Greek text begins “When the Sabbath was over [the women] bought spices . . ..” (Mark 16:1)  That could have been any time after sundown on what we would call Saturday, even in the dark before dawn.  Then, in the second verse Mark has three more time designations:  “very early,” “on day one of the week,” and “when the sun had risen.”   Why did Mark (and all of the other gospel writers) say “day one of the week” instead of “the first day of the week?”  Why doesn’t Mark say that Jesus rose from the dead “on the third day” as we proclaim in the creed?

Eugene LaVerdiere points out that there is a difference between “the third day” and “day one.”  Throughout the First Testament “the third day” is associated with God’s saving action.  For example, the revelation on Mt. Sinai takes place “on the third day.” (Exodus 19:10-11, 16)  Also, God saved Isaac from Abraham’s dagger “on the third day,” (Genesis 22:4) thus saving the entire future people of Israel from death.  Naturally, early Christians associated “the third day” with God’s saving action in raising Jesus from the dead. (See LaVerdiere 1999.2, 318)

“Day one”, however, is a reference to the first day of creation in the Book of Genesis when God brought light out of darkness.²  Mark takes pains to indicate that the discovery of the empty tomb and the proclamation of the resurrection are events which take place in the light, “when the sun had risen,” not events of the night associated with evil and sin.  “On the third day” could have included the darkness between evening and dawn.  Symbolically, the women emerge from the darkness of death into the new day of resurrection and life.  This echoes St. Paul’s words:  “For it is the God who said, ‘Let light shine out of darkness,’ who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.” (2 Corinthians 4:6)

Also “day one” “is not associated directly with the event of Jesus’ resurrection, but with its proclamation and celebration . . . New Testament references to ‘the first day of the week’ present that day as the day of the new creation, the day Jesus’ resurrection [whenever it occurred] transforms those previously born of human generation into children of God . . . .” (LaVerdiere 1999.2, 318-319.)

Neither Mark nor any of the other canonical gospel writers give an account of the actual resurrection event.  Nobody was there to witness it.  It could have occurred any time between the burial and the discovery of the empty tomb.  Whenever it occurred, it was “on the third day,” the day of God’s saving action.  “Day one,” however, is the day that we, as Christians, celebrate and proclaim the resurrection – on Easter Sunday and on every Sunday throughout the year.

It is also significant that Mark’s Gospel ends on “day one.”  It is like the musical notation “d. c. al fine.”  Christians are asked to start over again, to go back to the beginning of the Gospel, back to Galilee, and follow Jesus through his ministry once again, this time with awareness of the passion and resurrection.  Every Sunday, then, is a new beginning, a time to renew our belief in the crucified and risen Jesus and to rededicate ourselves to following him. (See Donahue & Harrington 2002, 460.)

The Stone

The women were concerned about the stone, not because it blocked Jesus’ exit from the tomb but because it barred them or anyone else from entrance  to the tomb.  According to LaVerdiere, “The symbol of the stone is connected not with Jesus’ resurrection but with his burial.” (LaVerdiere 1999.2, 320)

In terms of Mark’s story of the passion-resurrection, the stone was a baptismal symbol, blocking the way for someone effectively to be buried with Christ.  The passion was a story not just of Jesus dying but of the challenge for the disciples to die with Christ.  So also Jesus’ burial and the visit to the tomb was not just a story of Jesus being buried, but of the challenge for the disciples to be buried with Christ.  In this, the stone is a symbol for everything that blocks the way. (LaVerdiere 1999.2, 320)

In Mark’s narrative God rolls away the stone.  (The Semitic passive voice generally refers to God as the subject.)  Perhaps, Mark is referring to the grace of God that removes obstacles to faith.

The Young Man

The young man is also symbolic.  Matthew refers to an angel of the Lord, who rolls back the stone and sits on it. (Matthew 28.2)  For Mark the symbolism is more complex.  Obviously, the “young man” (Greek: neaniskos) is an angel in the sense of a person with an important message. Also, the white garment along with the awe and fear of the women suggests a heavenly apparition.³  However, Mark has one other reference to a “young man” in his Gospel.  After the arrest of Jesus this “young man” lost his linen garment and ran away naked. (Mark 14.51-52)  Is this the same young man?  Has he found his garment again?  Has he regained his lost innocence?

Without necessarily identifying them with each other, LaVerdiere thinks that they are both symbolic of Christians.  The young man in the Garden of Gethsemane symbolized Christians who, like the Apostles, abandoned the commitment they made at baptism to die with Christ.  The young man at the tomb has died with Christ and now shares in his glory.  He wears the white garment of the risen Lord as a sign of baptism; he sits on the right side of the tomb as the Son of Man will sit “at the right hand of the Power” (Mark 14:62), and he proclaims the message of the death and resurrection of Jesus. (LaVerdiere 1999.2, 320-322)

The young man at the right side of the tomb also instructs the women to tell the disciples and Peter that Jesus is going before them to Galilee where they will see him.  What does this mean, especially given the fact that Mark relates no appearance of the risen Jesus?⁴

Some have said that seeing Jesus in Galilee is a reference to the parousia or second coming of Jesus as the glorified Son of Man, an event still to come. (See Taylor 1959, 608.)  Others say that Mark “had no appearance stories available in his community.  All he knew was the tradition that the risen One appeared first to Peter, then to the Twelve . . . and he indicated this by his addition of 16:7 to the angelic message.” (Fuller 1984, 254)  Still others such as Vincent Taylor think that Mark, like Matthew, only knew of Galilean appearances and alludes to them in this way as a fulfillment of Jesus’ earlier prophecy in Mark 14.28. (Taylor 1959, 608)

According to LaVerdiere, “the entire Gospel was an appearance story.  For Mark, Jesus’ appearing as risen Lord was not so much an event as a life process.  To see Jesus the risen Lord, one has to follow him in Galilee and from Galilee to Jerusalem.” (LaVerdiere 1999.2, 322)

Conclusion

It is hard for us to read the Gospel stories in isolation.  This has been true from Tatian’s Diatessaron around the year 170 to Mel Gibson’s movie “The Passion of the Christ.”  There is a long history of smoothing out the differences and conflating the various accounts into one continuous narrative.  There are some merits to this approach, but it keeps us from appreciating the distinctive theology of each individual Gospel writer.

Reading the story of the women’s visit to the tomb solely in the context of Mark’s Gospel, one is struck by the fact that there is very little about the actual resurrection of Jesus and very much about its consequences for Christian believers; very little about the nature of Jesus’ risen body and very much about our baptism into his death.

The Easter Vigil Gospel calls us to go back and follow Jesus faithfully in the Galilee of our own lives.  If we embrace the symbolism of baptism, enter into his tomb, and are loyal to him “no matter what,” we shall see him as he promised.⁵

---

The First Testament  “The First Testament” is equivalent to “The Old Testament.”  Unfortunately today, for many, “The Old Testament” has negative connotations of being secondary or outmoded.  “The Hebrew Bible,” on the other hand, does not include a number of books that the early Church considered to be inspired.  “The First Testament” refers both to the sacred books written in Hebrew and to the slightly larger collection translated into or originally written in Greek, which was widely used by Israelites in the Diaspora (that is, in the Greek speaking world outside of the Land of Israel) at the time the Gospels were being written.

---

In preparing these reflections, in addition to the biblical texts, I consulted the following works:

Borg & Crossan 2006 – Marcus J. Borg and John Dominic Crossan, The Last Week:  A Day-by-Day Acccount of Jesus’s Final Week in Jerusalem (New York:  HarperSanFrancisco, 2006)

Crossan 1991 – John Dominic Crossan, The Historical Jesus:  The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant  (New York:  HarperSanFrancisco, 1991)

Donahue & Harrington 2002 – John R. Donahue, S.J. and Daniel J. Harrington, S.J., The Gospel of Mark (Collegeville [MN]: Liturgical Press, 2002)

Fuller 1984 – Reginald H. Fuller, Preaching the Lectionary:  The Word of God for the Church Today, Revised Edition (Collegeville, MN:  The Liturgical Press, 1984)

Harrington 1990 – Daniel J. Harrington, S.J., “The Gospel According to Mark” in Raymond E. Brown, S.S., Joseph A. Fitzmyer, S.J., and Roland E. Murphy, O. Carm. Eds., The New Jerome Biblical Commentary  (Englewood Cliffs, NJ:  Prentice Hall, 1990), [Chapter 41].

LaVerdiere 1999.2 – Eugene LaVerdiere, The Beginning of the Gospel:  Introducing the Gospel According to  Mark, Vol. 2 (Collegeville [MN]:  Liturgical Press, 1999)

Malina & Rohrbaugh 2003 – Bruce J. Malina and Richard L. Rohrbaugh, Social-Science Commentary on the Synoptic Gospels, Second Edition  (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2003)

Meier 1991 – John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew:  Rethinking the Historical Jesus, Volume One:  the Roots of the Problem and the Person, The Anchor Bible Reference Library (New York:  Doubleday, 1991)

Metzger 1994 – Bruce M. Metzger, A textual Commentary on the Greek New Testiment, Second Edition (Stuttgart:  German Bible Society, 1994)

Mitchell 2001 – Joan Mitchell, CSJ, Beyond Fear and Silence:  A Feminist-Literary Approach to the Gospel of Mark (New York:  Bloomsbury Academic, 2001)

NRSV = NRSV 1994 – New Revised Standard Version – Bruce M. Metzger and Roland E. Murphy, Editors, The New Oxford Annotated Bible [with the Apocrypha] containing the Old and New Testaments.  New Revised Standard Version.  (New York:  Oxford University Press, 1994)

Rahlfs 1961- Alfred Rahlfs, Ed., SEPTUAGINTA, Id est Vetus Testamentum graece iuxta LXX interpretes, Vol. I, Leges et historiae (Stuttgart:  Wurttembergische Bibelanstalt, 1962)

Schneemelcher 1991 – Wilhelm Schneemelcher, Ed., New Testament Apocrypha,  Revised Edition, English translation edited by R. McL. Wilson, Volume I, Gospels and Related Writings (Louisville [KY]:  Westminster/John Knox Press, 1991)

Taylor 1959 – Vincent Taylor, The Gospel According to St. Mark:  The Greek Text with Introduction, Notes, and Indexes  (London:  Macmillan & Co. LTD, 1959)

---