Archbishop of Sydney

Fifth Sunday of Lent

St. Mary’s Cathedral, Sydney
Ezek 37:12-14; Rom 8:8-11; Jn 11:1-45

By + Cardinal George Pell
Archbishop of Sydney
9/3/2008

As we approach closer to Holy Week with its commemoration of the suffering, death and resurrection of Our Lord, we have here John’s account of the raising of Lazarus from the dead, which is not recounted in any of the other three gospels.

It is like a prelude to Christ’s victory over death in his own resurrection, being a great victory in its own right, although Lazarus was brought back to live and die, while Jesus rose triumphant for eternal life.

Before returning to this incident with Martha and Mary, we should remember how central Christ’s teaching about eternal life is to the Catholic package.

Even in some quarters within the Catholic community something of a silence has fallen over the reality of heaven and hell. A young mother lamented this to me recently explaining that there had been a number of untimely deaths in her circle recently and she wanted to hear more about the Church’s teaching on life after death.

Scepticism and disbelief have spread much more widely in the general community. A disbelief in personal judgement after death and a stronger disbelief in the reality of punishment after death now reflect much public opinion. However if the scales of justice are eliminated from considerations of life after death, the logical case for survival and for a good God in charge of His creation are weakened and is indicative of a more general weakening in both religious faith and belief of survival beyond death. To believe that everyone automatically goes to heaven, without purification or “spring cleaning”, is not far from believing no-one survives death and that there is nothing on the other side.

The raising of Lazarus invites us to ponder the mystery of Christ’s resurrection a bodily resurrection, just as we shall ultimately rise again with our bodies. Traditional Christian doctrine goes beyond believing that our immortal souls continue to exist.

John is a master story teller and the fact that the synoptic gospels do not recount this spectacular miracle is not a strong argument against its historicity. As there were no media then, neither radio, TV, newspapers or journals and travel was by foot or horse (and therefore generally local) news and gossip tended to eddy around in small local ponds. The synoptic gospel writers did not know too much about Our Lord’s doings in Judaea, as they focussed on Galilee.

Another oddity in the account is that Our Lord waited for a couple of days before beginning the one day’s walk to Bethany, a suburb a couple of hours journey from Jerusalem. We can reject any suggestion that Jesus waited the extra time to highlight further the greatness of the miracle. God’s ways are mysterious but Jesus does not use people for self aggrandizement. So too the Jewish belief that the soul hovers around the dead body for three days and that Jesus delayed his return to emphasise that this was not simply a resuscitation are not together a sufficient reason for the early inaction.

John places this miracle close to Jesus’ final days, when he had incurred the hatred of the High Priest and his advisers, who were deciding how to deal with him. As they were more powerful than the Pharisees their opposition was more dangerous.

When Jesus received the news he was in comparative safety among friends on the other side of the River Jordan and he knew that if he returned to the district around Jerusalem at that time for any reason, he was placing himself in the power of his enemies and probably handing himself over to death.

His disciples recognized this immediately and objected pointing out that the Jews had just tried to stone him, so that he should not go back there again. Thomas typically spelt out what more of them were thinking “Let us go too that we may die with him”.

Verses nine and ten are baffling, to me at least, as Our Lord returns to the themes of light and darkness and emphasises the importance of walking in the light of day, because we stumble if we try to travel in darkness.

One useful suggestion is that this incident, or at least the early part of it, is John’s equivalent for Jesus’ agony in the garden at Gethsemane which he does not mention. It is as though Our Lord was busy with his work as he was pondering the wisdom of returning to Judaea and the price he would pay for trying to help.

We should be consoled to realise that Jesus loved Lazarus, Mary and Martha, was a dear friend to them and returned to help primarily for that reason. Does his decision to come represent his rejection of darkness?

All of this should be seen as essential background for what our version describes as Jesus’ emotions when he met Mary and her weeping friends.  Jesus spoke” in great distress, with a sigh that came straight from the heart”. Commentators have puzzled over this since it was written, because the Greek original implies anger and indignation.  It was as though Jesus saw in Lazarus’ death and the suffering it caused another example of the power of evil, which he was forced to confront by his own suffering. For all these reasons he shuddered with this mix of emotions.

Suffering, death, struggle and personal integrity, followed by resurrection are mighty matters which we should ponder especially in Holy Week.

In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.