Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common [Acts 4:32].
Perhaps many of you have heard the one about the American Protestant who was rescued by sailors after he had been stranded alone for six years on a remote Pacific island. As the man gathered his meager belongings to join the sailors on board their ship, one of the sailors pointed to three small structures erected near the beach, asking the man what had been their function. The marooned man proudly pointed to the largest of the three and said that it was the house that he had built. He pointed to the one about a hundred yards down the beach and indicated that this structure was his church.
The sailor, pointing to the third structure some 50 yards from the “house,” asked, “What about that one?”
The man audibly snorted and said, “Oh, yeah, well, that’s where I used to go to church.”
What is it about the American church that causes so much division and disagreement? Indeed, as the Rev. Dr. Harmon L. Smith, Professor Emeritus, Duke Divinity School, has so aptly noted, “American Christianity has spawned more sects than insects” [Where Two or Three Are Gathered: Liturgy and the Moral Life, p. 123, Wipf and Stock; Reprint edition (December 2, 2004)].
Over the years, the Church has split for many reasons. Particularly during and after the Reformation, some Christian groups shunned the practice of infant baptism. Others revolted over the early church’s episcopal nature, stressing that the church should not utilize presiding bishops. Other reformists saw scriptural bases for a congregationalist structure. Still others thought that the church should be guided by elders (presbyters).
Some Christians shun women pastors. A few even refuse to allow women teachers. Some require that pastors be theologically educated; others not so much. The Church of Christ traditionally requires that its worship services be instrument-free. A Church of Christ pastor friend jokes that the first century church didn’t have a pipe organ; and so, neither does the Church of Christ.
Some groups practice foot washing. Some stress the doctrine of free will. Some stress, but do not necessarily understand, a doctrine of predestination. For roughly 1,500 years, Christians met with and confessed their sins to a priest. Later, Protestants, some of whom say they believe in “the priesthood of all believers,” stress that confession is mostly between the sinner and God.
I could, of course, go on.
All these divisions are in stark contrast to the picture of the church drawn by St. Luke in the verses that form the first reading for this upcoming Sunday, Acts 4:32-35 [Second Sunday of Easter, RCL, Year B]. It is remarkable that when St. Luke describes the early church, he does not provide us with a list of doctrinal beliefs to which the early Christians agreed. He does not identify a synod gathering, a church council, or any sort of “organizational” meeting. There is no Book of Church Order. At this point in time, there weren’t even any creeds. There was, of course, no Holy Scripture.
For these early believers, there was but one focus, one truth, one reality. Jesus of Nazareth, the one who had walked among them, who had taught them, healed them, loved them, and guided them, had been raised from the dead. As they looked at each other, saying excitedly, “Christ is risen,” they heard the echo from other believers, “He is risen indeed.” Nothing would/could ever be the same.
Luke doesn’t describe a gathering at which the early Christians ironed out their theological differences. He doesn’t describe a group who determined that their first big step should be to craft a capital campaign. There was no committee assigned to pull together a salary package for Peter, James, John and the others. They didn’t hire a lawyer to handle the § 501(c)(3) details. These are the sorts of things that would, of course, come later. These are the sorts of things that often lead to division.
Luke instead describes a new reality. With a resurrected Jesus, joined together by and through the love of Christ, those first Christians collectively determined to follow a new pattern, a pattern of love that allowed every person to flourish. The world as they had known it had ended. They would not be bound by the world’s old set of rules. And so they shared their resources.
Armed with a resurrected Christ, the early Christians determined that they could and should cast aside their fears for tomorrow. With a resurrected Christ, the early Christians recognized that since Jesus had not hoarded His love and life, neither could they. Recalling Jesus’ parables and stories—the widow with the two almost worthless coins, the servants entrusted with talents, the parable of the prodigal son/father, the parable of the lost sheep, Jesus’ words about the Good Samaritan, and others—the early Christians came to the conclusion that as those living within the Resurrection, they could no longer tolerate suffering among their neighbors. And so, as I say, they shared their resources.
As we read the first lesson for Sunday, we should understand that Luke does not/Jesus does not want us to idealize the early church. On the one hand, the verses that follow this week’s reading remind us that there was a Cyprian Levite named Joseph, who sold a field he owned and laid the money at the apostles’ feet [Acts 4:36]. Yet in Chapter 5, we will soon encounter two others—Ananias and Sapphira—who lived not within the Resurrection, but within the old rules of hiding and hoarding [Acts 5:1 et seq.]. No, the early church was not a perfect gathering. But it did try to live within the Resurrection.
For Luke, wealth is not a sign of divine approval; it is instead a danger. The rich young man could not bear to part with his money (Luke 18:18-23). In one of Jesus’ parables, another rich man is declared to be a “fool” because of his reliance upon his well-filled barns (Luke 12:15-21). Where our possessions are our hearts will also be.
Many would be reminded of Jesus’ words, words that would later appear in the Gospels, “And if your eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away” [Matthew 18:9]. For Luke and many within the early church, anything that separated people, anything that tipped its hat at the old pre-resurrection form of existence should be cast aside, shunned, and abandoned. There was a new reality and it had been caused by and caught up within the Resurrection.
Differences, divisions—Do we live within the Resurrection? Or are we primarily interested in community organizing? Do we live within the Resurrection? Or are we too busy arguing over pronouns? Do we live within the Resurrection? Or are we mostly worried whether certain swing states will be carried by the Reds or the Blues?
Living within the Resurrection leaves no room for anything but Christ.
Be First to Comment