The
Seventh Sunday of Easter (The Sunday after the Ascension)
Psalm
68: 1–10, 33–36 / Acts 1: 6–14 / John 17: 1–11
This is the homily that was provided for the
people of St. John’s, Huntingdon, Pennsylvania by Fr. Gene Tucker for May 24,
2020. This homily was not delivered as part of a Sunday morning worship
service, because St. John’s is currently closed due to the COVID-19 viral
outbreak. Instead, it was provided via electronic means, and in hard copy to
those without email.
“UNITED IN COMMON WITNESS”
(Homily text: John 17: 1-11)
Our Gospel
text, appointed for this morning, places before us what has become known as the
Lord’s “High Priestly Prayer”. Chapter seventeen of John’s Gospel account
concludes his record of the events that took place during the Last Supper.
In this
prayer, our Lord looks back on His earthly ministry, but He also looks forward
to the time when He will no longer be with His disciples in the way that He has
been until now. As part of His commendation to His followers, He says, “I am
coming to you. Holy Father, keep them in your name, which you have given me,
that they may be one, even as we are one.” (John 17: 11)
“That they
may be one, even as we are one.” Apparently, that is one of our Lord’s fondest
wishes for those who would claim the name of Christ.
Given the
history of the followers of Jesus, that is, the Church, what does it mean to
“be one”? And, even as we ask that question, we might also ask, “Was there ever
a time when the Church was completely, truly one?” And, if the answer to that
question is “Yes”, then we might also ask in what ways was the Church “one”?
We might
begin our quest by taking a closer look at the “raw material” of the Church,
which is people.
The people
that the Lord gathered around Himself were a disparate lot. Take, for example,
the differences that must have existed between Matthew, the tax collector for
the Romans, and Simon the Zealot. It’d be easy to imagine that these two would
have had little in common with each other before the Lord called them into His
service. Matthew would have been regarded – most likely - by the Zealot Simon
as a traitor to the Jewish people, for Matthew was working to support the
brutal Roman occupation by collecting taxes that went into Roman coffers. (The
Zealots advocated the violent overthrow of the Roman occupation.)
But the
Lord’s call tends to push the differences that exist between people of
differing backgrounds and perspectives into the background. Even major
differences such as the sort that may have existed between Matthew and Simon
get pushed into the background.
The Lord’s
call to discipleship tends to unite, not to divide.
As the
original band of twelve disciples (minus Judas Iscariot, plus Matthias who
replaced him, and then plus Paul) went out into the world, their message went
first to Jewish ears, minds and hearts. But in time, that same message went out
into the Gentile world, where non-Jews responded to the Good News of God in
Christ.
The early
followers of Jesus worshiped in the Temple in Jerusalem, and faithfully
observed the requirements of the Law of Moses (Torah). But Gentile believers didn’t observe
those same things. Their culture and background were different. (The account of
the proceedings of the Council of Jerusalem, which hammered out the ways in
which Gentile believers would be incorporated into the Church, is well worth
reading…..see Acts, chapter fifteen.)
In the New
Testament period, the picture we get of the organization and nature of the
early Church was that it was made up of independent congregations, which
differed from one another in some significant ways, like the nature of their
leadership and their theological tendencies. The late New Testament scholar
(and Roman Catholic priest) Raymond Brown wrote a book entitled, “The Churches
the Apostles Left Behind”, which looked into this question. (It was one of the
most valuable books I read when I was in seminary.) In his work, Brown
concludes that there were no less than seven different types of churches in the
New Testament period. They differed in some significant ways.
But they
interacted with one another (recall that Paul went from church to church,
collecting money for the Christians in the Holy Land), and they shared a common
witness to the risen Lord.
With
respect to their common witness to Jesus, these early Christians emulated the
behavior of the original disciples who had become Apostles.
In the
years that have come and gone since that the New Testament period, much has
happened to the body of Christ, that is, the Church. In the wake of the
Reformation in the sixteenth century, there are now estimated to be about
34,000 different Christian bodies. That’s a bewildering number to contemplate.
As we seek
to faithfully respond to the Lord’s call that His followers would be “one”, how
should we proceed to promote our one-ness? Is organic unity desirable (that is
to say, the idea that there should be one, unified church or denomination), or
should that even be a goal?
And if the
idea of having one, unified church isn’t a desirable or achievable goal (and I
don’t think it’s a practical reality, nor is a totally desirable goal to
pursue), then are there alternatives to such a goal?
The witness
of the early Church informs us that there is an alternative: The most important
aspect of the one-ness of Jesus’ followers is their common witness to the Lord.
That’s what unites us, even as we differ from one another in the methods of our
organization, leadership, and theological tendencies. In those things, Brown
would tell us that we are imitating the practice and the reality of the early
Church in the New Testament period.
One final
comment is in order, I think, and it stems from our unique position as
Episcopalians, who are inheritors of the Anglican way of being a Christian.
Because we Anglicans are known as the “Bridge Church” between Roman Catholics
and Protestants (but incorporating elements of both of these traditions), we
can survey the landscape of Christian belief and practice from our unique perspective,
and we are uniquely posed, I think, to appreciate and value the contributions
of various part of the Christian family.
In that
sense, our legacy offers us rich gifts.
AMEN.
