From the Daily Lectionary for Friday/Saturday September 11-12, Proper 18
Acts 15:12-35
The whole assembly kept silence, and listened to Barnabas and Paul as they told of all the signs and wonders that God had done through them among the Gentiles. After they finished, James replied, “My brothers, listen to me. Simeon [the Semitic form of Peter’s given name] has related how God first looked favorably on the Gentiles, to take from among them a people for his name. This agrees with the words of the prophets….Therefore I have reached the decision we should not trouble those Gentiles who are turning to God, but we should write to them to abstain only from things polluted by idols and from fornication and from whatever has been strangled and from blood. For in every city, for generations past, Moses has had those who proclaim him, for he has been read aloud every sabbath in the synagogues.” Then the apostles and the elders, with the consent of the whole church, decided to choose men from among their members and to send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They sent Judas called Barnabas, and Silas, leaders among the brothers, with the following letter:
“The brothers, both the apostles and the elders, to believers of Gentile origin in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia, greetings. Since we have heard that certain persons who have gone out from us, though with no instructions from us, have said things to disturb you and have unsettled your minds, we have decided unanimously to choose representatives and send them to you, along with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, who have risked their lives for the sake of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will tell you the same things by word of mouth. For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to impose on you no further burden than these essentials: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from fornication. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.”
So they were sent off and went down to Antioch. When they gathered the congregation together, they delivered the letter. When its members read it, they rejoiced at the exhortation. Judas and Silas, who were themselves prophets, said much to encourage and strengthen the believers. After they had been there for some time, they were sent off in peace by the believers to those who had sent them. But Paul and Barnabas remained in Antioch, and there, with many others, they taught and proclaimed the word of the Lord.
The Acts of the Apostles is considered by most to be the sequel to the Gospel of Luke, and was written in the late first or early second century. The author is anonymous although by convention identified as Luke, who was probably a Gentile Christian and was thought to be a traveling companion with Paul. (If you want to read a great novel about the life of St. Luke, I highly recommend Dear and Glorious Physician by Taylor Caldwell). The name “Acts” was meant to imply the activities or deeds of the apostles following the death of Jesus. In essence it is the story of the church from the time of the ascension of Jesus until the arrival of Paul in Rome. Paul is the dominant figure in the second half of Acts, which serves as a link between the Gospels and the Pauline letters of the New Testament.
One of the most contentious and divisive issues of the formative Church was whether Gentile converts to Jesus had to follow all of the laws of Moses. In essence, if Gentiles are to become Christians, must they first become Jews? Must a man become circumcised before he is baptized? There were other issues as well, including how much social intercourse between Jews and Gentiles was acceptable, particularly around eating together, but circumcision—understandably I think—was especially problematic. Jesus’ apostles and followers including Peter and James (the brother of Jesus), who were the leaders of the evolving church in Jerusalem, initially felt strongly that all must “keep the law” (Note however the previous conversion and baptism by Peter of the uncircumcised Gentile Cornelius in Acts chapters 10 and 11.). Paul, on the other hand, who saw himself as an apostle called to take the gospel of Christ to the Gentiles, had been telling his newly formed churches throughout Asia Minor that they were not subject to all of the Law of Moses, and that they would not have to be circumcised. (Imagine! I can just see poor Paul having to telling his audience: “There is one thing you should probably know you have to do before you can join!”) This led to a great division among the Jewish Christians. Something had to give! Did these new believers in Jesus need to be circumcised or not?
Let’s set the stage for this reading from Acts 15, the speech of James as the concluding event of the Jerusalem Council: Paul and Barnabas have just returned from their first missionary journey. During that trip many Jews and Gentiles have become believers. Their mission has been successful, but it has also aroused great resistance and anger from some of the Jews, so much so that Paul had been stoned and dragged out of the city, and left for dead. Paul survives, and he and Barnabas go to Jerusalem to meet with the apostles and the elders, among them some who adamantly claim it necessary for believers to be circumcised and to keep the laws of Moses. As if on the stand at a trial, Paul reports about the miracles and wonders God has done through their ministry. Peter testifies that the Holy Spirit has been given to the Gentiles and that they should be accepted into the Church. James the leader of the Council is convinced, and renders the verdict which affirms admission of Gentiles to the Church. While some restrictions apply, circumcision does not. Although the war over who was “in” and who was “out” would continue, this battle had been decided. Peter and Paul had won. Paul would soon leave with Silas to begin his second missionary journey.
It should be noted that one of James’ concerns was that this acceptance of Gentiles presented another challenge to the Jewish believers. Might it lead to them forsaking their Jewish traditions of following the law? Did Paul’s mission somehow contaminate the distinctively Jewish ethos? Would this “gentilize” the Jews of the Diaspora? Luke answers “no,” and makes it clear that the new Church must maintain its Jewish memory in order to survive. This connection between the history and tradition of Israel and the new Christianity is, in his view, essential. From a more practical perspective, this decision by the council in Jerusalem was huge for the early growth of the Church. It expanded rather than restricted the potential for growth. While Paul would likely have continued his ministry anyway, he could use this support in his second and third missionary journeys to build the church among the Gentiles. Notice too that the decision was made prayerfully: “It has seemed good for the Holy Spirit and for us to impose on you no further burden than these essentials…” (v. 28). It was a strong move toward inclusivity. It was a “progressive” move forward.
Is there a message for us in our reading and reflection upon this story about the Council of Jerusalem nearly two thousand years ago? Let’s use modern language to get a sense of what took place. This was a divisive issue and extremely important decision for the Council. In doing so it heard from the “conservatives,” the Pharisees and others who wanted to maintain the status quo, fearful that eliminating circumcision would be creating a leak in the dike which would open the floodgates to abolishing the entire of law of Moses which had held them together as a people for centuries. It would remove the backbone of their faith, and might ultimately destroy their entire culture and identity. On the other side were the “liberals,” in this trial Peter with his testimony, and Paul and Barnabas with their accounts of how God had been moving among the Gentiles as they preached the Gospel to them in Asia Minor. This side of the argument was willing to break with the long-held traditions, including circumcision, because it had become an obstruction to the way of growth and barrier to the spread of the Gospel. Theirs was a progressive approach, willing to take a chance. The end result was that the Council reached a compromise. James allowed for removing circumcision as a requirement, but required Gentiles to observe the minimum moral law and to keep the food laws of Judaism out of respect for the feelings of the Jews with whom they might associate. So, there was a middle ground of sorts, and James found it to allow for the Church to move forward. Christianity would become a universal rather than a national religion. Although Paul probably felt that he didn’t get all that he wanted, he got what he needed to continue building the Church. History has shown that the Council succeeded in responding to “both sides of the aisle” of this divisive issue. Their compromise had worked to allow the Church to move forward. Was the Holy Spirit at work here? According to James it was, and the Council listened to the Spirit to guide its decision.
Rev. Bob Donnell
September11, 2020
Prayer for the Unity of the Church (BCP p. 204)
O God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, our only savior, the Prince of Peace: Give us grace seriously to lay to heart the great dangers we are in by our unhappy divisions; take away all hatred and prejudice, and whatever else may hinder us from godly union and concord; that, as here is but one Body and one Spirit, one hope of our calling, one lord, one Faith, one Baptism, one God and Father of us all, so we may be all of one heart and of one soul, united in one holy bond of truth and peace, of faith and charity, and may with one mind and mouth glorify thee; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
