Skip to main content

The Crucifixion Of Jesus (John 19:17-30)

 They took Jesus out to the place of the skull, which suggests that many people died there. Perhaps it was a common place of execution. They made him carry his own Cross. Three men were executed, with Jesus in the middle. Pontius Pilate made a sign--in Hebrew, Latin, and Greek--which said, "Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews."

The Pharisees and other leaders objected, and they wanted Pilate to write that Jesus claimed to be the King of the Jews. He left the sign the same, probably as a little act of rebellion against the leaders with whom he was tired of arguing. It's a shame he didn't have enough courage to set Jesus free, but in doing what he did, he unintentionally told the deepest truth. Whether he was mocking or not, Jesus is the King, not only in Israel, but over the entire universe.

The soldiers who crucified Jesus took his clothes, but they didn't want to tear his tunic, so they cast lots for it, which is a bit like rolling dice.

The quotation there concerning that is from Psalm 22, a Psalm of David. The other Gospels record that Jesus said, "my God, my God, why have you abandoned me?" as he was crucified. Jesus's cry is the first line of Psalm 22. The section involving casting lots for the clothing of Jesus is verse 18 of Psalm 22. Jesus's cry in anguish does capture his sorrow, but what it also does is teach us that Jesus is fulfilling Psalm 22. Jesus does not want us to only think of the quoted portions of the Psalm, but to realize that the entire Psalm applies to what they are witnessing. Verse 24 of Psalm 22 says, "For he has not despised or scorned the suffering of the afflicted one; he has not hidden his face from him but has listened to his cry for help." (NIV) Because of this, we should be very careful to reject any ideas that Jesus was separated from the Father as he died upon the Cross.

What is interesting about the next part of the passage is that all of the men except for St. John ran away, while all of the women stayed near the Cross, to console Jesus. Jesus saw his mother standing there with St. John, and he tells them to look after each other. Many people has seen a deeper spiritual meaning in these statements, in all the centuries since we received St. John's Gospel, to the effect that Mary is not only the mother of Jesus, but the mother of all the disciples of Jesus. Also, it implies that St. John had a special devotion to her, and it would continue, throughout the lives of the apostles. Just as Eve was named Eve because she was the mother of all the living, the Church Fathers and others see Mary as the Mother of all those born again in Christ. Aside from this, I think it is important to recognize that mothers and fathers have a wonderful and important job, but our most important duty is to be spiritual mothers and fathers, and anyone can do that.

The death of Jesus Christ was a big moment in the history of the world. The wording in the Greek of "it is finished" implies that something has happened which is now past, but the effects resonate into the present day. A pastor once told me, "The blood of Christ is still fresh for you," which means that Jesus would still be willing to die for me, even knowing my sin. He does not need to die again, but he would, only for you, and only for me. St. John telling us that there was a specific moment when Jesus gave up his life reminds us that Jesus said, "No one takes my life from me; I lay it down of my own accord."

Great thinkers and saints have said that "I thirst" has a deeper spiritual meaning also. Jesus is thirsting for us, so that we will be with him in heaven, sharing the life of God. We have so much to meditate on, and to think about here.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con...

Dear Alyse

 Today, you’re 35. Or at least you would be, in this place. You probably know this, but we’re OK. Not great, but OK. We know you wouldn’t want us moping around and weeping all the time. We try not to. Actually, I guess part of the problem is that you didn’t know how much we loved you. And that you didn’t know how to love yourself. I hope you have gotten to Love by now. Not a place, but fills everything in every way. I’m not Him, but he probably said, “Dear daughter/sister, you have been terribly hard on yourself. Rest now, and be at peace.” Anyway, teaching is going well, and I tell the kids all about you. They all say you are pretty. I usually can keep the boys from saying something gross for a few seconds. Mom and I are going to the game tonight. And like 6 more times, before I go back to South Carolina. I have seen Nicky twice, but I myself haven’t seen your younger kids. Bob took pictures of the day we said goodbye, and we did a family picture at the Abbey. I literally almost a...

Who Is Out Here Having Sex And Children With People They Don’t Like?

 And look, I’m not married. I’ve never been married. I have no children. I didn’t choose that; things just worked out that way. If you must know, I haven’t had sexual intercourse either. I probably should say “coitus,” so I am not arguing with some progressive activist about what “sexual intercourse” means. But I figured out from influencer videos or something what a “dead bedroom” was. Unless a couple mutually agrees that they don’t want to have sex/coitus anymore (hopefully to pray and serve) this is usually bad. I’ve known enough couples that it’s probably an indicator of trouble, especially for couples who are still able to have children. Is it really that wild to at least hope that Mr. and Mrs. Vance love each other? That a fourth child yet born at least might indicate that they enjoy each other?  Children are definitely not responsible for their parents’ happiness. That’s absolutely true. But wouldn’t any child hope their parents were happy, when they came into being? As...