Immediate Word

The lectionary's Easter texts for this year give us a good opportunity to comment on the nature of witnesses and witnessing, and events in the news this week invite us to do so as well. So for our Easter installment of The Immediate Word, we have asked guest writer Timothy Cargal, pastor of Northwood Presbyterian Church in Silver Spring, Maryland, to explore that topic, using the lectionary texts as a basis.

We have also included responses from The Immediate Word team members, illustrations, worship resources and a children's sermon.


"The Blessing and Bane of Witnesses"
by Timothy B. Cargal
Luke 24:1-12; Acts 10:34-43; Isaiah 65:17-25

The controversy over who will and will not publicly testify before the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States (http://www.9-11commission.gov) has brought renewed attention to the issues surrounding the value of witnesses. Obviously without the reports of witnesses, what we can know about an event is greatly limited. But witnesses are both a blessing and a bane -- particularly when they are not direct eyewitnesses to the event itself. Can witnesses give us, in the phrase immortalized by the character Joe Friday on the old Dragnet television series, "just the facts" or are witness reports always and necessarily inseparably intertwined fact and interpretation? Are their later reports shaped for good or for ill by hindsight that is seldom 20-20 despite our cultural aphorism to the contrary? Do they have ulterior motives for either wanting to testify or wanting to avoid testifying (as has been variously asserted with regard to former terrorism advisor Richard Clarke and current National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, respectively)?

If we fail to recognize that those who bore witness to the resurrection of Jesus Christ were subject to all these same concerns, then we are deceiving ourselves. Even a passing comparison of John 20:1-18 with Luke 24:1-12 (to take just the gospel lessons appointed by the lectionary for this Easter) reveals that even the scriptural testimony to the resurrection is not entirely consistent. But isn't that just what we should expect from witness reports, especially since the moment of Christ's resurrection itself wasn't observed by anyone?

Yet inconsistencies are themselves sometimes part of the blessing rather than the bane of witness testimony. The various vantage points, differing interpretations of "just the facts," and range of understandings that can emerge from hindsight can sometimes reveal truths about events that would have been missed even had they been video recorded from every angle. Especially this should be true with regard to Easter that, after all, is at its very heart about the transformation of the bane of death into the blessing of life. That message is the fact to which we are called to give witness in our Easter proclamation.

Setting the Context for the Sermon

There are many reasons for why the testimony of some witnesses is not immediately accepted. Was the witness really there? Is the witness credible? Is the testimony consistent with what is otherwise known? Has the witness' recollection been colored by other factors, whether hindsight that provides its own perspective on things or a desire to shape the testimony in order to affect some future outcome?

All these questions have recently swirled around the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States. The commission was established to accomplish two tasks: "to prepare a full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, ... [and] to provide recommendations designed to guard against future attacks." Structured and intended to be bipartisan in its work, the strains created by what are in fact two competing demands have emerged in the controversy surrounding what have recently been its most prominent witnesses, Richard Clarke and Condoleezza Rice.

Questions have swirled around their respective credibility. Can Clarke be believed when he has the potentially conflicting interest of promoting his recently published book? Could Rice be believed if she had provided her testimony in private discussions with the commission rather than publicly and under oath? Both may be perceived as having ulterior motives in shaping their testimony in order to influence (in potentially opposing ways) the fall presidential election.

While there will be both extreme skeptics and conspiracy buffs who will never accept the commission's findings whatever they may be, most people are convinced that it is only by such investigations that the truth can ever be known. They are convinced that by taking into account all the factors that can influence even honestly given testimony it is possible to arrive at a fuller understanding of things than could be provided from any single vantage point -- even if it were possible to have the accounts from the hijackers themselves (who would likewise be influenced by all the same kinds of factors). The various inconsistencies that will no doubt emerge (and provide ammunition for the skeptics) can be beneficially turned to new vantage points for examining the evidence that might provide otherwise unavailable insights. Witness testimony is vital, even if it must be used critically to assess its relationship to otherwise known facts.

Reflecting on the Lessons

Luke 24:1-12

Although the evangelist does not explain why the report of the women who had gone to Jesus' tomb to complete the burial preparations was not initially accepted by the disciples, he is explicit that their reaction had been dismissive: The women's "words seemed to [the eleven] an idle tale, and they did not believe them" (24:11).

Many people think that it is only modern skepticism regarding the miraculous that raises doubts about reports of Jesus' resurrection. By contrast, the culture in which Jesus ministered simply assumed that the miraculous was commonplace. So, they conclude, the disciples must have quickly and easily received the good news that Jesus had been raised from the dead. But Luke's account of the apostles' immediate reaction to the news of the empty tomb "reminds all of us who celebrate Easter so easily what a burden the resurrection of the dead places on faith, even among those close to Jesus."1

And why shouldn't the disciples have been skeptical of the women's report? Mary Magdalene, Joanna and the other women had themselves been "perplexed" by the open tomb and the missing body. They had received the testimony of the "two men in dazzling clothes" that the reason Jesus' body was no longer there was because "he ... is risen." Yet even the testimony of these two (later identified as "a vision of angels," 24:23) was not enough in itself for them. Their testimony also had to be corroborated by the women's remembrance that Jesus had told them while still in Galilee that "the Son of Man must be handed over to sinners, and be crucified, and on the third day rise again" (24:6-7; cf. 9:22). Physical evidence, witness testimony, and an interpretative context in which to relate them -- all these things had been necessary to convince the women to report "all this to the eleven and to all the rest."

There have always been some Christians who think that the empty tomb should be all the proof necessary for belief in Jesus' resurrection. After all, they say, Christianity's opponents only needed to have passed the legal test of habeus corpus, to have "presented the body," to disprove the resurrection. But Luke begs to disagree. The evidence of a missing body, like all so-called "negative evidence," is ambiguous at best. Facts only have meaning when interpreted by witnesses in a context that is convincing and backed by an authoritative tradition. As Craddock observed, "Matters of faith are never finally proven, nor faith generated by an incontrovertible argument. Faith is communicated by witness."2

Acts 10:34-43

Twice during the brief report of Peter's speech to the household of Cornelius that apostle includes himself among a group "chosen by God as witnesses" (10:39, 41). In the worship context of Easter Sunday, there is a tendency to focus in on the aspects of that witness related to "the third day." They had seen Jesus on the day of his resurrection, had been convinced of its reality by having "ate and drank with him after he rose," and had been charged by him "to preach ... and to testify" about him. What further proof should we need that Jesus "is the one ordained by God as judge of the living and the dead" (10:42b)?

Plenty, actually, at least as far as Peter was concerned. For Cornelius and his family to draw the correct conclusion about Jesus required more than just that they be convinced of the reality of his resurrection. Peter began by asserting that he and the others were "witnesses to all that [Jesus] did both in Judea and in Jerusalem" -- and implicitly even before that "in Galilee after the baptism that John announced" (10:37). Jesus had been anointed with God's Holy Spirit and thereby empowered to help and to heal those who were oppressed. Nor could Cornelius simply rely on the apostles' witness. He also had to take into consideration what "all the prophets" had testified about God's Messiah (10:43) long before Jesus was even born. Only by weighing all this evidence together could Cornelius reach a proper verdict about Jesus.

The pattern laid out in the gospel reading is replicated once more here in Acts. There are of course simple facts: John's baptism, people who had been healed, a death by crucifixion, and food eaten days later. But these facts had to be recounted by witnesses who could attest that it was the same one who lived, died, and was raised, and their testimony had to accord with the expectation of a community trained by the prophets as to what the Messiah would be. Neither of these things in isolation was sufficient to reveal the truth of what God had done in Jesus.

Isaiah 65:17-25

So, what was the testimony of the prophets regarding the Messiah? Our Old Testament lesson reminds us of a portion of it. This oracle declares God's promise "to create new heavens and a new earth." The description of this new earth reveals a reversal of many of the most painful characteristics of the world we know. There will be an end to both infant mortality and premature death in adulthood. People will be sheltered and provided for, living without fear for their security from attacks by others. God will meet every need of their lives before the need even comes to their awareness, and peaceful co-existence will extend from human society throughout all the created order.

But if this is the testimony of the prophets, perhaps we should wonder whether in fact their witness supports the claims made about Jesus by Peter and others. Certainly it is the case that our experience of the world does not comport with this vision of "a new earth." Yet within its own context, the reaction of the first to hear this oracle could not have been that different than ours. They had experienced something of a national resurrection with the return from exile in Babylonian. They could once again derive joy from Jerusalem. Yet the realities of life for the post-exilic community in Persian Judea were not the idyllic picture painted by this oracle. They still struggled on the brink of subsistence and worried about their precarious place in the struggle between empires. Nevertheless what they had already received from God gave them hope to trust for the complete fulfillment of the prophetic vision.

Hopeful realism is part of the truth that we discern from the full witness to what God has done and also begun in Christ. Like the return from exile for the Jews, Christ's resurrection is an in-breaking of God's new creation into the world that is passing into a status as "the former things." It is realism because it is both recognition of what God has already done and full acknowledgement of how much remains to be done. It is hopeful because it provides us a glimmer of a reality that remains beyond our comprehension (cf. Paul's assessment of the Christian life in the epistle appointed for Easter, 1 Corinthians 15:19-26).

Developing the Sermon

It has become fashionable in recent years to assert that the women were not believed simply because they were women. Within such a patriarchal culture, we are told men were so sexist that they would have immediately dismissed such a report as the hysterical, emotional outburst of the women's uncontrolled grief. Such speculation may make us feel better about how far we (think we have) come in dealing with our own society's sexism, but it is nonsense in terms of understanding the reactions of the disciples. The women's report was discounted not because they were women but because of its content.

Imagine yourself in a similar situation within our culture. A dear friend has died an agonizing death. You go to the funeral home a couple of days later to finalize the arrangements, and you are told that as of that morning the body is simply not there. What would be your immediate response? You would be incredulous. "What do you mean, 'the body isn't here'?" Perhaps like Peter you would rush to the preparation area to verify this absence, and finding nothing but the shroud you too might be "amazed." But, most likely, that amazement would be at the monumental incompetence that resulted in such disaster. Your emotions would move from incredulity, to amazement, to anger. Be honest: Even believing in the promise of resurrection, would it even cross your mind that the appropriate response to such news would be to glorify God that your once deceased friend now lives?

Yet that is precisely the conclusion we want our parishioners to draw from the witness of the scriptures in the context of Easter worship. There really are only two possible responses to such a demand. Some will simplistically accept the declaration. We might ennoble such a response by calling it a trusting, childlike faith before our divine Parent, or we might rationalize it on the basis of the authority of the scriptures as God's revelation and/or the experience of the 2,000-year history of the church. Either way, what will, in many cases, be the end result is that the declaration "Christ is risen!" will be stripped of any real, practical meaning. It is in fact much easier to make such a proclamation 2,000 years after the appearances of the resurrected Christ have ceased than it would have been for those to make it who would have had to couple that declaration with an expectation that theirs might be the next closed and shuttered room Jesus might choose to visit.

The other possible response is to accept that the call to believe the testimony of the women, the disciples, the scriptures, and the proclamation of the church -- with all its undeniable contradictions -- is fundamentally no different than the calls we are asked to make in so many aspects of our lives to accept a truth that is finally beyond all understanding. Sure the testimony of the New Testament writers was influenced and shaped by their recollections of the traditions of what we know as the Old Testament. But then all witness testimony is influenced by hindsight. Sure they had all manner of motivations for wanting to believe it was true, just as we will have our own vested interests in the truth of Jesus' resurrection (since it is the basis of our own hope of redemption; again, see the epistle lesson from 1 Corinthians). So what else is new?

The real benefit of opting for this second possible response is not that it fits more easily with our self-perceived modern sophistication. The real benefit that inescapably confronts us with the truth is that all faith is ultimately hope. Hope for our selves, and hope for our world. Hope that admits that the full reality of what God is doing in and for our world will always be beyond our intellectual capacities to fully conceive. The bane of truths that can only be known through witness testimony is that they can never be proved with absolute certainty. The blessing of such truths is that they provide us with more insights than we could ever grasp on our own. And in that openness to something more than ourselves we find hope.

Although one of the more contentious issues in contemporary homiletics is whether the preacher should ever use "personal illustrations," this may be an occasion when you may wish to bear personal testimony to the way in which your faith in Christ's resurrection provides hope for your life. Whether or not you choose to present it rhetorically in the first person, the point would be to give concrete expression to "your defense ... for the hope that is in you" (1 Peter 3:15b). What would be your "defense," your rational account, for this cornerstone of our Christian faith? The challenge is to steer clear of the opposing extremes of either the presumed proofs of apologetics or the sentimentality of purely emotional response. What practical difference does the resurrection make to your life and the lives of your congregants?

Notes

1. Fred Craddock, Luke, Interpretation, 283.
2. Craddock, 281.


Team Comments

Stan Purdum responds: Thanks for your solid work on this. My comments are simply some additional thoughts spurred by your material.

I grew up in a denomination where "testimonies" were a routine part of almost every worship service. They were intended to be times when people spoke of their own faith experiences. Because these witnessing opportunities happened so often, and because a lot of the same people said essentially the same thing week after week, it was easy to discount these testimonies. But what I found now that I am in a denomination where personal testimonies almost never happen is that on those few occasions when they do occur, either unexpectedly in conversation or as part of a preacher's sermon, they can be powerfully effective. Obviously these are not eyewitness testimonies, but when a Christian you respect says in some way, "I believe, and here's my experience of faith ..." I find myself paying attention. Along with personal revelation and scripture, the witness of others is a primary way the Christian faith is transmitted from one person to another.

I'm not suggesting instituting testimonies in our services or for turning the Easter sermon into a "get out there and witness" harangue, but Easter is a great time for at least the preacher to get personal and be a witness: "I believe, and here's why ..." And these texts afford an opportunity to do that.

George Murphy responds to Stan: I grant the value in some settings of such "testimony" but it's very important, especially for preachers, to remain clear on just what it is we're testifying to. In my opinion, one of the more dubious hymns is the one that says, "You ask me how I know he lives. He lives within my heart." I don't think any New Testament writer says anything like this. Paul certainly thought that Christ lived in him (Galatians 2:20), but he doesn't tell others that they should believe that Christ is risen because of that. When the question is posed of how we're to know he lives, Paul's answer is the apostolic witness, including his own (1 Corinthians 15:3-11).

Now having said that, it's important to add that the resurrection of Christ should not be evaluated simply as one historical event for which we have a few putative witnesses. The context of that supposed event and its implications have to be taken into account and that includes, inter alia, the testimony of believers that "he lives within my heart." But first things first.

Stan Purdum responds to George: I'm not talking about the "he lives within my heart" kind of testifying (which often seems maudlin to me), though I guess witnessing sometimes goes that direction. I'm referring more to the "I am persuaded" kind of acknowledgement, were someone who is respected both intellectually and as a caring human being says something like, "I am a Christian because ..." He may go on to lay out the intellectual case for his belief but adds a statement of personal commitment, such as, "Therefore I have chosen to live this way...."

My own statement might go like this: One of my LEAST favorite hymns is "I Come to the Garden Alone." That's a testimony from somebody I guess, but it's not mine. Jesus walking and talking in a garden with me and telling me "I am his own" is just too weird for me! Nonetheless, I am persuaded that the way of Christ is better than any of the other options, and I have chosen to be his disciple, not in some mushy, sentimental way, but in the concrete living of my days.

Maybe what I am distinguishing between is the witness who says, "This is what I feel," and the one who says, "This is what I have come to understand," though I am not prepared to say that the feeling response is invalid. In the Easter texts, of course, we hear from those who say, "This is what I have seen." Since none of us can be eyewitnesses to the Resurrection, we have to go with understanding and, perhaps, feeling.

George Murphy responds to Tim: Our modern way of understanding the world and knowing what's true and what isn't is supposed to be based on the experience of competent observers. That's one of the pillars -- some would say the pillar -- of a scientific approach. But how do we decide what observers are competent? (If you change the word "observer" to "witness" you may be able to tell where I'm going with this.)

Over 200 years ago the Scottish philosopher David Hume stated the classic argument against miracles, an argument that is easily applied to Easter: "A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature; and as a firm and unalterable experience has established these laws, the proof against a miracle, from the very nature of the fact, is as entire as any argument from experience can possibly be imagined." [David Hume, "An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding" in Enquiries Concerning Human Understanding and Concerning the Principles of Morals, 3d ed. (Clarendon, 1975), 114.]

In another place Hume is more explicit about the possibility of resurrection. (I'm sorry I don't have the exact quotation or reference handy.) Suppose, he says, that it was reported by all the historians of England that Queen Elizabeth (he meant the First of course) had died, and that a few days after her death she had been seen alive, had re-ascended the throne and reigned gloriously for a few years more before dying again. Hume says that he would be amazed that so many learned men could have been deceived, but that he would not for a minute believe it!

In other words, we do not always believe witnesses. Why not? Well, Hume (and many other modern people) would say it's because their testimony contradicts the "firm and unalterable experience" of humanity -- that is, of many other witnesses to the way things happen in the world. A relatively small number of people claim to have seen Jesus alive after his death, but billions of witnesses can testify from their experience that the dead stay dead.

But if we examine that argument carefully, we'll see that it has a logical flaw. Strictly speaking, the "firm and unalterable experience" has got to include the experience of those who claim to have observed the miracle, and if they maintain their testimony, then human experience no longer is completely "firm and unalterable."

But this doesn't immediately enable Christians to dodge challenges to the reality of the resurrection of Jesus because there is some truth to Hume's argument. We do have some degree of belief in the regularity of nature and we may reject the testimony of witnesses because they conflict with that belief. Nobody in his or her right mind believes all the stories of miracles that are told.

Thomas Huxley said that science involved a continual process of beautiful theories being slain by ugly facts, and "fact" in that context is often taken as synonymous with "observation." But things are actually more subtle than that. One of the things that philosophers of science have generally come to recognize is that there is no pure "raw observational data" that is completely free of theory. All data is "theory laden" because all of our sense data have to be interpreted in some way. That means that we don't simply challenge theories with facts, but have to evaluate our theories and facts together.

So those who develop scientific theories don't abandon them the first time an apparently discordant observation is produced. It may be that an experiment or observation has been misinterpreted or that some crucial variable has been ignored. (Or it may be simply that an error has been made in the observations.) Einstein was once asked what he would have thought if the observation of the gravitational deflection of light by the sun that confirmed the prediction of his general relativity theory had turned out the other way and supported Newton's theory instead. He replied, "Then I would have been sorry for the dear Lord." Einstein did not mean that one could just ignore observations. But he was so impressed by the ability of his theory to make sense of a large number of other facts about the world that he wasn't going to abandon it at the first sign of trouble.

So, after that excursion into the philosophy of science, how do we evaluate the testimony of our witnesses to the resurrection of Jesus? One thing we have to do -- and what we need to challenge skeptics to do -- is evaluate their testimony within the whole context of the biblical story and our experience of the world.

Suppose we encountered a supermarket tabloid-style claim about the resurrection of some person whose life had no other notable features, and no connection with any religious tradition. He or she was certified as dead and a few days later reported to be alive. How would we evaluate that? Even if the witnesses were solid and unimpeachable we'd have trouble believing it. It would make no sense. Not only would it not fit in with the general experience of our selves and the rest of humanity with the world, it also wouldn't lead to anything. It wouldn't give us any particular hope or promise. At most it could be a kind of bizarre "Believe it or Not" factoid, coming from nowhere and leading to nothing. And it wouldn't really make any difference to our lives whether we believed it or not.

Suppose, on the other hand, that we hear of someone firmly embedded in a tradition which has come to believe over the centuries that God, the creator of the world, has promised to fulfill the hopes of people for healing, freedom and justice, and that someday he will "swallow up death forever." Suppose that this person has put his trust entirely in this God, that he has shown love for all people, taught in memorable stories and been reported to heal people and do other amazing things. Suppose that all of those activities got him in trouble with the authorities who had him executed -- and then witnesses who had been discouraged and disillusioned by his death gave their testimony that he was alive. And suppose that this was supposed to be just the beginning of God's victory over death, and that those who believed in him had the hope that they would share in it. What then?

That's what people are confronted with -- or what they should be confronted with -- when they hear the Easter gospel. It's not a slam-dunk. We still have to evaluate the texts in which we have the witness to the resurrection. We still don't understand how (if at all) it may fit in with our scientific picture of the world. But it's the whole story -- including the ministry of Jesus, the history of Israel, human experience of life and death, and finally our whole knowledge of the world -- that has to be considered.

Carlos Wilton responds: Joe Friday ... now there's a name I haven't heard in a long time! His catchphrase, of which you remind us, Tim -- "Just the facts, Ma'am" -- conjures up in my mind the image of actor Jack Webb's famously impassive face and deadpan voice.

Although he played a detective on TV's long-running Dragnet, Joe Friday is just the sort of person you'd want to have as a witness in court: on your side. He's cold, analytical, and utterly unfazed by extremes of emotion. He's dead-on task-oriented: A law-enforcement bulldog who stays on the job until it's done. He'd make the ideal witness -- or would he?

Joe Friday would be the ideal witness if the goal were simply to unearth the facts. But he'd be less than ideal for another sort of witnessing: the witnessing that leads others to faith.

Which sort of witnesses were the apostles, as they raced back from the empty tomb with news of a missing corpse -- and as they traveled throughout the Mediterranean world in the years that followed: bearing good news of a risen Lord, whose Spirit inflames from within? What was it that convinced so many of their hearers: thereby growing the Christian church from a tiny, dispirited band into the religion of an empire? Was it "just the facts" -- or was it something more?

I like the way, Tim, you focus on the subject of what it means to be a witness to the faith. It's a fine message for Easter, or any other time.

A little later in Luke, the risen Jesus says to his disciples, "You are witnesses of these things" (Luke 24:48). Witnesses. Martyres, in the Greek. "You are martyrs of these things."

"Martyrs," as we've come to understand that word, are true believers who sacrifice their lives for the faith -- although our English word "martyr" is really no more than a direct transliteration of the Greek word for "witness." The early church believed the martyrs -- those who were killed in the arena, or thrown to the lions, or turned into human torches for the diabolical Emperor Nero's entertainment -- were witnesses to Christ. Their courage in going to their deaths told the world that what they had heard and seen was quite unlike the proclamation of any other religion.

In the sort of law court where Joe Friday frequently appears to testify, a witness is someone who has seen something important, something the court needs to know. The most valuable sort of witness, in that setting, is an "eyewitness": Someone who was right there, at the scene of the crime, who can tell the jury firsthand what really happened. It helps if an eyewitness is disinterested in the facts of the case, having no personal tie to the victim, the defendant or any other party.

Yet we are not called to be eyewitnesses when it comes to the good news of resurrection: how could we? We weren't there. What we do proclaim about the resurrection of Christ, we proclaim on faith.

The sort of witness Christ needs of us is a witness of another sort. Christ needs us to be "character witnesses."

Defense attorneys angling to undermine the prosecutor's argument are likely to call one or more character witnesses: people who know the defendant, and are willing to vouch for that person.

That's the kind of witnesses Christians are called to be for Jesus Christ: character witnesses. We can't tell firsthand stories about the resurrection: other than the beautiful, timeworn, smooth-as-a-piece-of-beach-glass tales that have been passed on across the generations. Like Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:3, we too can only declare, "I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received." But we can do something more. We can witness to a personal Christ, a living Lord whom we know: one who has touched our lives and made a difference.

This personal character of Christian witness is captured in a little parable told by the English philosopher Basil Mitchell.

In wartime, in an occupied country, a member of the resistance meets a stranger, who deeply impresses him. The two men talk into the wee hours of the morning: of life and death, of the struggle for justice, of the things that need to happen to make their country great again. Finally the stranger admits to the partisan that he himself is on the side of the resistance -- and not only that, that he is its commander. He urges the underground fighter to have faith in him no matter what happens.

The partisan is utterly convinced at that meeting of the stranger's sincerity and constancy, and decides that he will trust him.

The two men never have a conversation again. But from time to time, the partisan glimpses the stranger from afar. Sometimes he sees him helping members of the resistance. Then he is grateful, saying to his friends, "He is on our side."

Sometimes the partisan sees the stranger in the uniform of the police, handing over patriots to the occupying power. On such occasions his friends complain that he is no good: but the partisan still affirms, "He is on our side." The partisan still believes that, in spite of all appearances, the stranger did not deceive him.

Sometimes he sends word to the stranger for help, and receives it. Then he is thankful. Sometimes he asks for aid, and does not receive it. Then he observes, "The Stranger knows best." Sometimes his friends demand in exasperation, "Well, what would he have to do for you to admit that you're wrong, that he's not on our side after all?"

Always the partisan refuses to answer. He will not put the stranger to the test. And sometimes his friends complain, "Well, if that's what you mean by his being on our side, the sooner he goes over to the other side the better."

It's a parable of faith. At its very center is the whole notion of witness -- of what it means to be a character witness, testifying to the goodness of the One we know personally.

Carter Shelley responds: Tim, I really like the way you've taken the notion of witnesses and looked at the variety of witnesses to Jesus' resurrection as yet another example of the wonders of human diversity and experience enriching not only our lives but our understanding of God and God's unique revelations. A fun children's time exercise for this Sunday might be to invite the children of the congregation to each describe an experience they've enjoyed and shared -- Easter egg hunting, learning a special song for Easter, what they did in Sunday school that morning, etc. and listen to the different details each child provides that help to present a richer and more special overall appreciation of what they've done.

My graduate school dissertation used the work of Russian literary theorist Mikhail Bakhtin. The buzz term for one of Bakhtin's key concepts was dialogism. By that he meant that meaning gets enhanced, challenged, advanced, and expanded through the dialogue that people have with one another, with texts they are reading, with their historical context and the context of the text they read, and with whatever other elements may be at play at that time -- such as, what one ate for dinner, the beauty of the day, etc. The richness of insights possible for people in dialogue with one another and with texts (biblical or literary) grow as do the varieties of experiences, beliefs, insights and all that are shared. Thus, the different resurrection accounts offered by the gospel authors, the apostolic witnesses of Peter, Paul, and others provide multiple insights and understandings of God's redemptive act at Easter that make it accessible to more people than a single account could ever provide.

In reading your material I had a couple of thoughts that came to mind. First, John Grisham has run through almost every possible succinct courtroom scenario possible: The Firm, The Summons, The Testament, The Client, The Runaway Jury, but he hasn't written one yet about The Witness. As someone who can't remember details such as the color tie someone wore to work that day or the height or appearance of a UPS delivery person, I know I'd be a poor witness -- and a worse writer of detective fiction -- I am amazed at the details and the confidence with which witnesses identify an attacker in a police line up or recount their five-second glance at someone who stole their pocket book. What I do get and can recall clearly are people's emotional tenor at a particular time and place. Thus, I would not have been able to describe the "two dazzling men" or "the face of the stranger met on the road to Emmaus." What I would be able to recall and share would be the feeling of excitement, hope, joy, hilarity, wonder, awe, and astonishment that my beloved friend and teacher was not dead but alive and that he and his ministry were vindicated not by some earthly court like a Sanhedrin but by the highest court of appeal any of us have: our Lord and our God.

Because John 20:11-18 is one of the witnesses included in the lectionary for Easter, I am including a piece I wrote as part of an Easter service a few years back. It is written for two readers:

"Mary,
You stand there as though your
own son had died.
You look so listless, so sad,
as thought all the life had gone out of you
as well as out of him.
You couldn't prevent it
you know.
He knew too much.
He said too much.
It had to end as it did
on a cross,
in a tomb,
stone cold, dead.
Finished,
Gone,
kaput.

Why stand you there waiting
Mary Magdalene?
What do you wait for?
Don't you know
it's over?"

"It's never over," she replied.
"You should know that by now.
the suffering
the hurting
the hating
the emptiness
the void --
they never go away entirely.

I miss him.
It's only been three days
but I miss him.
God! How I miss him!

He never treated me like
just a woman.
I was a person to him
a full person
with promise
and beauty
and great potential.

They killed him for that,
for not making distinctions
between us and them
between the good and the bad.

Somebody always has to be
better in our world.
Someone always has to be excluded
from our life.

He excluded no one.
He treated all the same,
loved all equally -- fully.

They killed him for that
for overwhelming love.

I wish I had died with him.
I don't want to live in
this world anymore.
It's ugly
It's barren
It's full of selfishness, hate
and greed.

It was no place for him
yet without him --
it's no place for any of us."

And then a voice said, "Mary?"

And it was as though the heavens
had opened
and poured out the sunshine
of a thousand spring days.

As though all which had been
desolation and despair
was lost in the wonder
of God's amazing act.

As though He who was so precious,
so loved and loving
was again with her. . .

As
In fact
He is.


Related Illustrations

"The greatest proof of Christianity for others is not how far a man can logically analyze his reasons for believing, but how far in practice he will stake his life on his belief."
-- T.S. Eliot

***

There is an old story of a Civil War chaplain, who one day happens upon a wounded soldier on the battlefield. The chaplain asks him if he'd like to hear a few verses from the Bible. "No," gasps the wounded man, "but I'm thirsty. I'd rather have some water." The chaplain gives him a drink, then repeats his question.

"No sir," says the wounded man, "not now -- but could you put something under my head?" The chaplain does so, and again repeats his question.

"No thank you," says the soldier. "I'm cold. Could you cover me up?" The chaplain takes off his greatcoat and wraps the soldier in it. Afraid now to ask, he does not repeat his question.

He makes to go away, but the soldier calls him back. "Look, Chaplain, if there's anything in that book of yours that makes a person do for another what you've done for me, then I want to hear it."

***

The physicist Robert Oppenheimer, creator of the atomic bomb, was once involved in raising money for a pet project of his: an international student-exchange program. Oppenheimer was convinced that getting people of different cultures together would make for peace. In a speech he remarked, "The best way to send an idea is to wrap it up in a person."

***

Think of yourself as a mirror. A mirror reflects the thing that is placed in front of it. Young children gaze into a mirror and imagine they see another world, a parallel universe (like Alice in Through the Looking Glass), but we know that's just imagination. The mirror -- as any person using it to count pimples or wrinkles or gray hairs will tell you -- does not lie.

In the same way, our lives can serve as a mirror that reflects God: and our lives do not lie. If God is before us, if the Lord has first place in our lives, then as others look to us they will see a little bit of God reflected.

Anyone who's watched old horror movies knows that, in any story that includes a vampire, a mirror is a good thing to have. Remember Count Dracula? The Count has no reflection. He is visible everywhere, except in a mirror.

There's a peculiar kind of logic to that: for Count Dracula, in the old movies and in Bram Stoker's novel, is evil incarnate. Evil has no reflection at all -- nor does it need one. Its forces are all too visible in our world. They clamor for attention.

Not so with the forces of good. God is not instantly visible in our world. The only place we see the love of God is reflected in other people. "No one has ever seen God," writes the author of 1 John; yet "if we love one another, God lives in us...."

Unlike the fictional vampire, God is invisible in this world unless we Christians position our lives to serve as mirrors. "God has no hands but our hands," as the old saying goes.

***

"People are not persuaded by our reasoning, but caught by our enthusiasms."
-- Alfred North Whitehead

***

It is a tradition in the Moravian Church to celebrate Easter in the graveyard. During the days of Holy Week that precede the holiday, the people of the church have lovingly scrubbed each gravestone, and placed before each one a bouquet of fresh flowers. In a Moravian cemetery, the stones are simple: plain white and identical to each other, symbolizing "the democracy of death."

Then on Easter Sunday, before dawn, the whole community gathers at the church and marches in procession to the cemetery. Standing among the orderly rows of marble monuments -- in the very teeth of death, as it were -- they celebrate the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.

The Moravians feel the only proper place to celebrate Easter is in a graveyard, out there among the tombs where death is unavoidable. As they wait for the dawn, there is a sense that they are waiting to hear, once again, God's promise of new life.


Worship Resources
by Chuck Cammarata

There are several options for each part of the liturgy this Easter.

This is also a great Sunday for creative Calls to Worship. Last year in our church we began the Easter service with a trumpet blast that led into a trumpet chorus as trumpets joined one at a time until we had six. We followed this by reading the angel's proclamation from Luke 24:5b-7.

A couple of years ago we had three women dressed in time period clothing enter and walk down the center aisle talking to themselves about going to the tomb and what they might find. As they got close to the front of the sanctuary and a paper machete tomb, some bells began ringing. The women stopped to listen -- as they continued on toward the tomb our choir began singing, "The Easter Song." The first verse says, "Hear the bells ringing they're singing that you can be born again. Hear the bells ringing they're singing Christ is risen from the dead."

The women arrived at the tomb and an angel appeared to them as the song went into the following lyrics, "The angel up on the tombstone said, 'He has risen just as he said. Quickly now go tell the disciples that Jesus Christ is no longer dead.' " The choir sang the second verse as the women ran back down the aisle stopping to tell people that Jesus has risen.

Here are a few more options some traditional, some not so:

CALL TO WORSHIP

LEADER: The night is deep and dark. You lie awake listening to the nervous silence of the camp around you.
PEOPLE: IN THE MORNING, THE BATTLE.
LEADER: The enemy lies just beyond the horizon. They are many. You are few. The battle is hopeless.
PEOPLE: TOMORROW YOU DIE.
LEADER: When the day dawns you wait for the sounds of attack, but nothing comes. What are they up to? You send out your scouts. They return panting.
PEOPLE: SIR, THE ENEMY IS GONE.
LEADER: What? Where? Where have they gone?
PEOPLE: NO. YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND. THEY HAVE BEEN DESTROYED.
THEIR CAMP RANSACKED.
THEIR SOLDIERS DEAD ON THE FIELD.
WE HAVE BEEN SAVED!
LEADER: To the whole camp we must announce it. We are saved!
The armies of death? Devastated by the unseen hand of God.
They are powerless.
Love rules!
Life reigns!
Forever and ever.
PEOPLE: PRAISE BE TO GOD, THE LORD OF LIFE!
LEADER: We are victors in Christ. Come let us celebrate his victory!
PEOPLE: OUR VICTORY!
LEADER: Amen!
PEOPLE: AMEN!

CALL TO WORSHIP

LEADER: Early on the morning of the third day
PEOPLE: WHILE IT WAS STILL DARK
LEADER: They came to the tomb
PEOPLE: WHERE THEIR BELOVED FRIEND
LEADER: Jesus
PEOPLE: HAD BEEN LAID.
LEADER: They came to anoint his body
PEOPLE: TO PAY RESPECTS
LEADER: To mourn again
PEOPLE: AND SAY THEIR GOODBYES.
LEADER: It was a sad moment
PEOPLE: THEY APPROACHED WITH SORROW AND TEARS,
LEADER: But when they arrived
PEOPLE: THE STONE WAS ROLLED AWAY
LEADER: The tomb was empty
PEOPLE: AND SUDDENLY
LEADER: Two men in dazzling clothing appeared
PEOPLE: ANGELS!
LEADER: "Why," they said, "Do you seek the living among the dead?"
PEOPLE: HE IS NOT HERE!
LEADER: He has risen! Just as he said!
PEOPLE: HALLELUJAH!
LEADER: He has risen!

CALL TO WORSHIP -- Psalm 118

LEADER: Let Israel say:
PEOPLE: "His love endures forever."
LEADER: Let the house of Aaron say:
PEOPLE: "His love endures forever."
LEADER: Let those who fear the LORD say:
PEOPLE: "His love endures forever."
PEOPLE: The LORD is my strength and my song;
PEOPLE: He has become my salvation.
LEADER: Shouts of joy and victory resound in the tents of the righteous:
PEOPLE: The LORD's right hand has done mighty things!
LEADER: I will not die but live,
PEOPLE: And will proclaim what the LORD has done.
LEADER: The LORD has chastened me severely,
PEOPLE: But he has not given me over to death.
LEADER: Open for me the gates of righteousness;
PEOPLE: I will enter and give thanks to the LORD.
LEADER: I will give you thanks, for you answered me;
PEOPLE: You have become my salvation.
LEADER: The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone;
PEOPLE: The LORD has done this, and it is marvelous in our eyes.
LEADER: This is the day the LORD has made;
PEOPLE: Let us rejoice and be glad in it.

PRAYER OF CONFESSION AND ASSURANCE OF PARDON

LEADER: Come say it with me. "He is risen from the dead and he is Lord."
PEOPLE: HE IS RISEN FROM THE DEAD AND HE IS LORD.
LEADER: Death is defeated forevermore.
PEOPLE: DEATH IS DEFEATED FOREVERMORE.
LEADER: Our sin is forgiven and forgotten.
PEOPLE: OUR SIN IS FORGIVEN AND FORGOTTEN.
LEADER: Because he lives, we too shall live forever.
PEOPLE: BECAUSE HE LIVES, WE TOO SHALL LIVE FOREVER.
LEADER: So why do we so rarely sing?
Why do we not celebrate everyday?
Why is life so hard for us?
PEOPLE: BECAUSE WE FORGET. WE LOSE SIGHT.
WE GET TANGLED IN THE WORLD'S WEB OF DECEIT AND DENIAL. AND THE GLORY OF GOD'S VICTORY IS MISSED.
LEADER: Today let us disentangle ourselves from the cares of this world, and remember that nothing in this life, nothing living or dead, angelic or demonic, today or tomorrow, absolutely nothing can prevent us from receiving God's love and eternal life.
PEOPLE: NOTHING?
LEADER: Nothing!
PEOPLE: PRAISE GOD!

PRAYER OF CONFESSION

LEADER: They ran with their good news.
PEOPLE: "HE IS RISEN!" THEY CRIED
LEADER: "The tomb was empty!"
PEOPLE: "THE ANGELS SAID, 'HE IS RISEN' "
LEADER: But these words seemed to them just an idle tale,
PEOPLE: NOTHING MORE THAN WISHFUL THINKING.
LEADER: And they did not believe.
PEOPLE: O GOD WHO RAISES MEN AND WOMEN FROM THE DEAD
LEADER: Give us the eyes of faith
PEOPLE: THAT WE NOT ONLY HEAR THEIR WORDS
LEADER: But believe that
PEOPLE: JESUS CHRIST HAS RISEN FROM THE DEAD
LEADER: And God has conquered death.
PEOPLE: LORD, MAY WE BELIEVE!
LEADER: Amen.

ASSURANCE OF PARDON

LEADER: Know this; whether we believe it or not, it is true.
One day 2,000 years ago
Some women found his tomb empty.
PEOPLE: SOME SAID IT WAS BECAUSE HIS BODY HAD BEEN STOLEN
LEADER: But that was a lie to hide the incredible truth.
PEOPLE: HE HAS RISEN INDEED!
LEADER: Eternal life is possible.
PEOPLE: ETERNAL LIFE IS POSSIBLE.
LEADER: For all who believe in him shall not perish
PEOPLE: BUT SHALL HAVE
LEADER: Eternal life.

INVITATION TO THE OFFERING

Amazing love how can it be that you my Lord would die for me.

What gift would be adequate to show our appreciation for the gift of forgiveness that Jesus Christ made possible by his death?

And what gift would be adequate to say thank you to the God of all creation for raising him from the dead and making new life for him possible?

Lord, we give you our hearts, we give you our lives, for these are the only adequate gifts. Take them. Shape them. Use them. Amen.

PASTORAL PRAYER

As the seed shrouds the sweet flower; as the cocoon belies the butterfly, so life on this earth obscures the glory of resurrection living. Lord God, on this day when we celebrate the resurrection of Jesus Christ, let us have eyes to see beyond the things of this life. Help us to see the unspoiled beauty of your created world. Help us to see in every conflict -- hope for reconciliation. Help us to see in every defeat the seeds of victory. Help us to see in every human face -- the image of the one who created us all. For as we are able to see with such eyes -- as we see beauty, hope, victory, your image, we will be able to allow these deeper realities to come to life in our world.

(If you are going to pray for specific concerns at this point -- couch them in terms of seeing the resurrection in each situation. For example, "For Joe, who is battling cancer -- allow us and Joe to see that God has conquered every illness -- has overcome even death -- and replaced it all with eternal life...." )

PRAYER FOR ILLUMINATION

Living Word, as we open now the pages of the ancient book, inhabit these words -- read and spoken -- that they might live for us. May they not be old, tired, dead words, but may they be the words of the living God spoken so as to bring life to us. We ask in the name of the risen Christ. Amen.

HYMNS AND SONGS

Christ the Lord has Risen Today
Because He Lives
Up From the Grave He Arose
The Day of Resurrection
Easter Song
I Know That My Redeemer Lives
From the Ends of the Earth
Soon and Very Soon
Lord of the Dance (I Danced in the Morning)
I Am the Resurrection and the Life
Did You Feel the Mountains Tremble

"He's Alive" by Don Francisco -- could be used as special music

A Children's Sermon
By Wesley T. Runk

Text -- Verses 1-5: But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they came to the tomb, taking the spices that they had prepared. They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, but when they went in, they did not find the body. While they were perplexed about this, suddenly two men in dazzling clothes stood beside them. The women were terrified and bowed their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, "Why do you look for the living among the dead? He is not here, but has risen." Luke 24:1-12

Object -- The Bible (type out the first 5 verses of Luke 24 or the entire gospel lesson and hand them out to the children at the end of the children's sermon)

Happy Easter, boys and girls! On Easter morning we say, "The Lord is risen, the Lord is risen, indeed!" Do you think you can say this with me? (have the children repeat it several times)

I want to read to you a couple of verses from the Bible and I want to see if you hear what the Bible says. "But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they came to the tomb, taking the spices that they had prepared. They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, but when they went in, they did not find the body. While they were perplexed about this, suddenly two men in dazzling clothes stood beside them. The women were terrified and bowed their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, "Why do you look for the living among the dead? He is not here, but has risen."

We are looking for clues. Tell me what day all of this happened on? (let them answer) What time in the day did it happen? (let them answer) Tell me where this happened? (let them answer) Who was there? (let them answer) What did they bring with them? (let them answer) What was rolled away? (let them answer) What was missing? (let them answer) Who did they meet? (let them answer) How did the Bible describe the clothes they wore? (let them answer) How did the women feel? (let them answer) What did the angels say? (let them answer)

How did we find out about what happened on Easter Day? (let them answer) That's right, we found out about it because the women reported what they saw and heard to the disciples and the disciples told it to others. They women were witnesses to the resurrection. They went to the tomb to finish preparing the body of Jesus for his burial but when they got there they found the stone to the tomb rolled away and two angels telling them to not be afraid but to believe that Jesus was resurrected from the dead. They were witnesses to what happened.

Every day we are witnesses to different things. We witness what happens in our home, at school, at church, at the stores where we shop, to our neighbors. We see things and we remember them. We remember some things better than others. We remember our birthday parties, our broken bones, Christmas, and the day our baby brothers and sisters were born. Those were big days and we are witnesses to those days. It is hard to remember what we saw thirty days ago in the afternoon. It wasn't very important to us. But the important things we really remember.

Do you think you would remember the resurrection of Jesus if you were there? (let them answer) I think I would remember it very well. When you go home today ask your mother or father to read Luke 24:1-5 on more time and you will hear the witness of Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the other women. You will also hear of the witness of Peter.

Remember, the Lord is risen, the Lord is risen indeed. Amen.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * *



The Immediate Word, April 11, 2004, issue.

Copyright 2004 by CSS Publishing Company, Inc., Lima, Ohio.

All rights reserved. Subscribers to The Immediate Word service may print and use this material as it was intended in sermons and in worship and classroom settings only. No additional permission is required from the publisher for such use by subscribers only. Inquiries should be addressed to permissions@csspub.com or to Permissions, CSS Publishing Company, Inc., P.O. Box 4503, Lima, Ohio 45802-4503