No Small Dissension

 

Chapter 15

As it is so often in life, the story of the apostles takes us from the mountaintop to the valley in the blink of an eye. We left them in Antioch reveling in all the things that God had done through them, celebrating that God had opened a door of faith for the Gentiles. Then, as Chapter 15 begins, “certain individuals” came down from Judea.

We quickly learn that there has been “no small dissension” among the followers of Jesus regarding what is necessary to become a Christian. The individuals from Judea, Jewish Christians, believe that anyone who wants to be in the church must follow the laws of Judaism – particularly circumcision.

The rite of circumcision, according to Genesis, was initially part of God’s covenant with Abraham. Well before there was a Jewish people, God called Abraham to follow him:

Now the Lord said to Abram, “Go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you. I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and the one who curses you I will curse; and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.” (Genesis 12:1-3)

As a part of this covenant, Abraham and all the male members of his household were required to undergo circumcision.

Many generations later, Moses led the people of Israel out of bondage in Egypt, toward the land that God had promised Abraham. During their time in the wilderness, circumcision was written into the law Moses received from God. It is a practice still followed today for newborn Jewish boys.

This argument was probably less about circumcision per se than about the value of traditions in communal identity. Christianity began as a sect of Judaism. How much of Judaism was still essential to it? How far could they, or should they, stray from their origins?

The apostles were summoned to Jerusalem to discuss the problem. It would have been fun to be a fly on the wall there. But we should recognize that Luke has told the story in a way to highlight events that he believed were significant and essential in settling church disputes faithfully. Peter speaks, then Barnabas and Paul are invited to speak. Finally, James brings things to a close. James is clearly the man with the most authority.

When Peter speaks, he reminds them of his experience with Cornelius, the centurion who received the Holy Spirit (see Chapters 10-11.) At that time, Peter said, “I truly understand that God shows no partiality (10:34). Now he comes to a new and radical understanding: “we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will.”

This is a new revelation. Barnabas and Paul follow up with their experience, then James closes with a citation from the scriptures (Amos 9:11-12) that supports the decision to “not trouble the Gentiles” (v. 19). However, James adds, they should be asked to refrain from eating meat sacrificed to idols, from eating the blood of animals, and from engaging in sex with family members. These are all things that pagans would be likely to engage in, but were prohibited by the Mosaic Law.

The process gives us a template for how we might approach conflicts in church practice and doctrine. When something new arises which is a challenge to the old order, it is necessary to bring together the guardians of the tradition and the ones who have had a new experience. These parties must listen to one another – and in addition, they must listen through the lens of scripture (apologies for the mixed metaphor.) Although not explicitly stated in these verses, we may assume that the Holy Spirit is a part of these discussions. At every stage, the apostles have been mindful of the presence of the Spirit in all they do.

The reality of things was probable not so smooth as it appears. We get the impression from some of Paul’s epistles that there may have been an ongoing dispute about some of these issues. But the point is that conflicts must be addressed directly, and parties involved must engage in the discussion with a real desire to resolve the conflict.

The question should be asked: without this discussion between the apostles and the church authorities, would the church have thrived as it did? Or might it have splintered before it was even soundly and firmly established?

At the end of the chapter we read that Barnabas and Paul will split up. They each will find new partners and go their separate ways. One reason for it is given here by Luke; Paul offers a different reason in his writings (Galatians 2:11-14). This should not be surprising; there is always more than one side to a story.

This coda to the story in Chapter 15 says something equally important. Even when we engage in good faith efforts to resolve conflict, we may still decide that a split is necessary. This has been the history of the church. While we grieve division, we also understand that it may be necessary for the welfare of the church. Paul went on to a fruitful ministry and we may assume that Barnabas did as well.

May we seek the courage to resolve conflict.

May the Holy Spirit keep our eyes and ears open to the other and our hearts open in love.

May we trust in God to lead us into new paths.

Questions for Reflection:

·        When have you ended something on good terms? What are the elements that made it possible?

·        Churches sometimes experience tension when one faction wants to move in a new direction, while another resists change. Think about the balance that is needed to navigate this path.