He's gone! Sunday Readings: the Ascension (Y-not question the Sunday Readings)

Our job is to find the purpose of the myth, the 'truth' that is taught in this symbolic story of The Lord being taken up into heaven and being seated at the right hand of God, as Mark tells it. Luke (first reading) says that he was lifted up before their eyes and a cloud took him from their sight, leaving them gaping into an empty sky.<<

Brian if our job is to find the purpose of the myth, then surely we need to first establish if it is a genuine myth which is a relevant symbol for a catholic Jesus and not just a sign of synoptic spin?

Validly only the gospel of John, as the first gospel written, provides the standard to historically and theologically authenticate the synoptic non-spin.

And since John's record of the ascension is integral and relevant to a catholic Jesus, then clearly we should go with his and dismiss these 2 as synoptics' spin.

For any 'truth' taught in their stories, whether as myth or fact, can only mislead the enquiring reader.

What do you think?

Sue,

I think the following story of Eros and Psyche help me in unpacking this 'myth'. Perhaps the story of Jesus' resurrection and ascension into heaven comes directly on the heels of such mythological tales from the Greek and Roman world. After all, it is the story of the bridegroom and the church, his bride.

The Heroine of a Greek allegory, Psyche represented the human soul, married to the loving heart personified as the god Eros.   Psyche, the story goes, spent her days alone, making love each night in darkness with a husband she never saw; only under these conditions would he remain faithful to her.  For a while she lived happily enough.  But finally a fearful curiousity about his identity and a deep spiritual loneliness drove Psyche to bring a lamp into the bedroom.  Hardly had the woman seen the beautiful winged body of her lover than a bit of oil from her lamp, awakened him.  Instantly Eros flew away.  Thus the soul, the Greeks knew, could remain happy in romantic union, until unmet needs demanded conscious knowledge of the lover's real identity.

Next, the tale goes, Psyche was charged with many near-impossible tasks to gain back her beloved:  sorting overnight a roomful of seeds; catching the fleece of the sun's sheep; travelling to the underworld to ask for magical beauty ointment.  Intent on regaining Eros, she overcame these obstacles one by one.

But as Psyche returned from Hades with Persephone's ointment box, vanity overcame her.  She opened the jar to rub beauty cream on her weary face.  Psyche fell into a swoon and might have died, but Eros persuaded the Olympian divinities that she had struggled enough. She acended to heaven and was reunited with her lover, bearing two children, named Love and Delight.  In this allegory, the Greeks produced a magnificent tale of the relations of heart and mind, the journey through romance to real marriage, and the human joy born of the victorious struggle.

Excerpt from Goddess & Heroines by Patricia Monaghan.

...Before going on to think about the meaning you glean from this, there is an elephant in the room we might want to recognize.

It is this. Saying that the Ascension is a myth is like the thin edge of the wedge. It was not a real event. A week or two ago, Brian gave a YouTube link to a debate between Bishop Spong and evangelical scholar William Lane Craig on whether the Resurrection was myth or reality. (That was a fascinating debate, well worth watching - sorry, I don't seem to be able to give the link)

I'm afraid I didn't watch that debate, but I think I know roughly how the argument goes.

But the problem is, if the events recounted in the Gospels are all reduced to myth, then what is left of Christian belief, as summarized in the Creed?

Is anything left? What can we still believe...?

Thanks, Sue, and Billy for that illustration. I'm sorry Brian opened up this controversial aspect: actually, with my opening paragraph, I was trying to derail the issue before it got going - to deflate the rubber elephant so we could get on with investigating the mystery unfolding in our lives.

Myth is not without content: on the contrary, at its best it's a story considered sacred because of the wisdom it contains. If is has some elements of an historical event that 'actually' happened, so be it. Mostly nobody cares. One thing is certain, only foolish minds will shrug off the wisdom contained in a mythical story on account of what they perceive as an absence of historical reality. Eg: There never was a real person called Psyche who had a secret lover called Eros, so this is a stupid story. Please!!!

So the elephant in the room is just a big rubber balloon full of hot air. All our religious truths are communicated in mythological language, symbolic language. Likewise much of our civic communication is through myth. Eg. the idea of national unity as expressed in the myth of a royal sovereign 'reigning' over us. Our queen has no power, but she is a powerful symbol, an effective myth.

There was a real event: Jesus went away. I have no idea exactly how the apostles experienced that. Maybe it just dawned on them that he was gone, much as it did on me a few days after the funeral, that our mother was really no longer here with us.

I would welcome any comment on the idea that the ascension marks the watershed between the old order and the new. If this is true, then, while his teaching is essential, the things that Jesus did, where and how he lived, etc., are not important, certainly not there to be imitated. "It is the spirit that gives life: the flesh is of no avail." This is the time for us to be christened, to be anointed with the spirit, and get on with challenging the world we live in to grow up and recognise that it can be JUST and TRUE, that its destiny is to grow to maturity. And so on.

'TonyL
"A post is a free gift, and it will go where it pleases."'

One of the great tragedies of the post-Vatican II half century (almost) has been the failure of church teachers to educate ordinary faith people in theology expressed in myth.

Here is one article:

http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=171

In 1963, John L. McKenzie, S.J. wrote a book entitled Myths and Realities: Studies in Biblical theology. This book studies myth in the Old Testament. One chapter (9): Myth and the Old Testament is a good consideration of the concept of myth.

In 2005, Karen Armstrong wrote A Short History of Myth - a good study.

Sadly, most of my accurate knowledge of myth has departed from my memory, so I won't write an essay as I once used to do.

Truth, expressed in myth, is not something fanciful: it is truth.

Peter

not Cape Canaveral.
A myth? Or a myth that is a reality?
I accept the Epistle to the Romans, the Gospel of Luke, the Gospel of John, the First Epistle of Peter, the First Epistle to Timothy, the Gospel of Matthew and that of Mark, the Acts of the Apostles, and the teaching of Eastern and Western Churches that the Ascension is a reality. The jury is NOT out.It is a reality.
There were plenty of witnesses.
Supernatural means what it says - above natural law.
So was the Resurrection!
While subeditors and rewrite desk may have had a hand in the result, I believe the above were honest reporters and commentators.
Richard Dawkins would be proud of you.
So the Nicean Creed is wrong ? All of the saints, the scholars, the historians, the Church Doctors, all of them from the Popes down are wrong? I do not think so.

BTW, on this topic of "myth" which came up in this thread, it would be good if we could come up with another word other than "myth". In common parlance in our society, "myth" either means something which is widely believed to be true but in fact isn't, or else just a fanciful story, usually from an ancient culture, like the lovely story which Billy recounted. Even if you know that "myth" in the Biblical sense doesn't mean that, it's still hard to completely disassociate your mind from that more common meaning. Not sure what other word we could use though.

Cathy, I particularly agree with your last paragraph above. In common usage the word "myth" carries with it the understanding that something is not real and the person who believes it is childish or deluded. The less commonly used words "mythos" or "mythology" I don't think carry the same connotations. Karen Armstrong tends to use "mythos" in her writing perhaps for this reason.

When we are speaking of some story that is mythological while we might understand it to be "not real" in the sense that it is a story rather than some scientific or historical description of some event, we also have an appreciation that it is a story containing some depth of wisdom or insight. The nursery rhymes we tell to our young children or grandchildren we don't believe to be literally true — for example that there were once three little pigs that could talk, or a big bad wolf that could talk, or a person named Little Red Riding Hood. We continue to recite these stories to our children not just because the combination of words in them appeal to children but because they impart what we consider to be important paradigmatic messages. For example in the case of the story of the three little pigs that it is wise to invest in quality in building a home or community rather then being a cheapskate or utilitarian or slapdash. All of the great stories in our mythology have what is called a "moral to the story".

In contrast to that some people might believe that hanging a rabbit's foot around one's neck or carrying it in one's pocket or handbag will bring good luck, or ward off evil spirits. But many would consider that to be unbelievable and dismissed as "a myth" in the sense that it does not carry any wisdom. It is considered to be merely a superstition.

Perhaps one of the problems is that all religions do seem to be a mix, like life in general, of things that are genuinely "mythological" (i.e. carrying a deeper insight or wisdom) and a lot of beliefs and practices that are merely "superstition" or "myth" in the common understanding of that word. Perhaps an important part of the spiritual challenge we all face is the one of sorting the mythology from that which is merely superstition and myth in much the same way that a farmer has to sort the grain from the chaff if they are to increase the value of their product?

Brian Coyne
[Editor & Publisher]

Thank you Tony for what was, to me, a somewhat unusual and even a bit provocative interpretation of the Ascension. Thank you also for linking us to the article by Damian Howard SJ, who also insists that the Ascension should be given more significance than we usually assign to it. However, I must admit that your reflection left me somewhat perplexed. Perhaps I misunderstood you, but you seemed to be saying that Jesus has gone, the Spirit has come, so why do we focus so much on Jesus?

Cathy, it does seem strange that the Ascension is regarded simply as an event that we remember, without much questioning as to what it means and where it fits in the whole picture. We are prone to repeating the formulas without acknowledging that they mean little to us. I had come to this position in my own reflections when the Jesuit article arrived, making this same point. However I found the further interpretation raised too many questions about loyalty and obedience to a king, something that doesn't cut ice these days.

First of all, while it is true that John's Jesus says that it is better if he goes so that the Spirit can come, other Gospel passages tell us of Jesus' promise to be with us always. I certainly have a strong sense that Jesus is still alive and still with us. My favourite form of prayer is to sit down (or I may already be sitting, maybe even on the train or something!) then focus my mind on Jesus' presence and consciously spend some time with him, as with a close friend. It may involve (silent) words or may just be a time of quiet companionship. It's certainly very real to me!

I hope I am not seen to be criticising anyone's form of prayer. There is nothing wrong with focussing the mind on Jesus' presence to consciously spend time with him. However, I don't do that any more, and I am wondering about what is opening up ahead. It looks/feels like another stage of growth where I know myself as christened, as an agent able to act in his name – which for me seems to be a step further than being 'close to Jesus'. We'll see, I hope.

In any case, surely we still need to focus on Jesus and what we can learn about him - or at least, what the evangelists thought was important enough to tell us - about what he did, what he taught, how he lived. As I understand it, the coming of the Spirit was not intended to bring something new into the world, but rather, it had the effect of empowering the first followers of Jesus, and subsequently all of us, to live in the way that Jesus did.

John is very insistent that the spirit will make plain everything that Jesus had taught; the spirit of itself will not give new revelations. I think we are supposed to become active in our own right by the power/strength/light of the spirit. We too easily use the phrase 'to live in the way Jesus lived'. We don't do this at all, in fact, although there is always someone trying to imitate his way of living literally. What we should do is live by his principles of truth, justice and love – which is what you meant I think.

The important point I'm making here is that I don't just see Jesus as a great teacher, someone who left us a body of teaching which was recorded in the Gospels and which is a guide for us to live by. Rather, as I see it, Jesus shows us how to live through his whole being, through the person he was. Nor does this mean that he was just some sort of role model from the past: he can live within us now, if we are willing to be open to this.

“He can live within us now.” I find it is enough to live my life in all its modern complexity inspired by the spirit that Jesus 'sent', the spirit that hovered over the waters before time began, the spirit that inspires all the good endeavours, all growth, all progress. This seems to be a more direct way for me to engage with my community, without the imagined presence of Jesus of Nazareth sort of standing by like a coach or a mentor, or even like a friend. But that's just me at this time.

Having said all that, I can still agree with you, Tony (and Fr Howard) that the Ascension is perhaps a much more significant moment than we have usually assumed. But I would not see it as being such a decisive break as you do.

Well, Cathy, that's something we can go on discussing, because it does seem to me that the gospels present it as a decisive change in the mode of relationship with the divine.

Rather, it was the transition from the time when Jesus was physically present in the world, to the time when his presence could only be made known through his followers. Jesus' seemingly strange statement - that it was better for the disciples if he left them, because the Spirit could not otherwise come to them - still makes sense in this context. Jesus' physical absence meant that the disciples could be liberated from fear and dependency and could themselves become like the leader whom they so admired.

Pretty much a major break in their rhythm of life, but we have tended to bridge it backwards.

In fact, I often think that, when Jesus physically left the world, he put himself in a powerless and vulnerable position: his work in the world could only continue if and when there were those able and willing to let him work through them. It is still up to us, as you say Tony, but we are not alone.

Those able and willing to let him work among them. Or to allow his spirit to be their life principle urging them to tackle the job at hand, without looking back to that image we have of Jesus.

BTW, on this topic of "myth" which came up in this thread, it would be good if we could come up with another word other than "myth". In common parlance in our society, "myth" either means something which is widely believed to be true but in fact isn't, or else just a fanciful story, usually from an ancient culture, like the lovely story which Billy recounted. Even if you know that "myth" in the Biblical sense doesn't mean that, it's still hard to completely disassociate your mind from that more common meaning. Not sure what other word we could use though.

The trouble is that we can only share our understanding through words, and its not easy to find another word for what is among the most ancient, most deeply embedded elements in human culture – everywhere – the mythical account that embodies inexpressible truth. But let me say again: we live by myth and symbol. There are many words that get devalued – like love, rights, peace, democracy – and we don't look for new words but try to remind ourselves of the noble truth that is still there. I concede that 'myth' has been badly abused till it is used in a sense opposite to its original meaning. But I find the frenetic anxiety whenever 'myth' is used in its original and still valid meaning, as if truth were being betrayed, quite troublesome.

BTW, someone might like to get the Weather Bureau to stop this mythological nonsense about sunrise and sunset. Surely everyone knows that the transition from darkness to daylight results from the spin of the earth, and what occurred this morning at 7.18 EST is that, here in Melbourne Town, we crossed the shadow line at the enormous speed of about 1400 km/hr. Sunrise – Bunkum!

Thanks for your careful comments.
tony

'TonyL
"A post is a free gift, and it will go where it pleases."'

Jesus had manifested the presence of the mystery within himself. That is what attracted the disciples to him. But in the end he had to go, to plunge the disciples headlong into the shock of his absence. Only then could they discover that the mystery had taken up residence within their own hearts, a small flame that flickered into life, then ontinued to burn brightly without Jesus being there.

That pretty well sums it up, for the moment anyway. Another day we'll have other perspectives and wonder about it all over again. ...to plunge the disciples headlong into the shock of his absence. Only then could they discover that the mystery had taken up residence within their own hearts... I think this points to the idea that led me on. You have expressed it more clearly than I could, and even yet I haven't got a grip on it. Thanks, Sue. This has been a wonderful experience, listening to so much, turning this way and that to get a new perspective. At first I felt the "myth" question was a red herring, but it turned out to offer more light, and evidently it will be kicked around for a long time to come.

Many thanks to every contributor and reader. My understanding of The Ascension has grown, my faith is Jesus the Christ has been enriched, I have been christened anew. At Passover the Jewish people say: Next year in Jerusalem. Today we can say, Next week the days of Pentecost come round...

tony

'TonyL
"A post is a free gift, and it will go where it pleases."'