Living on the Edge: Acts 11; 13; 14

We often think of the Church as a conservative force in society. It has played that role in the history of Western Civilization, especially in the last 300 or so years. For example, it opposed the "democratic revolutions" which swept Europe in the 18th and 19th centuries. It was hostile to the growth of biblical criticism in Germany in the 19th century. And in our age anyone who pursues a "progressive" or "liberal" agenda has to be aware of the Church/es as possible foes of that agenda.

Thus, it comes as somewhat of a surprise to learn that the earliest Church, at least as Luke portrays in in Acts, is a progressive force, a force that is "on the edge" of the religious movement of the day. They were the ones who expored the "radical" idea of including the Gentiles in the early Church. The readings this morning (the irony of having a "common" lectionary is stark today, as the Roman Catholics, Episcopalians and other Protestants each have different readings) all point to that common theme--of what it was like to live on the edge in the earliest days of Christianity. This essay will link the three passages of the morning (Acts 11:1-18; 13:44-52; 14:21-28) under three themes: (1) A Basic Theological Realization--Acts 11; (2) The Opposition Faced by The Christians--Acts 13; and (3) On to New Lands--Acts 14.

Overriding Principle-God Shows No Partiality-Acts 11:1-18

The basic principle of Christian religion is articulated in this passage--God shows no partiality between Jews and Gentiles, but, in Peter's words in Acts 10, "in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him (God)" (10:35). Peter narrates the surprising conversion of the Gentile Cornelius, along with the gift of the Holy Spirit, to the Jerusalem authorities. Peter's words were:

"If then God gave them the same gift that he gave us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could hinder God?" (11:17).

Peter perceived, and the authorities in Jerusalem concurred, with the notion that God's new work was to break down barriers that had hitherto existed between people of different religions and to unite them under the common barrier of Christ. The words of Peter are reminiscent of the words of an earlier Jewish teacher, Gamaliel, who counseled his seething brethren not to oppose violently the new Christian sect because if it flourished it was of God. His words almost give Peter his mode of thinking:

"if this plan or this undertaking 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!" (5:38-39).

Opposing the principle of human dignity, of equal sharing in the blessings of God of all people in the world, may be, in Gamaliel's words "fighting against God." Now we see why the earliest movement is one that could live on the edge--because it took seriously the non-discrimination principle at the heart of God's heart and applied it to people who formerly were excluded from the Covenant community. When we begin seriously to ask the question today of whom we exclude and whom we ought to include, we will be living on the edge.

Opposition Develops--Acts 13:44-52

All who have ever taken a stand for something new and controversial know that they will attract opposition. As certainly as day follows night, so it is that a person who argues against an establishment, whether it is religious, social, academic, bureaucratic, political, knows that questioning the status quo will bring a lot of opposition. Why? Because the people who have a vested interest in the status quo don't want you to change things. Things will, they think, only get worse if you bring changes.

It is especially difficult for those who lead institutions to live on anything other than a very dull edge because of the risk of alienating "big donors." These are the people who don't want much change to happen because it might change their position of comfortable, or even precarious, power in the society. Because presidents and pastors and executive directors need to make sure that the institution survives, much less flourishes, and since they want to keep their job, they are often counseled to restrain themselves, to trim the sails, to teach or preach or lead in a way that will not alienate those who make the institution run.

But this text shows that the early disciples really didn't care for that advice. In city after city they incurred the wrath of what are called "The Jews." I have explained elsewhere why it was natural for the Jewish establishment of the time to oppose the early Christians and, consequently, why it was natural for the earliest Christian writings (i.e., the New Testament) to show a lot of hostility towards Jews. In a nutshell I argued that the earliest Christians leaving Judaism was like a painful divorce; each side felt torched by the other and took it out on them in their words/writings. I believe, also, that there really is no need in 2007 for Christians and Jews, however, to be anything other than amicable. We do have significant differences, of course, but our similarities in text and tradition make cooperation desirable.

This second point, then, to expect opposition if you live on the edge, will dissuade many of us from doing so. But, if you really listen to your heart, you will find your own "edge" in whatever you do. Opposition will develop, but you will know that you have to follow the heart rather than the opposition comments.

On To New Lands--Acts 14:21-27

So what do the disciples do when they meet the opposition? They don't stay and fight; they move on to new lands. Were they "wimps" for so doing? Not at all. They realized that the "edge" life doesn't have to be lived among those who oppose you; there are other places, other people, who might give your message a more ready reception. If people really want you to leave a place, why stay? You not only hurt yourself, but you distract the institution from moving in its own direction. Sometimes people get so wrapped up in their identity with an institution that they just "dig in" when opposition develops. Well, I suppose that isn't altogether wrong, but this text suggests that another strategy may also be called for--moving on. Go from Antioch to Derbe to Lystra to Pamphylia to Perga. Find the place where your "edge" will meet someone else's "edge." Don't settle for places where that can't happen for you.

Where is the "edge" today for people of faith? I think it can be almost anywhere, frankly. It need not be in the political arena, thought that is the one that is often most visible. You may find your "edge" in working on climate change or human rights or peace or victims rights or gay rights or a host of other issues. You may find, however, that something as seemingly noncontroversial as affirming the equal dignity of all people to your children, your community, your country, can have you living on the edge before you know it. Try it. Let the world know.

2612