Recently, this Easter message was published in the Eastern Daily Press.

It is based on the account of Jesus’ appearance to Mary Magdalene on that very first Easter morning (John 20:1-18).

Here are the main points.

It was dark (v1) – ‘Easter itself begins in darkness. Not only the dim light before dawn, but the deeper darkness of grief, confusion, and fear. Mary Magdalene came to the tomb while it is still dark because that is how the world felt to her. And, if we are honest, that is how the world can feel for many today.’

She was confused (v2) – ‘She was not expecting resurrection. She assumed the worst. Even when she found the stone rolled away, her first thought was not hope but distress about a grave robbery. Easter, then, does not begin with clarity. It begins with confusion. That matters, because it means the Easter story speaks directly into uncertain and unsettled times.’

She lingered at the tomb (v11) – ‘When two of the other disciples arrived, they saw but did not yet understand, and they left. Mary stayed. She remained in the place of grief, standing outside the tomb, weeping. In a culture that often urges us to move on quickly or to distract ourselves from pain, her response is striking. She stayed present to loss. And it is there, in that honest sorrow, that something begins to change.’

She did not recognise Jesus at first (v14) – ‘Jesus stood before her, speaking to her, and she did not know him. She mistook him for the gardener. Present but not recognised. In moments of crisis, people often ask where God can be found. The Easter narrative offers a quiet response: nearer than we might think, though not always in expected ways.  The presence of Jesus may be glimpsed in acts of compassion, in quiet courage, in those who refuse hatred or continue to hope against the odds. Like Mary, however, we may not immediately recognise what is before us.’

She thought he was the gardener (v15) – ‘Early Christian writers reflected deeply on this scene. The Venerable Bede described Jesus as the true gardener, cultivating the human heart. Gregory the Great suggested that Jesus plants within Mary the seeds of love.’

Jesus spoke her name (v16) – ‘Recognition began not with spectacle, but with a personal encounter: Jesus spoke her name – “Mary” – and everything changed.  That moment carries a powerful implication. In a world where people are often reduced to statistics or labels, Easter insists on something more fundamental: each person is known. Each life has dignity. The risen Jesus calls individuals by name, even in fear, grief, and confusion.’

Mary’s instinct was to hold on, but she was told not to (v16f) – ‘The resurrection is not about returning to the past; it is about being sent forward into a new reality. Easter points not backwards, but ahead – to a future shaped by hope rather than fear, by life rather than death.’

She was given a task (v17) – ‘She became the first witness to the Resurrection, the first to proclaim, “I have seen the Lord.” It is significant that this role is entrusted not to the powerful or the certain, but to someone who has wept, doubted, and struggled.’

Conclusion.  ‘So this Easter, I invite you to remain present to suffering rather than rushing past it; to remain open to unexpected signs of resurrection hope; to listen for the quiet, personal call of God in your life; to let go of the past while trusting that something new is still unfolding; and to bear witness – not with perfect certainty, but with honesty and hope. The world, still marked by conflict and longing for peace, needs to hear those hope-filled words, “I have seen the Lord.”’

Comment

When I was growing up, I was ‘treated’ (if that’s the right word) to any number of Christian messages in which no important tenet of the Christian faith was denied, and yet which somehow seemed  to sidestep those central truths, to domesticate the Biblical text, to subject it to a process of ‘spiritualising’.

Is there something of that going on in the above example?

Of the four Gospels, I agree that John’s gives the Christian teacher most permission to ‘spiritualise’ the message.  John seems very fond of double meanings.  The mention of ‘darkness’ in v1 may be suggestive of spiritual darkness; along similar lines, we think of Nicodemus coming to Jesus in the middle of the night (ch. 3).  There might be a bit of a theme going on there.

But, on the whole, is it a fair treatment of the text to read off descriptive details and expect them do this amount of homiletical work?  Is the main point of the passage being hit, or missed?  How legitimate is it to treat Mary’s experience (on that most unique of days) as speaking so directly to our own experience?