Tuesday, April 19, 2016

Divergent: Ascension

Years ago, I was reading a review of the latest novel in a book series that I enjoyed. The review panned the new book saying, “It’s retcon on a major scale.” I had never heard the term “retcon” before, so I had to look it up and learned that it was a contraction for “retroactive continuity.” Retcon is defined as “a piece of new information that imposes a different interpretation on previously described events.” When writers bring back a popular character killed off in a previous movie, episode, or novel with a hand-waving explanation of how the character escaped at the last minute, that’s retcon.

We have an example of retcon with the ascension of the risen Christ. Luke gives us two versions of the ascension, one at the end of his Gospel (24:50-53), and the other at the beginning of Acts of the Apostles (1:9-11).

The First Ascension Account

The first ascension story is part of the composite passage that concludes the Gospel of Luke (24:36-53). As the two disciples from Emmaus are recounting their experience to the gathered disciples, Jesus appears in their midst and asks them to touch him to see that he is flesh and bones and not a ghost. They give him a piece of broiled fish and he eats it in front of them. He then explicates the Scriptures to them and instructs them to remain in Jerusalem until the Father invests them with power from on high. Finally, leading them outside the city to Bethany, he blesses them and is carried up to heaven. The disciples return to Jerusalem with great joy and “were continually in the Temple praising God.” The gospel concludes as it began, in the Temple.

The Lucan Jesus’ final appearance to the gathered disciples on Easter Sunday night (vv. 36-43) recalls the material that appears in John 20:19-21 and the Marcan appendix (16:14-15). Luke seems to be drawing on a common tradition that at his final appearance to the gathered disciples, Jesus commissioned them to go out into the world. There are similar elements in both the Emmaus narrative and the conclusion of the gospel: an appearance that is not immediately comprehended, a meal, an instruction based on Scripture, and the sudden departure of the risen Christ.

The Second Ascension Account

In the beginning of Acts of the Apostles (1:1-14), Luke references his “first account” in which he described Jesus’ teachings and actions. Luke then recalls how the risen Jesus presented himself to the apostles “throughout forty days.” He instructed them to wait in Jerusalem for the baptism of the Holy Spirit in which they will receive power to become his witnesses to Judea, Samaria, and to the end of the earth. And, as he says this, he was lifted up and a cloud took him out of their sight. Two men in white robes – presumably angels – suddenly appear to explain that Jesus will one day return in the same way he was seen to go. The apostles depart the Mount of Olives and return to Jerusalem to await the coming Spirit.

In this prologue to Acts, Luke uses the ascension to conclude “the age of Jesus” and begin “the age of the church.” He recapitulates what he already said at the end of his gospel, but with more explanation on the coming of the Holy Spirit. Almost out of the blue, the apostles ask about the restoration of the kingdom of Israel (Emmaus disciple Cleopas also made a similar reference to the hope that Jesus would “deliver Israel” in Luke 24:21) and Jesus informs them their duty is to be witnesses to him throughout the world. In a similar fashion, the angelic interpreters assure the apostles that Jesus will return but there’s no point in standing there waiting for him. The implication is that the apostles have other work to do.

"See ya later, guys!" The ascension scene is the subject of the altarpiece in St. Peter’s Church in Copenhagen, by Danish painter Hendrick Krock

When was the Ascension?

We are left with a problem of dating the ascension. Luke’s Gospel clearly dates it to the night following the morning on which the empty tomb was discovered (i.e. Easter Sunday night). Acts describes the ascension occurring after a period of forty days in which the risen Christ appeared to the disciples.

A biblical literalist would try to harmonize the two ascensions. The one reported on Easter Sunday night would be merely the conclusion of Jesus’ appearance to all the disciples. His later ascension after forty days would be the “encore” performance. That’s a bit of a retcon, reinterpreting what appears to be the definitive final appearance of the risen Lord in Luke’s Gospel as merely the conclusion of one of many such appearances.

Another theory is that, having completed his gospel, Luke came upon information that Jesus appeared to the disciples for a period of time and wrote the beginning of Acts to correct his earlier account. In this hypothesis, Luke is retconning his earlier account.

Which Direction did Jesus Go?

At the other end of the spectrum from the biblical literalists are those who like to tweak the literalists by asking, “So which direction is heaven?” While there are some rock-ribbed biblical literalists who would claim that Jesus was bodily transported via cloud to heaven, most non-fundamentalists would agree that the ascension is a metaphor for the conclusion of appearances of the risen Christ to his disciples. At one time, the risen Jesus appeared to his followers and, at some point, those appearances stopped.

But it is more than that. During the Emmaus encounter, the risen Christ explained that the Messiah was bound to suffer “before entering into his glory” (24:26). The crucified Jesus, raised from the dead, has entered “his glory,” and it is from there that he has manifested himself to Peter, the Emmaus disciples, and all the others. Luke’s account of the ascension in Acts uses the trappings of apocalyptic writings – clouds, movement through the heavens, angelic interpreters – to present Christ’s final departure from his disciples in visible form. Thus the apostles become eyewitnesses to Christ’s exaltation. After this, they will no longer experience him in a visible way, but only in “the breaking of the bread.”

No comments:

Post a Comment