Seventeenth Saturday after Pentecost
We return to our Bible Study of Acts. Read Acts 5:27-42.
Peter and some of the other Apostles are put on trial before the high priest and the Jerusalem Jewish court, the Sanhedrin. The charge is teaching "in this name." The Jewish court is hesitant to use the name Jesus. Peter's retort is to lay blame on the high priest for the death of Jesus. Peter does not mention that the execution was actually carried out by the Romans under Pontius Pliate. Peter's denunciation evoked the wrath of the Sanhedrin Council, who wanted to kill him.
A cooler head prevailed. Gamaliel, presumably Gamaliel I, well known in Jewish Rabbinic literature, and some years later a teacher of Paul, cautioned against hasty action. He favors a "benign neglect" of Jewish revolutionary movements. He notes the failure of two recent such movements, that of Theudas and that of Judas the Galilean. Having little initial success, both these anti-Roman revolutionary movements were abandoned by the bulk of their followers once they encountered the might of the Roman army. Gamaliel assumes that this new movement "in the name" will likewise peter out (that pun was irresistible).
Gamaliel's wisdom and even handedness provides sharp contrast to Peter's passion. Gamaliel's wisdom is worth quoting, "If thus plan or this understanding is of human origin, it will fail; but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them--in that case you may even be found fighting against God (vv. 38-39).
The Council was convinced. They flogged the Apostles and let them go. I'm struck at the way Luke portrays flogging as something of a minor punishment. In reality it was brutal and painful for days afterward. Luke then tells us that the Apostles rejoiced to suffer dishonor "for the sake of the name." They continued to teach in the Temple court. The Sadducees appeared to regard them more as an annoyance than a threat. Luke adds that they taught in homes as well.
Both the Jews and the Romans will come to realize that these earliest Christians pose no threat of violence. Their threat is much deeper, as the Romans will gradually realize.
I don't have a sermon to preach on this text but just a few notes. There are some comparisons between the Roman Empire and 21st century America. Both have the eagle as a national symbol. Both had the most powerful military of their time. Both placed a very high value on power. I could go on. The Romans would find out over the course of Acts that the Christians formed a serious challenge to the Roman way of life.
Perhaps my comparison should end there. Christians don't seem to pose any challenge to the American way of life. The Church has for the most part been co-opted by the state. Evangelicals want to meld Church and State into the same value system. Secularists want a value system that keeps the Church at a distance, a great distance. They eagerly point out that the US Constitution has no mention of God. The Declaration of Independence has one mention of the "Creator." None of the foundational documents of the USA ever mentions Jesus.
What's a Methodist to do?
Faithfully,
Christian
1 comment:
It's unfortunate that the more activist churches like the UCC have shrunk just as much as the other churches. I wish we were attracting people on the basis of our commitment to justice, but the lack of centralization in the UCC makes it impossible to do much of anything as a large group, and the churches in rural areas are often just as much a part of the dominant power structure as any other. People find different places to live out their truly Christian belief in radical justice. My neighborhood, West Philly, is filled with Black Lives Matter posters, sidewalk chalk that says Biden Harris, and signs that say things like, "No matter where you're from, what language you speak or what God you worship (or don't), you are welcome here." African-American, white, Ethiopian, Asian, and a few others live in pretty good harmony here, though as you go west the poverty increases and it is becomes dangerous. My neighborhood is also filled with churches, most of them black, most of them open again with rules about social distancing and face coverings. My neighborhood is "religious" in observing social distancing and masks - there is a homemade sign not far away that says, "Love your neighbor - from six feet away!" Yet most of my white friends do not go to church and would consider it a waste of time as it would take away from the time they spend on activist work.
There is a lot of talk in activist circles about spiritual renewal, and how important it is to keep your spirit alive and practice self-care (spiritual self-care, not just a massage or pedicure, though those are great too if you can!). I do this through Zen meditation and yoga and prayer. The difficult balance in churches that are so activism-oriented is that sometimes they are more like political rallies than worship services. I find little peace or spiritual renewal there. As Dad says, none of this would be a problem if people would just preach from the lectionary!
Post a Comment