If there is one major disconnect between our experience of church and that first Christian community, it would be how we view food and meals. We see how as a menu of choices, we select what we want based on availability, taste, allergies, affordability. Then, the church was focused on dietary laws, what they were allowed to eat, what was forbidden. Further, now we eat either to supply our bodies with nutrition and energy, possibly a taste we crave or to mark an event, like Thanksgiving, birthdays, anniversaries, Christmas, Easter. Then, meals were a demonstration of continuity, an expression of gratitude for blessedness, a formal recognition of standing. Those who were at the table had been selected with consideration, their place at the table signified their status.
So it is not surprising that the early church, recorded in the Book of Acts, reveals tensions around food and meal times. And the 21st century church looks at these texts with confusion at best, indifference at worst. But beneath the surface of these stories of conflict lay the seeds of who the church was meant to be, the mission those early converts sought to embody. And as we work to reclaim a vision of church no longer the social network of the status quo, such a mission and outlook may help us better understand ourselves and our future.
Let’s look at this story given to us by those who organize the lectionary, on this 6th Sunday of Easter. Cornelius, a spiritual, but not religious Gentile living in Caesarea of some importance in the Roman legion had a vision. It was a clear vision, to send for an apostle of Jesus named Peter. Peter, a devout and faithful Jew and an ardent follower of Jesus, had a vision, too. His was not so clear. In fact, it was downright bizarre. Peter was in Joppa, praying on the roof of his friend's house, and he was hungry. While food was being prepared, he fell into a trance and saw a sheet being lowered down from the heavens, filled with the foods good Jews were not allowed to touch, much less eat. There was a voice, "Get up Peter, kill and eat." Peter's response, "By no means Lord! You know I can't eat what is profane and unclean!" There was a counter-response, "What God has made, you must not call profane."
The Holy Spirit said "Go!" so Peter went. Arriving at the Gentile house, he realized Cornelius was having a genuine experience of God, so he started preaching, to explain about this God who was giving Cornelius visions. Before Peter could finish his sermon, the Holy Spirit short-circuited the usual order of things and poured through the room. And now reading from the 10th chapter of Acts: While Peter was still speaking, the Holy Spirit fell upon all who heard the word. The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astounded that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even to the Gentiles, for they heard them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter said, 'Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?' So he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they invited him to stay for several days.
Matthew's gospel tells us that Jesus thought so much of Peter that, in fact, the Church would be founded upon him. In the book of Acts, we see early evidence of Peter stepping up to the challenge of leadership in the Church. It was Peter who quickly became the voice for the eleven remaining apostles (Acts 1:16). It was Peter who recognized the presence of the Holy Spirit in the chaos of Pentecost (2:14). Peter was the one who began to believe enough in the "greater things that would be done in Christ's name" that he was able to heal, cure, and even raise someone from the dead!
In our story today people are already filled with the Holy Spirit and then are baptized. They are completely outside the community and in fact are considered sinners because of their lifestyle. Cornelius the Centurion is a story of how the community of Jesus followers opened themselves up to receiving people different from themselves.
The Book of Acts is often referred to as the story of the Gentile mission. Most of its 28 chapters tell the story of how "The Way" of Jesus (Acts 24:14) expanded from its origins in and around Jerusalem to gain followers all around the Mediterranean. This was no easy feat. To adapt from Jewish into non-Jewish cultures required excruciating growing pains. Did new followers have to be circumcised, as adults? Did they have to follow Jewish dietary customs? None of these questions brought unanimity. I love remembering that good church folks have been fighting with each other since the beginning, it makes today's church fights seem less threatening. People of faith have always disagreed about the path of integrity.
None of us knows exactly what Peter meant when he blurted out, "God shows no partiality!" He didn't include a 10-point list of the folks who should be included in faith communities. He didn't make a Biblical case for his bald assertion, he never says "those dietary laws in our Scriptures are moot." He skips over the Biblical argument. His only defense seems to be "the Spirit made me do it." What Peter did changed the course of Christianity forever. He opened it to the whole world, to you and me, who would never have been welcome if this vision of God's impartiality had not worked its way through Peter's, and Cornelius, active imaginations.
When Peter declared, "God shows no partiality," he opened the possibility that anyone -- everyone -- is welcome in the family of faith. He also put us on warning: the rules were changed for you, so that you could come in -- who are you, then, to prevent God from blessing the whole human family? Who are you to stand in the way of God's love? The Spirit is still here. Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved. Everyone.
In reflecting on the common good of human communities, Scottish-American philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre asks, “what difference to moral philosophy would it make, if we were to treat the facts of vulnerability and affliction and the related facts of dependence as central to the human condition?” To extend the scope of MacIntyre’s question, I further add, what difference would it make to our conceptions of and attempts to secure the church’s common good if the church community was to treat vulnerability, poverty, and affliction in this way?
There are many ways the church of the 21st century can and should interpret this story from the early church. When I began my journey as an ordained minister, I heard so many people refer to “little clicks”. The emphasis then was to offer the Gospel as inclusive of all peoples, not just a few. Expressions like hoity-toity and mucky mucks were common for those who were seen to the included, while others we left out. Over time this changed, and the issue of inclusion and diversity referred more specifically to persons who identified in ways not common to the existing church demographics. So when it came to church leadership, it became important to name persons who were younger, women, persons of colour. And later, this also came to include gays and lesbians, then also bisexuals, and now a more all-encompassing term, Queer or LGBTQIA2S+. The United Church in particular, has taken great efforts to bring clergy and lay leaders into an awareness of this missionary effort.
I am proud of these efforts, albeit coming later and less effective than any follower of Jesus should expect from the church. We have a LONG way to go. Still, I find other ways our church needs to improve its reach and hospitality, and one I see played out so often is our middle-class biases and assumptions. Language, music, liturgy, programming, are often presented by faith communities to new arrivals as if everyone in the church is a university educated professional (in the case of the United Church, someone who works for a government, school, hospital, or university). There are a variety of ways we leave people out.
I have discovered the best way to offer testimonies and teaching of the Christian faith is to have regular conversation with a variety of people, new to the church, familiar with the church, from other churches. Listening to them, sharing stories and information with them, brings to light what language is most effective at clear communication. And giving voice to these persons, allows them to express what God is doing in our communities.
Then Peter said, 'Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?' So he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they invited him to stay for several days.
How can any of us withhold what God is doing in our midst? Being baptized is another way of saying, to welcome into our communities of faith. Note the ending of this section, Then they invited him to stay for several days. The invitation to stay, is a sign the Spirit is alive and well in the church. If you are wondering if the Spirit is moving in the church, look to see if those who are new are asking those who are familiar to “stay” and share their stories.
I am always delighted to receive, hear, your stories of faith. They inform my sermons, faith studies, indeed, my own story of faith. “Preaching to the converted” is not a recipe for growth in any way, shape, or form. Listening to each other, celebrating, and praying for and with one another, is the church at its best, as it was intended to be. Amen.