Jean Khoury

Summary: This article proposes a reading of John 20:1–9, centred on the Johannine understanding of Christ’s body as the Church. Through analysis of the resurrection narrative’s symbolic architecture—the separation of the soudarion (head covering) from the linen cloths—we explore how John’s contemplation of the empty tomb mediates insight into Christ as risen Head and His disciples as the constitutive Body. Drawing on patristic and Carmelite sources, this interpretation reveals the Resurrection not merely as a historical event, but as the inaugural moment of the Church’s mystical participation in Christ. The essay situates this reading within the broader theological vision of the Fourth Gospel, demonstrating how the symbol of the “rolled up” head-cloth illuminates the distinction between Christ’s personal Resurrection and the Church’s ongoing rising, culminating in eschatological union with Him as Bridegroom and Bride.

Introduction

Scriptural interpretation is never exhausted by a single reading. The tradition of the Church, from the Fathers to contemporary exegesis, offers a rich plurality of interpretations, each shedding light on the mystery in its own particular way. St. Augustine’s observation remains as pertinent today as it was in the patristic age: “the Scriptures are shallow enough for a child not to drown, yet deep enough for an elephant to swim.” (Tractatus in Ioannem, 2, 5) No single theological voice can claim to possess the whole counsel of the Word; rather, each interpretation, faithfully received and humbly offered, contributes to the Church’s growing understanding of the divine mystery.

The present reflection emerged through reading a work in the 1980s by Jean Gaston Bardet and has since developed into a sustained meditation on the Gospel narrative. What began as a singular insight has proved increasingly coherent and illuminating, particularly in relation to the broader theological vision of the Gospel of John. It seems to grasp something real within the text, even if it does not exclude other legitimate and equally fruitful readings. This essay therefore offers the interpretation as a line of understanding that has come to persuade me, while acknowledging that the mystery itself always surpasses any particular interpretation.

The Witness of John at the Empty Tomb

The Fourth Gospel’s account of the Resurrection begins with movement toward the tomb. “Therefore Peter and the other disciple went out and were coming to the tomb. Now the two were running together, and the other disciple ran ahead faster than Peter and came to the tomb first” (John 20:3–4). Even though John arrives first, he waits for Peter. This gesture of restraint is itself significant: the beloved disciple’s primacy of vision does not confer primacy of access. There is a mystery here of order, of witness, of the relationship between knowledge and authority that the Johannine text does not resolve but holds in creative tension.

What John sees from outside the tomb is limited: “And having stooped down, he sees the linen cloths lying there, but he did not enter” (John 20:5). His vision is constrained by perspective and propriety; he perceives the surface phenomenon but not its full significance. Peter, by contrast, enters immediately and sees more: “Then Simon Peter also comes, following him, and he entered into the tomb and sees the linen cloths lying there, and the soudarion that was upon His head, not lying with the linen cloths but having been rolled up in a place by itself” (John 20:6–7). Peter’s fuller gaze extends beyond the grave cloths to the head-covering, the soudarion, and notes with remarkable precision its position—not intermingled with the linens, but carefully rolled up and placed apart.

Then, John enters and sees. What strikes him is not merely entering the tomb or perceiving all that Peter perceived, but the particular character of what he observes. “So then the other disciple, the one having come to the tomb first, also entered; and he saw and believed” (John 20:8). What he saw led him to believe in the Resurrection. The text does not specify precisely what John sees that causes belief; the Evangelist only notes that “not yet did they understand the Scripture, that it is necessary for Him to rise out from the dead” (John 20:9). Between the perception and the understanding lies a gap that must be bridged not by logical deduction but by spiritual insight, a perceiving of meaning written in the very architecture of the empty tomb.

The Significance of the Separated Soudarion

The striking element that would come to touch John profoundly is the state of the soudarion—the head cloth that had been upon Jesus’ head. It is “not lying with the linen cloths but having been rolled up in a place by itself.” This separation is deliberate, intentional, and placed in textual prominence for theological reasons. The grave cloths that had covered and enveloped the entire body are distinct from the cloth that had covered only the head. Such a distinction would be natural and even expected; what requires interpretation is why the Gospel emphasises this detail with such care.

By the time John wrote his Gospel—commonly dated toward the end of the first century, often after c. AD 90—he was already deeply initiated into the mystery of Jesus and of His mystical body. This is evident from the Gospel itself. In John 2:19–21, the Evangelist records a saying whose meaning he has come to penetrate: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. But He was speaking of the temple of His body.” The body of Jesus is thus not merely a physical organism, but the true Temple of God, the locus of the divine presence. The Temple is ordained to contain both the presence of God and the people of God. This people is none other than the mystical Body of Christ: through Baptism and the Eucharist, we are incorporated into Him and become His Body. This understanding is woven throughout the Fourth Gospel and constitutes one of its most distinctive contributions to New Testament theology.

What John perceives at the empty tomb may thus be understood as one of the initial seeds of this profound doctrine concerning Jesus’ understanding of His own body. At the Last Supper, Jesus gives His Body: “This is My body which is given for you” (Luke 22:19). Through baptism, believers become members of that Body: “For in one Spirit we were all baptised into one body” (1 Corinthians 12:13). Each time the Church receives the Eucharist, this reality is renewed and deepened: “Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body” (1 Corinthians 10:17). The mystery of the Passion itself is ordered toward this consummate reality: the reconstitution of His Body, the rebuilding of the Temple: “in three days I will raise it up” (John 2:20).

The Head and Body in Resurrection

If the soudarion signifies the head and the linen cloths represent the body, then the separation witnessed at the empty tomb becomes pregnant with meaning: He is in heaven (“rolled up in a place by itself”) and his body is on earth (“lying there”). “He is the head of the body, the Church” (Colossians 1:18), and we who are baptised are His members. Risen from the dead, He stands as the risen Head, exalted and transformed. Our whole life in Christ becomes a progressive rising with Him: “If then you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above” (Colossians 3:1). Yet at the moment of the Resurrection itself, there is a crucial distinction: He is risen, while we remain in the process of rising. We have been raised with Him in baptism, yet our bodies await the resurrection. We are already seated in the heavenly places, yet still pilgrims on earth.

In this light, the architecture of the empty tomb communicates a theological truth through its symbolic form. The head, signified by the soudarion, is “rolled up”—risen, gathered in a new eternal life, constituted, personified—while the cloths remain “lying,” awaiting the completion of their transformation. The Head is risen; the Body is rising. The sign speaks of a unity that is neither yet complete nor yet broken: Christ is risen and glorified, while His members continue the journey toward full resurrection and transformation. It seems that this is what John perceives when he observes the disposition of the soudarion and the linen cloths. He grasps their meaning: the head is no longer here; He has risen from the dead and belongs to another realm—that of the Resurrection.

This distinction in Jesus between his risen head and his body lying there illuminates the words Jesus addresses to Mary Magdalene after the Resurrection: “Go to My brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God’” (John 20:17). As Head he says: “My Father” and as Body (us) he says “My God”. There is a unity here, but also a distinction. In Christ, we have access to the Father; in His Resurrection, we participate in His filial relationship.

Formation and Transformation in the Gospel of John

The entire Gospel of John is written within this perspective of Head and Body, archetypal reality and participatory fulfillment. What applies to the Son of Man, Jesus in His human nature, is called to be fulfilled in us, His disciples, when we are fully formed. As Jesus says: “Truly, truly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master; nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him.” (John 13:16) (also: “A disciple is not above his teacher, but everyone when he is fully trained will be like his teacher” (Luke 6:40)), “For I have given you an example, that you also should do as I have done to you.” (John 13:15). The Gospel may thus be read on two levels, corresponding to two stages of the Disciple’s life and Christian maturation.

First, the Gospel leads us toward formation and union with Jesus. At this stage, we contemplate Him as Teacher, as the Incarnate Word, as the manifestation of divine love and truth. We seek to believe in Him, to follow His commandments, to be transformed by His grace. This is the work of conversion and sanctification. The Gospel culminates in this first conclusion: “Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples which are not written in this book; but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in His name” (John 20:30–31). “To believe” symbolises union with Jesus, accessing his divinity like Thomas when he puts his hands in Jesus’ side (John 20). The goal is a fullness of faith, victorious of the world (1 John 5:4) participation in His life, transformation by His presence.

But the Gospel admits of a second reading, oriented differently. Once formed in Christ, once we have been remade in His image, experiencing the fullness of his resurrection, reaching Union with Him, the same Gospel becomes a manual for apostolic witness and prophetic mission. What applies to Christ the Head now becomes the pattern for His members. We read again (this time till chapter 21 reaching the second conclusion which talks about witnessing), seeking to follow Him in mission and suffering, to bear witness to the Light as He did, to lay down our lives for the friends whom we are sent to serve. The formula of the prologue—“He pitched his tent among us and we saw his glory”—becomes not metaphor but lived reality.

The Resurrection as Nuptial Union

“the third day there was a wedding” (John 2:1) The Resurrection can be contemplated in yet another register, one deeply resonant with the Johannine vision and the mystical tradition that flows from it. The Resurrection is the union between Bridegroom and Bride. The Bride is His Body, His mystical body constituted by all the baptised. Yet the Bride remains on earth and must grow toward the fullness of love. The Bridegroom has been raised and glorified; the Bride continues her pilgrimage, reaching toward Him who has ascended.

The apostolic understanding of this mystery is clear: “Christ loved the Church and gave Himself up for her” (Ephesians 5:25). His self-gift culminates in the Resurrection, in which He takes His Bride to Himself, not yet in full nuptial possession, but in the pledge and earnest of complete union. The Church is called to become what she is in baptism: “members of His body” (Ephesians 5:30), fully conformed to Him, “bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh” (Genesis 2:23), the new Woman. The Resurrection inaugurates the movement toward this eschatological wedding, in which the Bride shall be presented to the Bridegroom “without spot or wrinkle or any such blemish, but holy and blameless” (Ephesians 5:27).

This mystical vision illuminates the cryptic saying to Mary: “Woman, what is that to me and to you?” (John 2:4), spoken at the wedding feast of Cana. The mysterious dialogue between Jesus and His mother at the beginning of the Gospel can be understood as a veiled announcement of the true wedding, the union between Christ and His Church, which is prepared by His passion and sealed by His Resurrection.

Conclusion: John’s Vision and the Mystery of the Church

John “saw and believed” (John 20:8). He perceived in the sign of the empty tomb—in the separated soudarion and the arranged grave cloths—the great mystery which Saint Paul articulates with remarkable concision: “This mystery is great; but I speak with reference to Christ and the Church” (Ephesians 5:32). The Resurrection is not first a reversal of death or a merely historical vindication of a condemned rabbi. It is the revelation of Jesus as risen Head, and simultaneously, the inaugural moment of the Church’s entry into that Resurrection through participation in His body.

The reading proposed here does not exhaust the meaning of John 20 nor does it supersede other traditional interpretations. Rather, it offers a particular angle of vision onto the text, one that has proved increasingly coherent with the broader theological vision of the Fourth Gospel. It invites the reader to contemplate the Resurrection not merely as an historical event to be believed, but as a mystery to be interiorized and lived. The empty tomb becomes a school in which we learn that we are Christ’s body, that we are called to die with Him so as to rise with Him, and that the final destiny of the Church is to be united with the Risen One in a union as intimate and complete as that of Bridegroom and Bride.

What John understood in that moment of faith at the empty tomb was not a doctrine to be formulated in abstract terms, but a mystery to be lived and testified to in the concrete fabric of the Church’s existence. The Fourth Gospel itself is that testimony—the fruit of decades of prayer, suffering, and transformation in Christ. It invites each reader, in each generation, to make the same journey: to approach the tomb with John, to see and believe, and to allow the Resurrection to transform our understanding of who we are and who we are called to become in Christ.

Bibliography

Augustine of Hippo. “Tractatus in Ioannem.” Translated by John Gibb. In The Complete Works of Augustine, edited by Philip Schaff. Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1888.

The Holy Bible: English Standard Version. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2001.

Brown, Raymond E. The Gospel According to John: Introduction, Translation, and Notes. The Anchor Bible Series, vol. 29. New York: Doubleday, 1966.

Ignatius of Antioch. “Letter to the Ephesians.” In The Apostolic Fathers, edited by Kirsopp Lake. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1912.

Irenaeus of Lyons. “Against Heresies.” In The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, translated by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1913.

John of the Cross. “The Spiritual Canticle.” In The Collected Works of St. John of the Cross, translated by Kieran Kavanaugh and Otilio Rodriguez. Washington, DC: Institute of Carmelite Studies, 1991.

Teresa of Ávila. “The Interior Castle.” In The Collected Works of Teresa of Ávila, vol. 2, translated by Kieran Kavanaugh and Otilio Rodriguez. Washington, DC: Institute of Carmelite Studies, 1980.

Thérèse of Lisieux. “The Story of a Soul: The Autobiography of Saint Thérèse of Lisieux.” Translated by John Beevers. Garden City, NY: Image Books, 1957.