36b
Jesus said, "Peace be with you."
37They were startled and terrified, and thought that they
were seeing a ghost. 38He
said to them, "Why are you frightened, and why do doubts arise in your
hearts? 39Look at my hands
and my feet; see that it is I myself. Touch me and see; for a ghost does not
have flesh and bones as you see that I have." 40And when he had said this, he
showed them his hands and his feet. 41While
in their joy they were disbelieving and still wondering, he said to them,
"Have you anything here to eat?"
42They gave him a piece of broiled fish, 43and he
took it and ate in their presence.
The
Reflections columns the past few weeks have dealt with the problem of reading
the gospels’ Holy Week and Easter stories as historical events. This excerpt
from today’s Gospel reading is yet another dimension of that problem: the risen
Jesus as a resuscitated corpse.
The
earliest New Testament writings are by Paul and, as I wrote earlier, his
understanding of the “Easter experience” is that that the resurrected Jesus
“appeared” to his disciples at various times, and ultimately to Paul himself.
The use of the word “appear” here and elsewhere is the experience of a vision
or a dream. For ancients, such experiences were very real but were also
considered to be different than normal everyday living.
In
Mark, the earliest gospel, there is no Easter appearance of Jesus. Instead, the
women at the tomb are met by a “man dressed in white” who tells them Jesus has
been raised, and that he can be seen by the disciples if they go back to
Galilee. The women run from the tomb in fright.
In
the Easter stories of Matthew, Luke, and John, Jesus does appear in tangible
form. These later gospels were written at least 50-70 years after the events
they are recounting. We are all familiar with the notion that a story grows in
its telling and that seems to be the case with the gospels. But rather than
thinking of this as exaggeration or even lying, it’s more helpful to see each
of them trying to address questions and problems in their various church
communities.
In
our story today from Luke, the resurrected Jesus has skin and bones which he
invites the disciples to touch and feel. He even eats a snack. Taken literally
this story raises almost comical problems and impossibilities. From a modern
perspective it is absurd.
But
Luke is not a modern person and is not writing for a modern audience. Luke
tells us his concern: the risen Jesus was not a ghost. The appearance of
ghosts, the spirits of dead people, was a commonly accepted phenomenon in the
ancient world. Apparently this is how some were interpreting, and probably
dismissing, the stories of Jesus’ resurrection appearances. Jesus was seen
after he died? No big deal; people see ghosts all the time.
Luke
feels the need to refute this interpretation and does so in the only way he
can, by making the risen Jesus a physical reality. He was not just a ghost; he
has been raised. For modern people, however, and I suspect even some people in
his own day, Luke only digs the hole deeper. Now that Jesus has a body, what
will happen to it? Where is it now? Our minds spin with new questions and
problems.
Unless,
of course, we understand this text for what it actually was: a story, very
likely created by Luke himself. The problem for us is that we separate fact and
fiction into hard categories without overlap: fact=true and fiction=untrue. In
practice, however, the division has never been so clean, even today.
Before
modern times, history was almost always told through what we would now call
“historical fiction.” Detailed factual history was simply impossible to write
because the information was unavailable. The interest in telling about people
or events of the past was how they could help living in the present. From the
courtroom and the laboratory we have developed a laudable appreciation for
demonstrable facts and data. Our modern world would be impossible without them.
We make a mistake, however, in assuming ancients had those same standards or
judging them by them.
In
today’s gospel, Luke is interpreting one story (the empty tomb) by telling
another story (of a resuscitated corpse). What’s essential for us to appreciate
them is realizing they are both stories. It is entirely possible that Mark
created the first account of an empty tomb. Paul never mentions it and it’s
hard to imagine that he wouldn’t have known it if it existed, and that he
wouldn’t have talked about it if he did know it.
Having
told the story of Jesus’ life and death, Mark wanted to conclude his gospel in
a way that pointed to the future. The women, representing Jesus’ followers, are
turned away from adoration of Jesus’ corpse and told instead to go to Galilee,
which for Mark is the center of the new church’s life. “There you will see
him.”
In
the ancient world, stories took on a reality all their own. The gospel writers
that followed Mark each interpreted his work in their own unique way. One
result is that their subsequent Easter accounts differ significantly from each
other in nearly all their details. This is a problem if we imagine them as
accounts of historical events. It’s not a problem with we understand them as
theological stories built on the foundation of earlier stories, guiding and
inspiring faith.
So
today we can hear a story of the risen Jesus eating a piece of fish, or cooking
fish on the beach as in John, and smile. I suspect at least some ancient people
did as well. The essential message of all these stories is that the Spirit of
the crucified Jesus yet lives. The question is whether we have our own stories
to tell of that Spirit alive today in our world, and in our lives.
No comments:
Post a Comment