From Fr Robert Barron’s Lenten Reflections:
In all of the Gospel accounts, mention is made of the huge stone rolled across the entrance of Jesus’ tomb after his burial. This seems to stand for the awful finality of death, the irreversible, dense facticity of it.
But in Jesus’ victorious resurrection, that stone is effortlessly rolled away.
This subtle but important action highlights why each Sunday is our victory day. The power that held us ransom has been overthrown; the dark cloud that has brooded over our lives, turning us in on ourselves and outward in violence and sin, has been removed.
Now we can sing, “Death and sorrow, earth’s dark story, to the former days belong.” And, “Where the Paschal blood is poured, Death’s dark angel sheaths his sword.”
With Paul, we can mock the former lord of the world: “Death where is thy sting?” And with the psalmist we can say-now at full pitch-“If God is for us, who can be against us?”
Jesus rolls away the stone of death and brings to that dark place the light of God.
Catholicism Pure & Simple 
“In all of the Gospel accounts, mention is made of the huge stone rolled across the entrance of Jesus’ tomb after his burial. This seems to stand for the awful finality of death, the irreversible, dense facticity of it.”
Why should it “seem to stand” for that? It was only a stone, no matter how huge.
Someone clearly rolled it into place originally, so why shouldn’t someone also roll it out of the way later? What makes that action “irreversible”?
Where’s the “awful finality” in it all? Or am I missing something?
LikeLike
Toad, I suggest that putting a dead battered body inside a sepulchre and getting 10 fine strong boys to roll a stone over the hole would give one a “sense of closure”, as Oprah might say.
LikeLike
True enough, GC – but the words, “awful finality,” and “irreversible, ” are used – which 10 boys, however fine and strong, rolling a stone – does not constitute.
But I’m probably being a tad too pedantic here.
Old hack habit, you will be irreversibly amazed to hear.
LikeLike