Page images
PDF
EPUB

were most

manner of the Jews is to bury:" I think he means as they use to bury persons of distinction. For to such only spices and aromatic gums belong. I think, that to be implied also in the original word, evToDaLeLv. Nor was Lazarus, the friend of Jesus, buried in that manner. His body was bound or swathed in rollers. But there was no mixture of spices. For he was supposed to smell after he had been dead not more than four days. And whereas you use the expression, rolled in nothing but a mixture of myrrh and aloes,' and again, “a mixture only • of myrrh and aloes :' I think there can be no reason to doubt that they were such spices, as

proper

for the purpose. So · says Grotius. And all was done, as may be reasonably supposed, after the best manner, by the hands of an apothecary, or confectioner, or perfumer, skilful in performing funeral rites. There must have been many such in Jerusalem. And those two great and rich men, Joseph and Nicodemus, would procure one of the best and most proper for the service intended by them. Such men as these seem to be meant in Eccles. Xxxviii. 4, 7, 8. “ The Lord has created medicines out of the earth with such does the physician heal men, and take away their pains. Of such does the apothecary make a confection, ” or mixture, usyud, the word used by St. John. " And of his works there is no end.". See Gro. tius upon the place. There must have been at Jerusalem several of this profession, Unguentarii, who were able to perform funeral rites in a proper manner, in the space of three hours. And Nicodemus and Joseph, would, besides, have the attendance of such of their servants as could be of any use upon this occasion. A representation of our Saviour's body, embalmed, and swathed and brought to the door of the sepulchre, may be seen in Chifflet. And I suppose, that the justness of the representation is allowed by antiquarians.

V. I come now to the fifth and last article of my inquiry, and the most important of all : • the journey of these women to the sepulchre, and the appearances of our Lord to them, and to others after his resurrection.'

Here I cannot forbear saying, that your harmony of this part of the evangelical history is very perplexed, and intricate. Your words at p. 634. are these. • It may seem strange, that • in the accounts, which the evangelists have given of our Lord's resurrection, there is not the « least mention made of the disciples meeting one another in the way, although they went seve• ral times backward and forward, in separate companies, between their lodgings in the city and • the sepulchre. On the contrary, the circumstances of the history, oblige us to suppose, that • they did not meet one another. But there is nothing improbable in all

this. For, as Jerusa• lem was a great city, the apostles' lodging might be at the distance of a mile or two from that • extremity of it, which was nearest to the sepulchre. And therefore from their lodging to the

sepulchre there might be several different ways through the city, all equally convenient. Far• ther, Calvary, where our Lord was crucified, is said to have been “nigh unto the city,” John • xix. 20. But it would be nigh, though it was at the distance of half a mile. Suppose it how• ever to have been only a little more than a quarter of a mile. In this place, or nigh to it, • [EV TOxw] was the garden, where our Lord was buried, John xix. 41. Yet the garden might be • on the side of Calvary, which was farthest from Jerusalem. Wherefore, as it was a spacious

garden, the sepulchre could not well be nearer the city than half a mile. It may however • have been at the distance of a whole mile, consistently enough with the description, which • John has given of its situation. On either supposition, there may have been different roads • from Joseph's villa and garden to the city. Besides, as Jerusalem was walled round, the • apostles' lodging might be so situated, that persons going from thence to Joseph's garden, • could come out of the city by different gates. To conclude, the garden, where the sepulchre

was, might have more doors than one, and several shady walks in it, leading to the sepulchre. · On these suppositions, it is easy to imagine, that the disciples and the women, who went to • and from the sepulchre, may have missed each other by taking their rout through different • streets of the city, or different roads in the field: or they may have been hid from one another • by the shady walks of the garden, in which the sepulchre stood.'

So you write. But should you not have been led to suspect a scheme, which needs so many suppositions to support it? If the women and the disciples never met each other, in passing to and from the sepulchre, may it not afford reason to believe, that they did not make so many journeys separately, as you have supposed ? How many of those journeys you have found in the

447plex Ojuuguns xolt adons. Quæ aromata ad hunc usum optima habebantur. Grot. ad Joan, six, 39.

[ocr errors]

6

6

evangelists, or ingeniously contrived for them; I should not be able to say distinctly, were it not for a note, which you have placed at the bottom of p. 657, 658, where you say: if the * reader desires a more compendious view of the several journeys to the sepulchre, and of the * relation, which they bear to one another, he may take it as follows.' Where you reckon twelve in number, the last of which is this : 12. In the evening, the disciples arrive from Emmaus, and while they are telling their story, Jesus himself appears. There are, undoubtedly, some real

, or seeming difficulties in this part of the evangelical history. Which, as seems to me, have been of late increased and multiplied by annotators, and other writers, and not at all diminished by yourself. This being the case, I have found myself to be under a disability to unfold it by my own skill only. I have therefore, upon this occasion, had recourse to a learned and judicious friend : who, I before knew, had some uncommon observations upon this subject. The answer, with which he has favoured me, is to this purpose.

• I never could bring my mind to think, that Christ appeared first to Mary Magdalene separately, but that his first appearance was to the watch : who, I think, saw the angel, and the • rolling away of the stone, as well as felt the GEOMOV Meyav, attending the presence and action of the • angel, for fear of whom the keepers did shake, and became woel vexpol, “ as dead men." Some • of whom, as the same evangelist says, TIVES THS neswdies, “ came into the city, and showed unto * the chief priests all the things that were done.” The appearance to Mary Magdalene, I * think, was in common to her and to the other women, who went altogether to the sepulchre, and ' once only, not twice, as is generally supposed, and saw our Saviour, and were coming back to • the city, with the account of what they had seen and heard to the apostles, at the same time, that * some of the watch came to relate all that was done, to the chief priests. And they did make their • report to the apostles, before the two went from the rest of the company to Emmaus. No * notice is indeed mentioned by the two in discourse with Christ of the women's having related • their interview with Jesus, because it should seem none of the company believed a word of · what the women said, Mark xvi. 11. Luke xxiv. 11. And none of the evangelists pretend to give an exact detail of all circumstances.'

This I apprehend to be the truth, or nearly so. And it will be the key to this history. And I now intend to digest the several particulars of it, in their proper order, as well as I can. If I should at all differ from my friend, it will be in such points only as are not very material. And still I must acknowledge myself indebted to him for a clear insight into this history.

But before I enter upon the rehearsal of the several parts of this history, I must premise a few observations.

First of all, I reckon, I have showed, that your supposed journey of some of the women to the sepulchre, designed and begun, but not performed and finished, by them, about six or seven o'clock in the evening of Saturday, presently after the sabbath was over, is fictitious, and without foundation. Secondly, You speak of a journey to the sepulchre made by some of the company of the

This

p. 639, a second deputation from the apostles. You speak of it likewise at p. 633, 656, 657. I beg leave to say, that I cannot but consider this as a fiction, without any foundation. And perhaps I may take no farther notice of it hereafter.

Thirdly, You suppose St. Peter to have made a second visit to the sepulchre alone, different from that mentioned John xx. 3—10. This you argue from Luke xxiv. 12, at p. 646, 647. But I think it to be the same visit which is mentioned by St. John: when “ Peter, and that other disciple,' went together. So this also is understood by Le Clerc, and all other interpreters and commentators in general, so far as I know. Therefore my friend says in his letter to me: St. Luke • xxiv. 12, mentions only Peter running to the sepulchre; but we do not conclude from thence, that he ran thither twice, once by himself

, and at another time along with John. However, it is your opinion that two visits are here spoken of. And indeed this is agreeable to the usual method of your harmony: in which you make two stories of one, and account such passages of the gospels to be different, which are really parallel. Whereby, in my opinion, and so far as I am able to judge, you have oftentimes perverted the true order of things related by the evangelists.

I now proceed to rehearse the several parts of this history, and to digest them in order as well as I can.

.

you call, at

Says St. John xx. 1. “ The first day of the week, cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre."

But though Mary Magdalene only be here mentioned, I suppose, she was not alone. It is agreeable to what you say also p. 626. • In the morning of the first day of the week, according to our form of the day, all the women went out together very early, carrying the spices which

they had prepared to the sepulchre, at which they arrived about the rising of the sun.' See Matt. xxviii. 1. Mark xvi. 1, 2. Luke xxiv. 10. And at p. 627, you observe, · The women 6 said to have made this journey, are in all the evangelists the same- Mary Magdalene there• fore, Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, are the women, who made the visit with the spices early in the morning. John indeed speaks of none of the women who made this visit to the sepulchre, but Mary Magdalene. Yet because he mentions none but her, it does not follow, • that there was nobody with her. In the gospels there are many such omissions—Where• fore, since it is the manner of the sacred historians in other instances, John may be supposed • to have mentioned Mary Magdalene singly in this part of his history, notwithstanding he knew • that others had been with her at the sepulchre, and the rather, because his intention was to * relate only what things happened in consequence of her information, and not to speak of the • transactions of the rest, which his brethren historians had handled at large.'

You say very well. We therefore proceed in considering St. John's narrative, which follows, ver. 2. « Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them: They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know. not where they have laid him.”

I do not believe that Mary Magdalene was now alone. All the women might be with her. If some only, the rest stayed in the garden, expecting her return. For they knew that she went to tell Peter and John what she and the rest had seen, and to invite them to come to the sepulchre, and see how things were there.

It follows, ver. 3--10. “ Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple, and came to the sepulchre. So they ran both together. And the other disciple did outrun Peter, and came first to the sepulchre. And he stooping down, saw the linen clothes lying. Yet went he not in. Then cometh Simon Peter, following him, and went into the sepulchre, and seeth the linen clothes lie; and the napkin that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself. Then went in also that other disciple, which came first to the sepulchre, and" be saw and believed. For as yet they knew not the scriptures, that he must rise again from the dead. Then the disciples went away again unto their own home.”

Here you say upon ver. 8. p. 636.“ Then went in also that other disciple, which came ." first to the sepulchre. And he saw and believed. • Finding nothing in the sepulchre but the

cloths, he believed the body was taken away, as Mary Magdalene had told him. This, as I • take it, is all that John means, when he tells us, that Peter and he, after searching the. sepulchre, “ saw and believed.” Mary Magdalene, it would appear, had told them not only that the body was taken away, but that the cloths were left behind, a circumstance which filled • them with wonder. They saw them however with their own eyes, and believed her report• For that they had not the least suspicion of Christ's resurrection, is evident from the apology, ..which John himself makes for the stupidity of the disciples in this matter. Ver. 9. “ For as ..yet they knew not the scriptures, that he must rise from the dead”-Nor had she herself the • Jeast notion of it, even when Jesus appeared to her, as is plain from what she says, ver. 13 and" *. 13. You say very right, in my opinion. And Grotius has spoken to the like purpose in his annotations upon these verses.

St. Luke says, ch. xxiv. 12. “ Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre, and stooping down, he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed, wondering in himself at that which had come to pass.” This I take not to be another or a second visit of Peter, or different from that mentioned by St. John, but the same. And as this is the general opinión of interpreters, I need not say any thing to prove it.

a 'Et vidit, et credidit;' ver. 8.) Credidit certo abesse corpus, quod Mariæ referenti non crediderat, et de quo conspectis fasciis dubitaverat. Gr. ad Joh. xx. 8.

• Nondum enim sciebant scripturam.') quasi dicat, Corpus illud vitæ redditum nondum credebat Joannes. Nam

et ille et discipuli alii nondum satis perceperant id quod scriptura prædixerat de ejus resurrectione. Sæpe quidem audiverant Dominum id pollicentem. Sed rei magnitudo et ingenii tarditas obstabant, quo minus hoc in animum admitterent. Lucæ xxiv. 12. Gr. ad Jo. xx. 9.

Ver. 9.

St. John goes on ver. 11—18. “But Mary stood without at the sepulchre weeping. And as she wept she stooped down, and looked into the sepulchre, and seeth two angels in white, sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain. And they say unto her: Woman, why weepest thou? She saith unto them: Because they have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid him. And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing. And knew not that it was Jesus. Jesus saith unto her: Woman, why weepest thou? Whom seekest thou ? She supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him : Sir, it thou hast borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away. Jesus saith unto her: Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him: Rabboni, which is to say, Master. Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not: for I am not yet ascended to my Father ; but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father, and my God, and your God. Mary Magdalene came, and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that he had spoken these things unto her.”

This I suppose to be what is related by St. Mark xvi. 9. “ Now when Jesus was risen, early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven dæmons.”. And I can suppose that Mary Magdalene was now alone, or only one of the other women with her, and she, perhaps, not one of the most honourable: which, I think, is the opinion of some learned interpreter, though I do not now recollect his a name.

Our Lord having shown himself to Mary Magdalene, and discoursed with her, as related by St. John, I think, he withdrew to a small distance, out of sight. Mary, then, immediately went to the other women, who were not far off, and told them that she had “ seen the Lord,” and that he had spoken unto her. They assented to what she said, and were willing to go down with her presently to the apostles, and acquaint them with the glad tidings, that the Lord was risen. Whilst they were going, and not yet got out of the garden, Jesus came to them, and showed himself to them all. Which is what is related by St. Matthew xxviii. 5—9. “And the angel answered and said unto the women: Fear ye not. For I know that ye seek Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here. For he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead. And behold, he goes before you into Galilee. There shall ye see him. Lo, I have told you. And they departed quickly from the sepulchre, with fear, and joy, and did run, [that is, they were setting out] to bring his disciples word. And as they went, (or were going] to tell his disciples, behold Jesus met them, saying, All hail, (or a good day to you.] And they came, and held him by the feet, and worshipped him.” And now, undoubtedly, Mary Magdalene likewise was admitted to embrace our Lord's feet, if she did it not before. For the words, “ touch me not,” need not to be understood of an absolute prohibition not to touch him at all, but only that she was not to expect to be indulged in a long conversation. And now they were all fully satisfied that it was Jesus himself, who was alive again. He had given them all the evidences which they could desire. They saw him, they heard his voice, they handled him. “ Then [ver. 10.] said Jesus unto them: Be not afraid : go, tell my brethren, that they go into Galilee: and there shall they see me.”

Now all the women together had a joint appearance of Jesus, resembling that made to the eleven disciples, in the evening of the same day. And perhaps there was some peculiar fitness in our Lord showing himself first to Mary Magdalene, either alone, or when one more only was with her, and then to the rest all together. So before he showed himself to the eleven, he appeared to the two going to Emmaus, and to Peter, much about the same time : though we cannot exactly say when or where.

This appearance to Mary Magdalene, and the other women with her, may be considered as one and the same appearance. It is so considered by Lightfoot.

It is so considered by Lightfoot. Harmony of the N. T. Vol. I. p. 269, 270.

It follows, that we now consider their message to the apostles. John, as before, ver. 18,

• Grotius has in one place intimated, that Mary Magdalene spectat Christi responsum. Mibi propterea magis placuit amhad a maid servant with hernisi dicere malumus, quod plectendi, quant prehendendi verbum. Bez. in loc. credibile est, ancillam Magdalenæ adfuisse. Gr. in Matt. • Postea etiam Jesus se conspiciendum præbuit Petro, xxviii. 9.

quamvis rei circumstantiæ ad posteros transmissæ non sunt. Amplexæ sunt,' expatrpav.) Vulg. tenuerunt. Sic pre- Cleric. Harmon. p. 487. hensis videlicet ejus pedibus, quasi eum illic retenturæ, quo

says: Mary Magdalene came, and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that he had said these things unto her.” Matt. xxviii. 9, 10, before transcribed. And Mark xvi. 10, 11. “ And she went, and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept. And they, when they heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not.” St. Luke xxiv. 9-11. is more particular. “ And returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the rest. It was Mary Magdalene, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with him, who told these things unto the apostles. And their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not.”

Thus is the message, or testimony of the women, related by several evangelists ; but the disciples did not believe them.

Nor do I discern in the gospels any more journies of the women, or of the apostles, to the sepulchre, and back again, than these already mentioned. The first journey of the women to the sepulchre was early in the morning: when they saw that the stone was rolled away from the sepulchre, and missed the body of Jesus. Mary Magdalene, then, with some other of the women, came down to the apostles, and informed them of what they had seen with great surprise. Whereupon Peter and John went to the sepulchre, and then returned to their own home. Mary Magdalene, and the others, who had come down to the apostles, followed Peter and John to the sepulchre. And when those two apostles returned back to Jerusalem, Mary and her companions stayed yet a while near the sepulchre. And whilst they were there attending, Jesus came, and showed himself to them. Whereupon Mary and all the women came down to Jerusalem, and went to the apostles, assuring them that they had seen Jesus: and went no more to the sepulchre. For which indeed there could be no reason, when they were persuaded that Jesus had left it, and was alive again. As Lightfoot says, in the place before referred to, p. 270. • Here Matthew speaks short. For he mentioneth but one journey of the women to the grave, • and back, and saith, that as they came back, Jesus met them. Whereas Mary Magdalene had • two journeys. As she returned, now the watchmen are come into the city, and bribed to deny that he was risen. And so the chief priests and elders gave money to hire the nation into unbelief.'

The next appearance of our Lord is to the two disciples going to Emmaus. Of this I understand St. Mark to speak briefly, ch. xvi. 12, 13. “ After that, he appeared in another form unto two of them as they walked, and went into the country. And they went and told it unto the residue. Neither believed they them. After that,” meaning after the appearance of Jesusto the women before related, ver. 9, 10. and after that they had delivered their message and tes.. timony to the eleven.

Of those two disciples St. Luke speaks more particularly and at large, ch. xxiv. 13–35. “ And behold two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs. And they talked together of all those things which had happened. And it came to pass, that whilst they communed together, and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them. But their eyes were held, that they should not know him. And he said unto them: What manner of communications are these, that ye have one to another as ye walk, and are sad? And the one of them, whose name was Cleophas, answering, said unto him : Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days? And he said unto them: What things ? And they said unto : him: Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, who was a prophet, mighty in deed and word before God, and all the people: and how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him. But we trusted that it had been he who should have redeemed Israel. And beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done. Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, who were early at the sepulchre. And when they found not his body, they came saying, that they had seen a vision of angels, which said he was risen. And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even as they said. But him they saw not. Then he said unto them: O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken. Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? And beginning at Moses, and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. And they drew nigh unto the village whither they went. And he made as if he would have gone farther. And they constrained him, saying, Abide with us : for it is toward evening, and

the day is far spent. And he went in, to tarry with

[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »