Information service of the Pontifical Mission Societies since 1927
Vatican City (Agenzia Fides) - With regard to the Gospel’s narration of the resurrection of Jesus the most widely read Italian Catholic weekly writes : «“Then the other disciple who had reached the tomb first also went in; he saw and he believed” (Jn 20,1-99) . What did he see? No specific object: absence itself filled with love evokes for him a presence».
Why then did the evangelist say a little earlier that he saw the linen cloths lying there but waited for Peter before entering? Precisely on this point the Catechism of the Catholic Church observes: “This suggests that he realized from the empty tomb's condition that the absence of Jesus' body could not have been of human doing and that Jesus had not simply returned to earthly life as had been the case with Lazarus” (n. 640). Therefore he saw a “specific object”. What can we say? In the Lives of the Prophets a 1st century document, states that Jewish religious leaders used to go to pray near the graves around Jerusalem, many of which were brought to light by archaeologists. Those who are familiar with Judaism know that the Mishna and the Talmud ruled that from the moment the dead person was buried graves were to remain open for three days, for rites of piety such as anointing which, in fact, was repeated for cadavers already wrapped in the burial cloths; however, around the time of important Jewish festivals such as the Passover, the tombs were closed temporarily. So the disciples of Jesus would have observed these rules (cfr. Mk 16,6), had it not been for the Resurrection. In fact his body had been buried in haste because of the Passover feast, and so they would return to complete the operation. This all underlines the importance of the empty tomb.
In reality as the historian Vittorio Messori observes, «many biblical scholars of today, although of Christian formation and conviction, are convinced that that “modern” man could never accept the idea of a corporal resurrection…» (“Dicono che è risorto”, Torino 2000, p. 87). For them what counts is the subjective “experience” of the apostles and not the historical event of the Resurrection.
Therefore we should wonder: if the empty tomb was of no importance why did the angel indicate the place where the Lord had been laid in the tomb? (cfr. Mk 16, 5ss). He did so not because the women did not know where the Lord had been placed, but so that they should see the burial cloths for themselves, as eagle eyed John who “saw and believed” (cfr. Jn 20,8).
The empty tomb is a “proof” of the Resurrection because the cloths were limp and, close at hand, gave the impression that not much time had passed.
Thus the empty tomb is part of the sign of Jonah promised by the Master. As Messori rightly recalls the angle’s invitation to see the empty tomb is closely connected with the signs of the mystery which had just taken place there (cfr. “Dicono che è risorto”, p 143). The angel rolled away the stone from the entrance to the tomb after the Resurrection, not before, unless one considers the Angel a literary genre.
Thus in the empty tomb there is no ambiguity, indeed there are the signs which prove the Resurrection; rather than interpret, what we must do is see and believe; therefore the empty tomb “adds” much - very much! - to the apostolic experience of the Resurrection, indeed it is its historical grounding; otherwise, according to Saint Paul, the faith would be without substance (cfr. 1 Cor 15,14).
The empty tomb can found faith in the Resurrection; it is not a matter of “some historic content”; on the contrary precisely the “historic incongruence” demonstrates that the Evangelist wrote his “report” not to annul this but to respect it, since it is connected with an event which happened.
The Church has not softened this incongruence in her proclamation of the Scriptures; so we must say still today “the structure of the word is sufficiently univocal” (J. Ratzinger, “Che cos’è la theology?” in La Comunione nella Chiesa, Cinisello B., 2004, p 32). And again: “The Resurrection of Christ is a fact that occurred in history, of which the Apostles were witnesses and certainly not inventors.” (Benedict XVI, address to the Meeting of the Church in Verona, 19 October 2006). (Agenzia Fides 12/4/2007; righe 51, parole 707)
