The REAL Last Temptation of Christ--Luke 23:33-43 (I)

"33 When they came to the place that is called The Skull, they crucified Jesus there with the criminals, one on his right and one on his left. 34 Then Jesus said, “Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing.” And they cast lots to divide his clothing. 35 And the people stood by, watching; but the leaders scoffed at him, saying, “He saved others; let him save himself if he is the Messiah of God, his chosen one!” 36 The soldiers also mocked him, coming up and offering him sour wine, 37 and saying, “If you are the King of the Jews, save yourself!” 38 There was also an inscription over him, “This is the King of the Jews.” 39 One of the criminals who were hanged there kept deriding him and saying, “Are you not the Messiah? Save yourself and us!” 40 But the other rebuked him, saying, “Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? 41 And we indeed have been condemned justly, for we are getting what we deserve for our deeds, but this man has done nothing wrong.” 42 Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” 43 He replied, “Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”

I. Introduction

The celebration of Christ the King Sunday is, rather surprisingly, of recent origin. Pope Pius XI, on Dec. 11, 1925, issued the encyclical Quas Primas in which he laid out the rationale for such a celebration. Reading through that encyclical, removed from us by 82 years, left me with a combination of bemusement and general acquiescence. In 34 paragraphs, some of which are pretty long, the Pontiff castigates the regnant secularism in Europe and then declares not only that secular powers ought to recognize Christ as King but that the Church needs to recapture this important doctrine. I was bemused because the idea that the Church's special recognition of the Kingship of Christ, when the entire idea of kingship was quickly diminishing in the modern Western democratic states, would in some sense reverse the "decline" into secularism and make political party leaders sit up and pay attention to Christ as King is odd at best and out-of-touch at worst. Modern Western bureaucracies cannot function as religious bodies or as arbiters of religious sentiments. But, on the other hand, I generally acquiesced in his sentiments--that it is a good idea to focus on Jesus' regnal character.

Why did Protestants embrace this celebration when the intellectual/spiritual underpinnings for it aren't that compelling? Well, Protestants were trying to become more "Catholic" in liturgical understanding in the wake of Vatican II, and this was one of the ways to show an ecumenical spirit. No one can really object to Christ as King--oh, some folks do, by arguing that the mere mention of Kingship in our world somehow evokes memories of people drawn and quartered, of arbitrary imprisonment, of nobles and hierarchical society, etc. But it isn't really a bad idea. So, Christ the King Sunday came into Protestantism, though it still rather badly needs a good present-day justification. I will exposit the Gospel text here, and make comments on Christ's kingship, even though the focus of my exposition is on the fact that the Sunday is the last one before Advent.

II. Turning to the Gospel of Luke

Christ the King Sunday is also the last Sunday in Pentecost, the last Sunday in ordinary time. This observation is important because today we "end" our journey with Christ through his earthly life. We will "begin" it again soon, but we ought to pause and reflect on the fact that we have followed Jesus for seven months or so through Luke's Gospel. We have seen Luke's distinctive emphases on the poor and the inclusion in the Kingdom of those not normally invited to the great feasts.

For me, however, the "year" with Jesus in Luke's Gospel has opened up for me the ambiguity of some of Jesus' teaching. As I have argued, for example, Jesus is just too multi-form to put in any one theological "box." Especially important in developing this thesis were the stories in Luke 16:1-13 and 19:1-11. Jesus was "against" the rich, though he embraced the rich tax collector Zacchaeus; he was interested in setting up a rival system of ethics ('give without expectation of repayment') but he affirmed the wiliness of the dishonest steward. My inability completely to "categorize" Jesus in ways that many scholars want to do so means that I want to keep coming back to him, to see how he deals with me and the Church in the multiplicities of our existence.

III. Expositing Luke 23:33-43

And so we come to this final passage in ordinary time, and we will "leave" Jesus just when he is about to be placed on the cross. There will be time for crucifixion in about four months; now the emphasis is on the request to Jesus of one of the criminals to "remember me" when Jesus comes in his kingdom. Three points emerge from this passage. First, we note the passage in general functions as a "last temptation of Christ"; second, we see the recognition by the evildoer of Jesus' kingdom; third, we note the idea that today is the right time to respond to the claims of the kingdom on us.

A. The Real Last Temptation of Christ (33-39)

Usually when we think of the Christ's last temptation, either the movie or book so titled, or the story from the beginning of Jesus' ministry comes to mind. We think of Jesus' temptation as that cluster of events at the beginning of Jesus' ministry where he was tempted by Satan into taking a series of short-cuts to glory. Once he endured every such temptation, he was on his way, empowered to challenge the works of darkness and heal and teach.

But as I read the passage for this morning over and over, it seemed that the passage functioned as another temptation for Jesus. Just as there were three temptations in Luke 3, so there are three of them here. In Luke 3 there was only one speaker--the devil, but here there are three separate individuals who verbally abuse or challenge Jesus. All of them challenge him on the same point that the devil did in Luke 3--'if indeed you are so great (or are the Messiah or the King of the Jews), you will save yourself out of this predicament.'

One might even say that the temptation here for Jesus to act in some way to "save himself" might even be stronger than it was in Luke 3. First, Luke skillfully uses language that puts Jesus' trials here in a biblical context of unjust suffering. In v. 35 the high priests are said to "mock" him (Gk. ekmukterizein). This extremely rare verb is the same word used in that most messianic of Psalms (22) when those who stand around the oppressed person "mock at me; they make mouths at me, they shake their heads.." (22:7). In the Psalm the people say:

"Commit your cause to the Lord; let him deliver--
let him rescue the one in whom he delights" (v. 8).

Jesus' suffering and decision here is now placed in the context of another significant biblical sufferer; will God now rescue him or will he "pull rank" and get himself out of this predicament?

Then, second, the temptation is even greater precisely because Jesus is at the end of his ministry. By having three successive people not recognize him in the way he wanted, the temptation would be to think of one's life work as useless. Many people die in near-despair because they feel that all their efforts to effect change, or to "stamp" the world with a distincitive idea or approach to life, have been in vain. Surely that temptation would have also rested on Jesus. He had spent his entire public ministry trying to do good, teach and heal, to call people back to God, to teach a new ethical system. If he knew that he didn't even get through to the disciples (18:34), how much less might he get through to anyone else. Thus, I think there was even a stronger temptation for Jesus at this point of his life to say, in effect:

"Ok, cut the crap! I am here to enforce God's will. You measly little people really have no authority over me; you have no ability really to put me to death. I can and I will show you who is boss.."

The genius of power is that when you have it, you can use it, but you only do so sparingly. Convince others that you have it, and then you really need not use it. But if people aren't convinced that you really have it, you are sometimes forced to show that you do, in order to "shut them up." That is the way the world works, in athletics, in law, in business, in human relationships. But Jesus chose not to gratify their requests. Sometimes I wonder if he wouldn't have been better served to come off the cross, kick a few butts, and then willingly submit again to their punishment. I wonder..

Let's continue with these thoughts, in the next essay.

3022