He ran off naked?!

[milimac]

In the Gospel of Mark (14:51-52), at the time Jesus was arrested, “There was a young man following him who was covered by nothing but a linen cloth. As they seized him, he left the cloth behind and ran off naked.”

Here we’re going through the story of Jesus at the Last Supper, Jesus’ agony in the garden, Judas betraying Jesus, Jesus being arrested, a man running off naked, Jesus before the Sanhedrin, Peter denying Jesus…What?! What was that about some young man running off naked?

Is there some significance to this little digression? Was it reported in order to show the bewildering chaos? Whenever this passage is read, I can’t help but ask myself, “What was that all about?!”

 

[Marie]

milimac:

In the Gospel of Mark (14:51-52), at the time Jesus was arrested, “There was a young man following him who was covered by nothing but a linen cloth. As they seized him, he left the cloth behind and ran off naked.”

What?! What was that about some young man running off naked?

Some scholars feel that the evangelist is speaking of himself when describing the arrest of Jesus in Gethsemane: “Now a young man followed him wearing nothing but a linen cloth about his body. They seized him, but he left the cloth behind and ran off naked” (Mark 14:51-52).

Indeed, if one presses it, the Gospel obliges each believer to be a first, or primary, witness. Mark does not place an angel in the empty tomb to address the holy women; he identifies the first agency of the Gospel as “a young man sitting in a white robe” (Mk 16:5). The Greek word neaniskos is the same one used in Mark to describe the curious youth who spies Christ at prayer in the Garden of Gethsemani and who flees naked in the night as a guard holds his torn-away “linen tunic” (Mk 14:51-52). Commentators have long held that this witness of Christ at prayer (while Peter slept) and this witness to the women of Christ’s resurrection is the same person. He would be, on the one hand, a dramatic persona of the Gospel writer himself and, on the other, the figure of any soul made young again by baptism, stripped of the old self and rerobed in the white garment of those purified by Christ’s blood. Mark is saying — in a way that contests nothing that he or any other biblical author has written — “I saw Him first, and you must see Him first, and no one else can have that faith for you!”

We believe in Jesus, therefore, because He is present to us, alive in our midst, no less in our particular souls as in the assembly, as in the significant other with whom we walk, as in the office of the Church’s apostles. And all these witnesses are to be one, and of one accord.Continued OSV

 

[BayCityRickL]

I saw a persuasive explanation of this and I can only offer you a tidbit.

It has to do with someone who lets down a responsibility and whose punishment is the scene described. I think it’s based on the Old Testament.

 

[Digitonomy]

In the New Oxford Annotated Bible (Third Edition), it is suggested the verses are symbolic of the disciples “exposed as unfaithful deserters”.

The note goes on to suggest it is the same “young man” as found in 16:5-7.

5 As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man, dressed in a white robe, sitting on the right side; and they were alarmed.
6 But he said to them, “Do not be alarmed; you are looking for Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has been raised; he is not here. Look, there is the place they laid him.
7 But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see him, just as he told you.”

NRSV

 

[dream_wanderer]

What does this do to the tradition that Mary Magadelene was the first to see the risen Christ?

dream wanderer

 

[Marie]

dream wanderer:

What does this do to the tradition that Mary Magadelene was the first to see the risen Christ?

dream wanderer

Actually nothing. The tradition stands on its merits. The four Gospels though, go much deeper than that.If you notice this paragraph it explains the differences in witness and Primacy.

When the witness of the Resurrection is considered from the perspective of the community’s engagement with Christ, the women, especially those named Mary, are highlighted as first witnesses. When the witness is considered from the perspective of who can speak authoritatively for His presence, Peter is singled out.

The New Testament is not given to great curiosity about the first chronological witness, but to the most significant — the primary — witness. What is primary is first, and, in that sense, the biblical authors are alert