Walking to Calvary (Luke 23:26-32)

Probably Jesus was led to Golgotha by a centurion and four soldiers. The distance was not long, about three quarters of a mile. With him were two criminals who were also going to be crucified. Behind them were a large crown of people and among them were some women from Jerusalem who were weeping loudly. Initially, Jesus was carrying the cross (John 19:17), but somewhere on the route they compelled a man called Simon to carry the cross. It may have been the cross beam that he had to carry. We are not told why Simon was compelled to carry it. Perhaps Jesus was unable to do so because of physical weakness resulting from the way he had been treated since he was arrested.

Sharing – the privilege of Simon

Simon had probably travelled to Jerusalem from Cyrene (modern Libya) to participate in the annual Passover. The Passover had been held the previous evening and Simon would have held it with family or friends. We are not told where he was staying, only that it seemed to have been outside the city walls. Many Jews did that because they had to stay within the city boundaries during Passover. Now the week-long feast of unleavened bread had commenced. Simon maybe was going into the city in connection with that feast.

Simon has been the focus of what we can call spiritual detective work about whether he became a Christian. Mark tells us that his sons were called Alexander and Rufus, which means that Mark knew about him and expected his readers to know who they were. Church tradition tells us that the original readers of Mark’s Gospel were connected to the church in Rome and a man called Rufus and his mother are mentioned in Romans 16 by Paul as well-known to him. Detective work concludes that somehow Simon and his family became Christians, were known to Paul and Mark, and then his wife and children were living in Rome. If that is the scenario, then we have a wonderful example of divine grace coming to a family.

The account of Simon, although brief, has some lessons for us. First, he is a reminder that sometimes people meet Jesus without seeking for him. Simon would have not known that Jesus had been arrested and condemned to death. He would have had other thoughts on his mind, and then suddenly he was confronted by the suffering Saviour on his way to the cross. People still meet Jesus without expecting to do so initially.

Second, Simon is an illustration of the difference the cross of Jesus makes in a person’s life. Before coming in contact with Jesus, Simon was heading in the opposite direction – he was going into the city whereas Jesus and the cross were going out of the city. But the task of carrying the cross led him to turn round and walk in a different path. And the cross still does that for everyone who trusts in the Saviour who suffered there as the sinbearer. Simon carried the cross for Jesus, but Jesus carried Simon’s sins away when he paid the penalty for them.

Jesus often used the illustration of carrying the cross when teaching his disciples about how to live for him. All kinds of suggestions are given as to what is signified by having a cross to carry, including a bad back, a bad temper, and an unfortunate experience. Those kinds of suggestions miss the point of the illustration. The meaning of carrying the cross is death to something. The only event facing a person carrying the cross was execution. Jesus says in Mark 8:34: ‘If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.’ In the following verse, he says what he means by that: ‘For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake and the gospel’s will save it.’ It is clear from his words that carrying the cross always means identification with the Christ of Calvary – ‘for my sake and the gospel’s,’ and that there is the possibility of losing one’s life.

Imagine if a person in the crowd was asked to describe Simon. He would say that Simon followed in the footsteps of Jesus by carrying his cross. Is that not what a Christian should be – a person easily identified with the cross of Jesus and prepared to go against the flow even although very much in the minority?

Third, Simon is an illustration of the effect of a powerful influence on his behaviour. In a literal sense, he felt the authority of Rome demanding his involvement in carrying the cross. He would have been appalled initially because this contact probably made him ceremoniously unclean since he had touched something forbidden that had to do with death and was now unable to take part in the feast. Whether that was the case or not, it is the case that his participation was only external. He had no choice in the matter. Christians also sense a higher pressure when it comes to the cross of Christ – the pressure from above to identify clearly with the crucified Christ. They do so voluntarily, unlike Simon initially. With Paul they say, ‘But far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world’ (Gal. 6:14). The Holy Spirit urges them and leads them to glory in the cross.

George Muller, in a statement about his own Christian life, summarised what this really means, this idea of crucified to the world: ‘There was a day when I died; died to self, my opinions, preferences, tastes and will; died to the world, its approval or censure; died to the approval or blame even of my brethren or friends; and since then I have studied only to show myself approved unto God.’ That statement is quite liberating when we think about it. Basically, it is putting God first in all things, and doing that puts everyone else and everything else into its proper place. What matters in the end is the opinion of God.

Sorrow – the pity of the women (vv. 27-31)

It was the custom for a group of women to accompany condemned prisoners and wail over them. Having such a response to death was not limited to condemned prisoners. We can recall what happened when the daughter of Jairus died – some people appeared and started mourning, but they quickly started laughing at Jesus when he said that the girl was not dead. The women on this occasion seem to have been genuine mourners, sympathetic, but they were not disciples, going by the way that Jesus speaks to them. Yet there are some lessons we can take from their reaction.

The first is that lamentation at wrong practices is a valid response. It is not too difficult to imagine that some residents in Jerusalem would have been appalled at the treatment that was given to Jesus. They would have been aware of the injustice of his trials and the cruelty that he went through from different groups, and they would have had sympathy, even pity, for him. Lamentation is an appropriate response when wrong actions are practised. The Bible has many references to personal and communal lamentations, especially in the Psalms, as well as in the Book of Lamentations.

The second detail to observe is the contrast between these women and some of the others present at that time. There is an obvious contrast between their sorrow and the cruel words of the religious leaders when they cried for his death, cruelty that arose out of jealousy; there is also a contrast between them and the unfeeling dismissal of Jesus by Pilate and Herod; and there is a contrast between them and the silent crowd who are following the condemned to the place of execution and don’t seem to say anything.

A third detail is that Jesus knew where they were from. At the time of the Passover, the population of Jerusalem was enlarged by the number that came to the feast. Many could be identified as coming from different places, but Jesus knew that these women were from Jerusalem. He also knew that they would divine help in the future, a future that in many ways would be sad beyond words. If these women were young, then they could have lived until the destruction of Jerusalem several decades later.

A fourth detail that can be mentioned is that Jesus’ words to the women contain a gentle corrective when he tells them not to weep for him. He knows his future, and while the next few hours are going to be marked by great distress and pain, after they have passed he will rise in glory from the dead and later ascend to heaven. They were weeping because they thought he did not have a future, but he did, and he knew that would be the case.

Surprise – the parade of the criminals

Two colleagues of Barabbas walked along beside Jesus. No doubt, they would be surprised that their comrade in rebellion was not with them, that he had been taken from the cell and set free. Perhaps they anticipated that the replacement would have been a worse man than Barabbas, but as they looked at Jesus they would have seen a quite different person.

They walked beside Jesus as condemned men, guilty of rebellion against the authorities. Is not strange that the company he had to Calvary illustrated why he was going to Calvary? He was going there to pay the penalty incurred by those who had rebelled against the Authority of heaven, those who had broken the laws of the eternal God. The two criminals were going to pay the penalty for their own actions, but Jesus was going there to pay the penalty for the incredible number of sins committed by a number that no-one could count.

They walked beside Jesus as men who had failed in a cause. They had attempted to bring deliverance to Israel by participating in an insurrection. Their death was evidence of their failure. But when we come to look at Jesus, the opposite is the case. His death will be evidence of success in an unusual way because the reason why he had come into the world was to die. For him, his death was an achievement, even although it was painful and humiliating. Before he would die, he would say ‘Finished’ or ‘Accomplished.’

One could imagine how some people in Israel might regard the two men as martyrs and so give to them a form of recognition. But Jesus could not be regarded as merely a martyr. If that was all the recognition that could be given to him, then he was a deluded person unable to keep his dream even as that could be said of the two criminals. For Jesus, his death was not the end of his aspirations, but it was the means of his aspirations. Through death he would destroy him that had the power of death and deliver them who through fear of death were all their lives subject to bondage. The two men had attempted to free Israel from political bondage, but Jesus through his death would deliver his people from a far greater bondage.

The travellers who were walking to Calvary did so for varied reasons. Their journeys speak to us about many things as we have seen. The question that comes to us is, Are we walking to Calvary? And if we are, are we going there for the right reason? The fact is, although Calvary happened a long time ago, we can travel there for either the right reason or for wrong reasons. The right reason for going there is to look on as Jesus takes the place of sinners and suffers the penalty due to them for their sins.