The One About a Eunuch

Now an angel of the Lord said to Philip, “Go south to the road — the desert road — that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza.” So he started out, and on his way he met an Ethiopian eunuch, an important official in charge of all the treasury of the Kandake (which means “queen of the Ethiopians”). This man had gone to Jerusalem to worship, and on his way home was sitting in his chariot reading the Book of Isaiah the prophet [Acts 8:26-28, New International Version].

From time to time, I’ve shared several of the many Bible stories that the children at Olney Presbyterian Church (Gastonia, NC) re-enacted during the 1950s and 1960s, either in Sunday School or before the proud assembled congregation. Many of you had similar experiences in your youth.

There was the time that brother, Jeff, took on the role of Jonah. Lee Huffstetler once wore a Madras shirt in his Oscar-deserving portrayal of Joseph. Tommy Love was perfectly cast as Zacchaeus. Melba Rhyne was Mary Magdalene personified when she encountered the risen Lord on Easter Sunday morning. Douglas Alexander, my twin brother, Todd, and I made respectable “Magi” was we brought our gifts to the baby Jesus.

Some Bible stories, of course, had to be avoided. Take the one about the Ethiopian eunuch that is appointed as the first reading for this upcoming Sunday, the Fifth Sunday of Easter [Acts 8:26-40, RCL, Year B]. The story didn’t fit within Olney’s sensibilities at all.

For one thing, and remember that the early-to-mid-60s would have been the last days of Jim Crow in western North Carolina, one of the two central characters in the “eunuch story” is Black. And by “Black,” I don’t mean “brown;” I mean Black. The Greek word “Ethiopian” meant “burnt faced.” Ethiopians were both exotic and mysterious. “Ethiopian” also served as a term for those folks who lived at what was thought to be the edge of the world. Olney shunned those sorts of people.

Second—and here, I may as well say it plainly—the Acts 8 story is about this “guy” who, well, he really isn’t a “guy.” I mean he used to be a guy. But, well, he isn’t a “guy” now. And by not being a “guy” now, I don’t mean that earlier in his life he won the Olympic decathlon and later transitioned to become a “gal.” “He” didn’t undergo hormone treatments. “He” was castrated. Ok, I said it. The Olney elders would have winced.

There are other unusual aspects to the story. Phillip, the other protagonist in the story, has been successfully preaching and healing in Samaria, although there is some question about whether he’d received appropriate credentials for that sort of church work. He was one of the initial set of seven deacons appointed “to wait on tables” [Acts 67:2]. After the stoning of Stephen, one of the seven, which stoning, by the way had the blessing of Saul, a/k/a Paul [Acts 7:54 et seq.], many Christians in Jerusalem were scattered about. That’s how Philip came to be in Samaria.

Despite the fact that things are proceeding well for Philip in Samaria, an angel of the Lord tells him to get up and travel down the desert road to Gaza. The strangeness continues, for it is there, of course, that Philip meets the Ethiopian eunuch who is sitting in a chariot reading from the Book of Isaiah. Of course, he is.

The Ethiopian is erudite. He’s apparently good with money. He’s in charge of the queen’s entire treasury, and travels in what amounts to a first century limousine. This unnamed Ethiopian is reading Isaiah aloud and Philip asks if he understands what he’s reading. The Ethiopian replies, “How can I, unless someone guides me?” [Acts 8:31.

So Philip climbs up into the chariot and begins to explain. Beginning with the particular passage being read by the Ethiopian—the “sheep led to slaughter” passage [Isaiah 53:7-8]—Philip proclaims to the Ethiopian the “good news” about Jesus Christ. I’m omitting some details here, but as you know, the Ethiopian spies a pool of water nearby and asks Philip what is to prevent him from being baptized?

Philip doesn’t say, “Well, for one thing, there is Deuteronomy 23:1, which says men of your “nature” may not come into the Assembly of God. Nor does Philip mention Leviticus 21:16-23, which offers a more comprehensive list of those to be excluded from fellowship. Instead, Philip—lacking proper credentials, but stirred by the Spirit—gets down into the water with the Ethiopian and baptizes the latter.

With a final flurry of strangeness, the Spirit of the Lord snatches Philip away. The eunuch never saw Philip again and, as Frederick Buechner has so succinctly written, “didn’t need to” [Buechner, Beyond Words]. Instead, the Ethiopian continued on home rejoicing.

All this brings us back to the Olney question: Why is St. Luke, the author of Acts, so intent upon telling us this story? Over the centuries, thousands of pages have been filled with commentary on this exotic, unusual passage of Scripture. Turning to some of the tangential issues, many have, for example, wondered if the Ethiopian had been allowed to worship in Jerusalem upon his original arrival [see the passages from Deuteronomy and Leviticus noted above].

Others have wondered whether the Ethiopian was Jewish, a Gentile, or a proselyte. Contrary to some popular belief, there is no clear evidence that he was anything other than Jewish. Still others have speculated as to whether the Ethiopian’s “condition” had been imposed upon him or, perhaps, had been accepted as part of his office.

Whatever his overall story, the Ethiopian is clearly a blend of contradictions. In traditional “male” terms, he is powerless. Yet, in very practical terms, he is powerful. He’s in charge of a queen’s fortune. He did not immediately discern the meaning of Isaiah, yet he could clearly read Hebrew. If the emphasis of earlier stories of conversion (aided by Philip) in Samaria [Acts 8:4-25] is placed on reception of the Holy Spirit, then the emphasis of this story—the one about a eunuch—is placed on reception of Holy Scripture. To foster Gods Kingdom, God will use either. God will also use both, since both have the resurrected Christ as their source.

And what about Philip? Lacking full apostolic credentials, shouldn’t he have remained in his place, tending to the Greek-speaking widows, i.e., “waiting tables?”

This vivid story reminds us that the Good News of Jesus Christ has not reached the several billion persons who claim the Faith primarily through the work of Boards of Ordained Ministry, Synods, Presbyteries, Councils, and the like. It is Spirit driven. Moreover, our risen Lord seems to have little regard for focus groups, six-point plans, Powerpoint ®, and metadata. Instead, the Spirit moves and operates where It pleases. It abides within men and women like Philip who are awake for its command, who respond when sent, and who are not weighed down by popular conceptions of appropriate boundaries. The Good News of Jesus Christ is more than a match for our prejudices.

The story also provides our institutions with an uncomfortable lesson: that great strides in spreading the Gospel, great Spirit-filled missions, and exciting missionary progress are all seen most vividly not in any discussions held at the centers of church polity, but rather at the periphery of the Church. Too much proximity to the cathedral tends to produce cataracts. Proximity often makes the church’s innermost servants comfortable with the status quo. Too much time spent in the power centers, and not at the periphery, can condition church leaders to expect too little from the Gospel.

The one about a eunuch—it’s a salvation story, but not just for the Ethiopian. It speaks to all of us as it urges us to follow an unbridled, unpredictable, and uncontrollable God away from our points of comfortability and into the world, wondering what might actually happen since the Gospel is True.