_THE THIRD DAY._
MATT. xxvii. 57-xxviii. 15.
Now that the atoning work of Christ is finished, the story proceeds
with rapidity to its close. It was the work of the Evangelist to give
the history of the incarnate Son of God; and now that the flesh is
laid aside, it is necessary only to give such notes of subsequent
events as shall preserve the continuity between the prophetic and
priestly work of Christ on earth which it had been His vocation to
describe, and the royal work which, as exalted Prince and Saviour, it
still remained for Him to do. We need not wonder, then, that the
record of the three days should be quite brief, and of the forty days
briefer still.
This brevity is a note of truthfulness. The old idea of deliberate
falsehood having been quite given up, reliance is placed, by those who
wish to discredit the gospel witnesses, on the suggestion that the
records of the resurrection are the result of fancy crystallising into
so-called fact. But not only was there no time, between the death of
Christ and the latest date which can be assigned for the writing of
the first Gospel, for the process of crystallisation, but had there
been such a process, the result would have been very different. Had
fancy, and not observation, been the source, how comes it that nothing
is told but what came within the range of actual vision? Why is there
not a word about Christ's entry into Paradise, or descent into Hades?
What a fruitful field for fancy here!--yet there is not even a hint;
for it is not from anything in the Gospels, but solely from a passage
in one of the Epistles, that the doctrine of the descent into Hades
has been derived. There is not a word or a hint of anything that
passed in the unseen; a plain statement of what was done with the body
of Jesus is absolutely all. Clearly it is not myth, but history, with
which here we have to do.
_The Evening of the First Day_ (vv. 57-61).
Day was passing into evening when Jesus "yielded up His spirit"; for
the early evening according to the Jewish reckoning began at the ninth
hour. It was probably some time after this--perhaps towards the later
evening, which began about the twelfth hour (six o'clock)--that Joseph
of Arimathæa thought of claiming the body to give it honourable
burial. Why should such a duty have fallen to a stranger? Where were
the eleven? Had none of them so far recovered from their fear? Where
was Peter? might not his penitence for the past have impelled him to
come forward now? Where was John? He had taken the mother of Jesus to
his own home; but why did he not come back to see what he could do for
the sacred body? How can they all leave this tender office to a
stranger?
It may be thought by some sufficient answer simply to say, So the Lord
willed it, and so the Scripture was fulfilled which intimated that He
Who had died with the wicked should be "with the rich in His death";
but is there not more than this to be said? Is not the disappearance
of the eleven and the coming forward of the two secret disciples (for
as we learn from the fourth Gospel, Nicodemus--another secret
disciple--appears a little later on the scene) true to human nature?
Let us remember that the faith of the eleven, while much superior to
that of the two, was from the nature of the case exposed to a
counter-current of feeling, of which neither Joseph nor Nicodemus
could know anything. They had committed themselves and their all to
Jesus, as Joseph and Nicodemus had never done. The consequence was
that when the terrible tempest broke on Him, it came with all its
force on them too. But Joseph and Nicodemus had not as yet ventured
their all--had not, it would appear, as yet ventured anything for
Christ. They were looking on at the storm, as it were, from the shore;
so they could stand it, as those who were in the very midst of it
could not. They could stand beholding. Not having made themselves
known, they were not exposed to personal danger, hence were in a
position calmly and thoughtfully to watch the progress of events. We
can imagine them first looking towards Calvary from afar, and then, as
the darkness favoured a timid approach, drawing nearer and nearer, and
at last coming within the spell of the Divine Sufferer. As they
witnessed His patient endurance, they would become more and more
ashamed of their half-hearted sympathy, ashamed to think that though
they had not consented to the counsel and deed of the rest (Luke
xxiii. 51; John vii. 50, 51), they had not had courage to offer any
serious opposition. They would feel, as they thought of this, as if
they shared the responsibility of what must now appear to them an
awful crime; and so, looking to Him whom they had pierced, they would
mourn; and, brought at last to decision by His death (John xii. 32),
first Joseph, and after him Nicodemus, came out boldly, the one asking
for the body of Jesus, the other joining him in those tender and
reverent ministrations which all that was best in them now constrained
them to render.
The sad duty hastily but tenderly and fitly done, a great stone is
rolled to the door of the sepulchre, and they depart. But the
sepulchre is not deserted yet. What are these figures in the dusk,
these women that advance as the others retire? While the two men were
busy they have been keeping at a discreet and respectful distance; but
now that all is silent at the tomb, they draw nearer, and though night
is coming on apace, they cannot leave it, and the story of the long
day ends with this pathetic touch: "And Mary Magdalene was there, and
the other Mary, sitting over against the sepulchre."
_The Second Day_ (vv. 62-66).
It was the Jewish Sabbath. The Evangelist for some reason avoids the
common designation, preferring to speak of it as "the day after the
preparation"--whether it was that he shrank from mentioning the
Sabbath in such a connection, or whether it was that the great event
of the preparation day had such complete possession of his mind that
he must date from it, we shall not attempt to decide.
This is the only record we have of that Sabbath day except that St.
Luke tells us that on it the women "rested according to the
commandment." But the enemies of Jesus could not rest. They were
uneasy and troubled now that the deed was done. They could not but
have been impressed with the bearing of their Victim, and with all the
portents which accompanied His end. It was natural, therefore, that
words of His, which when reported to them before had not seemed worth
noticing, should come back to them now with fateful force. "After
three days I will rise again" was what He had often said. "What if He
should rise? we must see that He does not." It would never do,
however, to confess to such a fear; but they may get all needful
precautions taken by suggesting that there was danger of the disciples
stealing the body, and then saying that He had risen. On this pretext
they get a guard from Pilate, and authority to seal the sepulchre.
Having thus made all secure, they can sleep in peace.
_The Morning of the Third Day_ (xxviii. 1-15).
The women, having rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment,
knew nothing of what had been done at the tomb that day, so, as they
set out before daybreak on the third morning, they only thought of the
great stone, and wondered how it could be rolled away; but when they
came, the sun just rising as they reached the spot, they found the
stone already rolled away, and an angel of the Lord at the tomb, so
lustrous in the livery of heaven that the keepers had quailed in his
presence and were powerless to interfere. The awe with which the sight
would naturally inspire the women also was mingled with joy as they
heard his kindly greeting and sympathetic words. Altogether worthy of
an angel from heaven are the words he is reported to have spoken.
There is first the tender response to their looks of dread--"Fear not
ye," as if to say, These others well may fear, for there is nothing in
common between them and me; but with you it is different: "I know that
ye seek Jesus, Which was crucified." Then there is the joyful news:
"He is not here; for He is risen, as He said:" and as he observes
their look of half-incredulous wonder he kindly adds, to let their
sight be helper to their faith, "Come, see the place where the Lord
lay." Then he gives them the honour of carrying the glad tidings to
the other disciples, and assuring them that the Divine Shepherd will
meet them all in Galilee according to His word.
At this point we encounter one of the chief difficulties to be found
in St. Matthew's record of the resurrection. There are indeed several
particulars in this Gospel, as well as in the others, which it is
difficult to fit into a connected account embracing all the facts; but
as every person of even moderate intelligence knows that the same
difficulty is met in comparing various truthful accounts of any great
event in which details are many and complex, it is only the most
unreasoning prejudice that can find in this an excuse for doubting the
credibility of the writers. Rather is this feature of the records a
distinct note of truthfulness; for, had it been easy to fit each fact
into its exact place in all the other accounts, we should have heard
from the very same doubters, and with far better reason, that there
was every sign of its being a made-up story. All the four accounts are
brief and fragmentary; there is evidently no attempt whatever to
relate all that took place, and we should need to know all in order to
form a complete picture of the entire series of events which glorified
the first Easter Day. We must therefore be content with the four vivid
pictures given us, without insisting on what with our imperfect
knowledge is perhaps the impossible task of so combining them as to
have one great canvas embracing all the details in each of the four.
The account before us is the briefest of all, and therefore it would
be especially out of place in dealing with this Gospel to attempt to
fill up the blanks and construct a consecutive history of all that
took place on that eventful day. But there is one point with which it
is especially necessary to deal in considering St. Matthew's account
of the resurrection--viz., the prominence given to the appearance of
the Lord to His disciples in Galilee--whereas in the fuller records of
the third and fourth Gospels, not Galilee, but Jerusalem and its
vicinity, is the region where He makes Himself known.
Those who are anxious to make the most of this difficulty are much
disappointed to find the ninth verse in their way. Wishing to prove a
sharp contradiction, as if the one said the Lord appeared only in
Galilee, and the other that He appeared only in Jerusalem and its
neighbourhood, they are naturally vexed to find one of the Jerusalem
appearances actually mentioned here. The attempt has accordingly been
made to discredit it; but in vain. It stands there an unquestionable
part of the original text. So we must bear in mind that St. Matthew
not only does not assert that it was only in Galilee that our Lord
appeared, but he expressly mentions one appearance in Jerusalem. On
the other hand, while St. Mark mentions no appearance in Galilee, he
does mention the Lord's promise to meet His disciples there, and
leaves it distinctly to be inferred that it was fulfilled. St. Luke,
indeed, makes no mention of Galilee at all; but there is abundance of
room for it: for while he occupies almost all his space with the
record of one day, he tells us in the beginning of his second volume
(Acts i. 3) that Christ "showed Himself alive after His passion by
many infallible proofs, _being seen of them forty days_, and speaking
of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God." St. John also
confines himself to what took place at Jerusalem; but in the
interesting appendix to that Gospel there is a striking account of a
meeting with the eleven in Galilee--evidently not the same one which
is recorded here, but another of the same, affording one more specimen
of meetings which were no doubt frequently repeated during the forty
days. It is abundantly evident, therefore, that there is no
contradiction whatever.
Still the question remains, Why does St. Matthew make so little of
what the others make so much of, and so much of what the others make
so little of? In answer we might first ask whether this was not in
every way to be expected and desired. If, as evidently was the case,
there were manifestations of the risen Lord both in the south and in
the north, and if we were to have several accounts, was it not
desirable that one at least should make it his specialty to bring into
prominence the appearances in the north? And if so, who could do it
more appropriately than Matthew the publican of Galilee? The favour
shown his own northern land had most deeply impressed his mind. It
will be remembered that he passed over entirely the early Judæan
ministry recorded by St. John, and rejoiced in the Galilean ministry
as the dawning of the new Day according to the words of ancient
prophecy (Matt. iv. 14-16).
Furthermore, there is every reason to suppose that it was not till
they met in Galilee that the scattered flock of the disciples was
gathered all together. The appearances in Jerusalem were to
individuals and to little companies; whereas in Galilee it would seem
that He appeared to as many as five hundred at once (1 Cor. xv. 6);
and though the Lord appeared to the ten (Thomas being absent), and
again to the eleven, before they left Jerusalem, it is not to these
occasions, but rather to the meeting on the shore of the lake, that we
look for their fresh commission to address themselves again to their
work as fishers of men. This will appear more clearly if we bear in
mind our Lord's sad reference, as the crisis approached, to the
scattering of the flock, and His promise that after He had risen again
He would go before them into Galilee (Matt. xxvi. 31, 32). We have
here, then (ver. 7), a repetition of the same promise, "He goeth
before you" (as the shepherd goes before his flock) "into Galilee,"
where all the scattered ones shall be gathered round the Shepherd once
again, and thence sent out as under-shepherds (see John xxi. 15-17),
to gather in the rest of the flock that are scattered abroad.
The conduct of the chief priests and scribes (vv. 11-15) is the
natural sequel of their futile attempt to seal the sepulchre. It is in
vain to raise the objection, as some do, that it was too clumsy a
device for men so astute; for what else could they do? It was indeed a
poor evasion; but, baffled as they were, no better was possible for
them. Let the critic say what better expedient they could have thought
of, before he assigns its poverty as a reason for discrediting the
story. That St. Matthew, and he alone, records it, is sufficiently
accounted for by the fact that, his being the first written Gospel,
and moreover the Gospel for the Jew, it behoved him to deal with a
saying "commonly reported among the Jews until this day"; while its
being recorded by him was a sufficient reason why no further notice
should be taken of it, when there was so much of greater importance to
tell.
Looking back on this very brief record of the great events of Easter
Day, nothing is more striking than the prominence of the women
throughout. It is a note of the new dispensation. It must have been
very strange to all the disciples, and not least to the author of this
Gospel, that woman, who had been kept so far in the background,
treated almost as if her presence would pollute the sacred places,
should, now that the veil was rent in twain from the top to the
bottom, not only enter into the sacred presence of the risen Lord as
the equal of her brother man, but should be there before him,--that a
woman's eyes should be the first to see Him, a group of women the
first to receive His loving welcome and to fall in adoration at His
sacred feet. Yet so it was. Not that there was any partiality. "In
Christ Jesus there is neither male nor female." It is not a question
of sex; it is a question of love and faith; and it was because the
love of these women was deeper, and their fidelity greater, than that
of any of the men, that they had this honour. Had the love of John
been as all-engrossing as that of Mary of Magdala, he would not have
had to wait for the Easter tidings till she had come to tell him. It
is not a question of faith alone, but of faith and love. The women's
faith had failed them too. It was with no hope of seeing a risen Lord
that they had gone to the tomb--it was with spices to finish the
embalming of His dead body; but their love, love stronger than death,
even in the wreck of faith, kept them near, and so it was that, when
light first broke from out the darkness, they were there to see.