Fther Joseph Knabenbauer's Commentary on John 20:1-9

 Father Joseph Knabenbauer's Commentary on John 20:1-9

What is observed in the narrative of the Passion is also evident here. For John both presupposes and supplements the narrative of the Synoptics. John 20:1: “But on the first day of the week,” i.e., the first day of the week; for τὸ σάββατον and τὰ σάββατα also take on the notion of “week” (cf. Matt 28:1; Mark 16:1; Luke 18:12, etc.). “Mary Magdalene came early in the morning, while it was still dark, to the tomb.” She sets out at the break of dawn, which declares the fervor of her love. From the Synoptics it is clear that she did not set out for the tomb alone, but together with other women who had prepared spices so that, upon arriving, they might anoint Jesus. For, as Chrysostom says, although both the men, Joseph and Nicodemus, and the women showed great love for Jesus, it is clear they did not entertain any great expectation concerning Him; for they wished to pay Him honor as though He were to remain permanently in the tomb.

It is asked why John makes mention of Mary alone. Augustine judges that it was because she was more fervent in love than the others. The reason seems to be that John wishes to narrate what others had omitted concerning her, and to explain what Mark 16:9 had touched upon: that the Lord appeared to her first. John presupposes that it was known that she had come to the tomb with others, and this he also clearly indicates in Jn 20:2: “we do not know,” openly stating that she was not there alone. “And she saw the stone taken away from the tomb,” concerning which the women had been anxious on the way (Mark 16:3–4). As Luke narrates, the women, having entered the tomb, did not find the body, and stood perplexed in mind about this (Luke 24:3–4). Mary Magdalene, due to her more fervent disposition, as soon as she sees the tomb empty, does not wait with the other women, who soon experience the appearance and address of the angels, but (v. 2) “she ran and came to Simon Peter and to the other disciple whom Jesus loved.” The verb ἐφίλει expresses the tender love that is felt. Since πρός is repeated, some conclude that the disciples were not in the same house. She ran to these two because Peter was the first among them all, and because John loved Jesus more than the others, and these two alone among all had followed Him when He was led to Annas (Euthymius).

“And she says to them: ‘They have taken the Lord from the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid Him.’” That “we do not know” is not put in the plural without reason (Schegg), but indicates that several women had approached with her, and that the apostles knew this. For later in Jn 20:13, where Mary speaks of herself alone, she nevertheless says “I do not know” (nescio) regarding “they have taken.” In this way, then, it is most easily and suitably shown how this narrative (vv. 1–2) harmonizes with the account of the Synoptics.

While the other women, having received the angelic message, return home, the two disciples, whom Magdalene soon follows back to the tomb, take another road to the tomb. Jn 20:3: “Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple, and they came to the tomb.” Luke also mentions Peter going to the tomb (24:12), and in v. 24 he makes those going to Emmaus say: “And some of those who were with us went to the tomb, and found it just as the women had said, but Him they did not see.” How these two came to the tomb, the evangelist, who was himself present, accurately describes. Jn 20:4: “And they both ran together.” Out of ardor and desire to investigate the matter, “and that other disciple ran on ahead faster than Peter,” as being younger (Corluy, Scholz), more robust (Euthymius), or more agile due to his age (Jansenius, Toletus). “And he came first to the tomb.” Jn 20:5: “And when he had stooped down,” that is, having bent his body, he peered through the entrance into the tomb to examine what was the matter, “he saw the linen cloths lying” (τὰ ὀθόνια), those burial wrappings with which the body of Jesus had been bound (19:40). “Yet he did not go in.” He seems to have been held back by a certain fear. Others prefer to say that he did not enter because he wished to yield the honor to Peter, who was older and of higher dignity (Toletus).

Jn 20:6: “Simon Peter therefore came, following him, and entered into the tomb,” being of a more ardent disposition (θερμότατος, Theophylact). “And he saw the linen cloths lying,” and moreover, having entered, he saw what John, merely peering into the tomb, could not have noticed: Jn 20:7 “and the face cloth that had been over His head, not lying with the linen cloths, but rolled up separately in one place.” This was a sign of the resurrection. For if anyone had taken away the body, they would neither have first stripped it nor taken such care to remove the burial cloth, wrap it up, and place it in a specific spot, but would have taken the body just as it was. Therefore, John anticipates by saying that He was buried with much myrrh, which binds the linen cloths to the body no less than lead does. Thus, when you hear that the face cloths were lying placed separately, you may not entertain the idea of those who say that He was stolen away by theft. For a thief would not have been so foolish as to take such great care in a superfluous matter (Chrysostom, Theophylact, Euthymius). It is also true, as the Fathers note, that the matter described in such minute detail would be sufficient to reveal that the writer, who narrates what was seen by Peter, had also seen it himself, even if he did not immediately add, as he promptly does, that he too saw it.

Jn 20:8: “Then therefore that other disciple also entered, who had come first to the tomb, and he saw and believed,” namely, that Jesus had truly risen (Chrysostom, Cyril, Thomas, Cajetan, Toletus, Lapide, Corluy, Scholz, Weiss). Not, as Augustine, Bede, Rupert, and Jansenius hold, that he believed only what the woman had said, that the body had been taken away. For he saw that, nor could it come to his mind that Jesus had been translated and taken up to paradise, as Enoch and Elijah were (Gen 5:24; 4 Kings [4 Reg] 2:11), as Schegg explains; for he had seen Jesus dead. Nor should ἐπίστευσαν [“they believed”] be read [here], for Luke teaches us what Peter felt: “He went away to his home, marveling at what had happened.” Then John gives the reason why he himself needed to see this in order to arrive at faith in the resurrection, and at the same time provides the cause for Peter’s state of mind, of which Luke 24:12 narrates—namely, his amazement, by which he was not yet persuaded of the resurrection. Jn 20:9: “For as yet they did not know the Scripture, that He must rise from the dead.” This refers to what was said, “he saw and believed,” as if to say: before he saw, he did not know the Scripture that He must rise from the dead, but when he saw, he believed (Thomas). He thus excuses the slowness in believing from ignorance of Scripture (Cajetan), and at the same time explains why others also did not believe the women who afterward announced the resurrection to them, but why it seemed to them like idle tales (Mark 16:11; Luke 24:11, 23–24). And yet Jesus had foretold the resurrection so clearly that even the Sanhedrin understood it (Matt 27:63). But accustomed to hearing parables from Him, they did not understand, and believed that He was signifying something else (Augustine, Bede). Later, when they had received the Holy Spirit, they also perceived that the resurrection had been predicted (cf. Acts 2:25, 27, 31; 13:33; 1 Cor 15:3).

The mystical explanation of this race of the disciples, etc., concerning the faith of the synagogue and the Gentiles, is handed down by Gregory (Hom. in Evang. 22.2 seq., Migne PL 76, 1175), followed by Rupert, Thomas, Lapide, etc.

CONTINUE