John
Paul II
in his general audience of Wednesday, 21 May 1997
offered several reasons for concluding that the first person to
see the resurrected Lord was His Mother, the Blessed Virgin
Mary. Although this is not what we would call a defide teaching
- Catholics are free to believe it or not - there is much
spiritual fruit to be had by meditating on this point.
Saint Pope John Paul II
taught,
“The
Gospels mention various appearances of the risen Christ, but not
a meeting between Jesus and his Mother. This silence must not
lead to the conclusion that after the Resurrection Christ did
not appear to Mary; rather it invites us to seek the reasons why
the Evangelists made such a choice. ... 3. Indeed, it is
legitimate to think that the Mother was probably the first
person to whom the risen Jesus appeared. Could not Mary’s
absence from the group of women who went to the tomb at dawn
(cf. Mk 16:1; Mt 28:1) indicate that she had already met
Jesus?”
Enemies of the Church will sometimes say that once a person
becomes a Catholic he has to check his brain at the door and
just let the Pope do the thinking for him. This could not be
further from the truth. Pope John Paul II indirectly points
this out by pointing to the vast area of theology that is not
yet defined where we are free to explore deeper insights into
God’s love.
Those that deny that truth can be known are implying that their
own attempts at thinking are fruitless. Truth is to the mind
what food is to the mouth and body. At some point we are
intended to chomp down on it. The mind was made to embrace
objective truth. Just as comprehension of scientific laws
enables us to go further into science, truth in other fields
such as theology enables us to think more deeply and more
profitably. A person who knows certain truths is more free, not
less so.
Does
Mark 16:9 “he (Jesus) appeared first to Mary Magdalene”
preclude the possibility of an earlier apparition to the Blessed
Virgin Mary?
No! See below
Objection Answered.
We
have at least six reasons for concluding that Mary was the first
to see our resurrected Lord. We have two biblical reasons, one
reason based on justice, one based on love, and there is the
historical testimony of our tradition and now John Paul II’s
magisterial teaching.
Biblical Reason #1.
Where was Jesus at before Mary Magdalene saw Him ?
Jesus has a physical body. When Mary Magdalene went to the tomb
it was empty. She went to the Apostles and He was not there.
Later, she sees Him and He says that He has not yet ascended to
the Father. John 20:17 To where or to whom had Jesus gone ?
With so many prominent individuals eliminated it doesn’t seem
hard to choose between Pontius Pilate and the Blessed Virgin
Mary. Jn 21:25
Biblical Reason #2.
How do we explain Mary’s absence from the tomb on Easter morning
?
Mary, most likely a single mother at this point, was very
devoted to her only Son and she followed Him all the way to the
cross, even when most of the Apostles did not. She faithfully
followed Jewish custom. (Luke 2:21-24, 39 John 2:2-5) No
doubt Mary was exhausted with grief and probably slept a good
part of the Sabbath, but after that what else would she have
been thinking about other than her only Son ? When Mary
Magdalene (Luke 24:10) went to finish anointing the body why did
the Blessed Virgin Mary not go as well ? It only makes sense if
Mary had known that Jesus was not there.
Jesus had appeared to Mary first.
Some
will say that this conclusion is pure speculation, but then all
attempts to answer questions that are not infallibly determined
or defined involve speculation. One of the strengths of by John
Paul II’s position is that a person can speculate as much as
they wish and as long as they wish, but I don’t think they can
arrive at another answer that is equally plausible. No other
answer really fits or solves the above questions.
If a
person has one particular piece that fits perfectly into a
puzzle and no other piece can fit and one cannot even imagine a
piece that would truly fit, then it is reasonable to conclude
that this particular piece is the correct one.
Reason 3:
An
Argument of Justice.
John
Paul II explains why Justice leads us to this conclusion.
“The
Gospels mention various appearances of the risen Christ, but not
a meeting between Jesus and his Mother. This silence must not
lead to the conclusion that after the Resurrection Christ did
not appear to Mary; rather it invites us to seek the reasons why
the Evangelists made such a choice.”
“ 3. … This inference would also be confirmed by the fact that
the first witnesses of the Resurrection, by Jesus’ will, were
the women who had remained faithful at the foot of the Cross and
therefore were more steadfast in faith. Indeed, the Risen One entrusts to one of them, Mary Magdalene,
the message to be passed on to the Apostles (cf. Jn 20:17-18).”
Saint Pope John Paul II
Mary
heard the hammer striking the nails as her Son was fastened to
the cross. She saw with her own eyes the lance as it pierced
His side and the water and blood that poured out onto the
ground. Mary was in perfect union with the Son in his suffering
on the Cross.
She was filled with God's grace and
had complete faith in Him from the beginning. So,
from an argument based on justice we have another reason to
conclude that Mary would have been the first to share in the joy
of His Resurrection.
Frei Francisco explains :
1.
2 Corinthians 1:7 “ … knowing that as you are partakers of the sufferings, so
shall you be also of the consolation.” DRB
2.
Saint Augustine taught that the only one who held firm the Faith
in the resurrection of Christ during the three days from Good
Friday to Easter Sunday was Mary. She was the only believing
member of the Church during that triduum.
3.
[So,] what share must not the Virgin-Mother have had in the joys
of the Resurrection? We should hold it as a certain truth that
Her most sweet Jesus, after His Resurrection, consoled Her first
of all.
Frei Francisco
Reason 4:
Love Opens the Door to Understanding and Knowledge.
Hopefully we all love our own mothers. Jesus, who is the
perfect Son, loved his mother even more. Being God He perfectly
fulfilled the 4th commandment. Jesus loves everyone,
but Mary was most open and therefore she is the most perfect
vessel to receive that love. If we would want to console our
own mother’s sorrow, how much more so would Jesus.
Love reveals what the skeptic is slow to believe.
Reason 5:
Historical Tradition
The
tradition that Mary was the first to witness our Lord’s
Resurrection.
A
fifth-century author named Sedulius claimed it was so.
In
the ninth century, George of Nicomedia infers from Mary’s share
in Our Lord’s sufferings that before all others and more than
all she must have shared in the triumph of her Son. [Or. IX, P.G., C, 1500]
Eadmer of Canterbury (c. 1060 – c. 1126, disciple of Saint Anselm), writes :
(English paraphrase ) A focus on the Incarnation of Jesus Christ. And … The Blessed Virgin Mary was the first to witness Jesus coming
into the world as He took on flesh by the power of the Holy
Spirit. And it was the Blessed Virgin Mary who first witnessed
Jesus after He had rose from the dead by the power of the Holy
Spirit as He came in His new resurrected flesh. (Romans 8:11)"
Liber de excellentia Virginis Mariae , Chapter 5. See
Latin Text
The Proof :
An insult to the glory and grace of Jesus Christ must be wrong.
Eadmer is alluding to the principles of typology. He is not
only stating that Jesus first appeared to the BVM (Blessed
Virgin Mary,)
he is also providing us with a proof that Jesus did so.
We
need only to understand two principles.
First typology and second how Mary is the most perfected of all
creatures.
Let
us consider two different hypothetical individuals. The
first person is very open to the grace that Jesus provides.
The second person is less so. It
would be an insult to the glory and grace of Jesus Christ if the
second person who was less close to
Jesus and who had refused some of his grace also participated to
a greater extent in the heavenly glories than the first person, who
was closer to Jesus Christ and His grace.
Also
see
Aren’t you Catholics placing Mary to high ?
But
now in the example on Mary she is the greatest of God’s
creatures because she has the fullest co-operation and
participation with God’s grace. She can point to no creature
greater than herself because no creature co-operated with Jesus
more than she did. If there was a greater participation by
someone other than BVM in the Glories of Heaven such as Jesus’
resurrection by someone who was not as close to Jesus as was BVM
that would be an insult to Jesus Christ because He is the sole
source of all grace.
Therefore, Mary had to be the first to participate in the
heavenly glory of Jesus’ resurrection.
See
More Details
And
St. Ignatius of Loyola (1491-1556) also claimed it.
“The
Resurrection of Christ Our Lord. His First Apparition” … 105. Christ's apparition to Mary is not found in Scripture, but
it is an opinion prominent in a long tradition of Christian
writers. It is found in ch. 70 of the Life of Christ by Ludolph,
and Ignatius may have accepted it from him. ... Cusson lists
some twenty writers who held this opinion, including Sedulius,
Paulinus of Nola, Albert the Great, Bernardino da Siena,
Maldonatus, and Pope Benedict XIV (BibThSpEx, pp. 303-304) (Ignatius of Loyola: The Spiritual Exercises
by Ignatius of Loyola, George E Ganss, Paramanda Divakar, Edward
J. Malastesta, Page 417.
Also, see Ignatius of Loyola , Spiritual Exercises, 4th week,
the first of 14 meditations on the risen life of Christ.)
Pope Benedict XIV (1740-58) declared that this fact is “based on the
tradition proclaimed by ancient architectural and liturgical
monuments, starting from Jerusalem itself.”
Saint Bridget of Sweden (Revelations VI, 94)
Christus Rex
Web site has several pictures of the ruins of a Basilica in
Jerusalem that was destroyed by the Moslems in 1009 AD, and it
reports how the pilgrim Daniel visited “the chapel dedicated to
Jesus’ apparition to his mother.”
Also
see
Lay Witness
Reason 6:
Magisterial Teaching
Now,
with the teaching of John Paul II on Wednesday, 21 May 1997 we
have that to consider. He did not claim that it was infallibly
revealed, but he did say that it was reasonable to conclude that
the Blessed Mother was the first to witness Jesus’ Resurrection
and obviously he believed it as well. See Official Vatican Web
Site to verify that.
See
John Paul II’s General Audience.
Objection Answered
Possible Objection ??
Mark 16:9-10
“Now when he rose early on the first day of the week, he
appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had cast out
seven demons. She went and told those who …”
A
few will wrongly claim that Mark 16:9 “he appeared first to Mary
Magdalene” precludes the possibility of an earlier apparition to
the Blessed Virgin Mary. Is Mark 16:9 a valid proof for their
claim ?
No.
Their flawed conclusion is based on the false assumption that
Mark 16:9 allows for only one interpretation. Words can have
several different meanings based on context.
Many
bible exegetes have affirmed that the wording is not conclusive
as to who received the very first apparition. The great Fr.
Cornelius a’ Lapide asserts that the word first indicates not an
absolute priority, but only a relative priority specifically and
exclusively to the events Mark decides to include.
Rupert
with the
approval of Salmeron, Maldonatus, and a number of other
exegetes, answers the difficulty drawn from Mark (16:9), "apparuit
primo Mariae Magdalenae." He thinks that the custom of the Roman
Church in placing the station for Easter at St. Mary Major
confirms our opinion.
(De divinis officiis, vii, 25; ML, CLXX, 207), [Jesus Christ: His Life, His Teaching and His Work,
By Ferdinand Prat, page 415 notes. ]
The opinion being confirmed
is that the Blessed Virgin Mary was the first to see the
resurrected Lord. See
complete context.
Therefore, the evangelist Mark was using the term “first” to
convey the order of events after the resurrection that he [Mark]
relates. First, Jesus appeared to Mary Magdalene, and then she
went to and then she told the good news to the Apostles.
It
does not speak as to what may or may not have happened before
the chain of events he describes.
It does not by necessity
preclude the possibility of an earlier apparition to Mary.
The argument that Mark 16 precludes a visit to Blessed Virgin
Mary before Magdalene is based on a supposed conclusion that is
not definitive, therefore the proof is flawed. Most of the
Church fathers do not address this issue. The ones who deny Mary
was visited first base their argument on this flawed conclusion,
therefore their testimony must be dismissed as unfounded.
So, why do Sacred Scriptures not record this event ?
John
20:30-31 clues us in as to why this event need not be included
in Scriptures, but looking further we can see a possible reason
why the Holy Spirit would have wanted to leave this visitation
out of the Bible. Perhaps He wanted to help us attain something
more valuable than just data for our intellect. Our minds were
made to wonder and meditate about things. On the one hand we
can speculate about the sordid innuendos and accusations that
our fallen world constantly throws our way, or we can speculate
about the things of God. Perhaps God wanted us to open our
hearts by getting us wonder where was Jesus when the tomb was
found empty. What would have motivated His heart ? How much
love did the perfect Son have for the perfect Mother ? Why
would Mary be absent from the tomb? Did she already know
something the others did not ?
As
we contemplate about Jesus we can draw much fruit as we think
about how much we each love our own mother. Maybe God intended
the answers to some questions to remain hidden until we pondered
those questions with love in our hearts because only in the
context of love could the real answers be known. Love opens
heart as well as the mind to a deeper understanding of the
things of God. |