The First Christian Community–and Ours

(Lectionary for May 7, 2017)

“From each according to their ability; to each according to their need.” That, of course, is the hallmark claim of Karl Marx in his ground-breaking work on labor and class that became the idealized foundation of the world wide Communist movement. It is a grand and enviable vision. Unfortunately, it was never, and has never been, realized in any large community. 20th century Russia, the collapsed USSR, was the most enduring attempt to make it work, and though modern China still claims to operate by this sweeping dictum, its continuous forays into overt capitalistic experiments gives the lie to that claim. The repressive disaster that is modern North Korea is a vivid example of what can go wrong with such a system when a dictatorial family takes charge.

What does the maxim mean? Though it has been parsed interminably since its formulation 150 years ago, it appears to suggest the following: all must work up to the limits of their abilities—and perhaps in some cases beyond those limits—in order that those with distinct needs, and who may not be capable of work, may receive what they need to live. It is in short a wonderful-sounding plan, wherein all labor for all, with the result that all feel rewarded for their labor and rewarded in their gifting of others who are unable to labor. This is classic socialism, an economic system that strives for genuine equality among all who participate in the system.

Of course, in the USA in 2017 the “s” word has become anathema, for we, it is claimed, are a nation of rugged individuals who reject anything like government handouts, who work for ourselves and our own families, and thus demand similar labor from those who would try to live “on the dole,” namely the federal entitlements like food stamps, welfare, social security, etc. I work, the cry is raised; let those lazy dolts find their own work. Why should I labor to support them?

This bald-faced capitalistic shout is, in fact, not at all what the early Christian community described in Acts had in mind. It must be said as clearly as possible that what Luke envisioned, right after the sermon of Peter at Pentecost had converted three thousand to the new community in Jesus, was a community founded on the principles of socialism. How else may one understand this text for today? “All who believed were together and had all things in common; they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute them to all, as any had need” (Acts 2:44-45). It has been suggested that Marx found inspiration for his ideas directly from this biblical formulation, though of course he later repudiated all religion as nothing more than mass opiates, drugging those who should be working for the good of all.

It must be said that much of Christianity as practiced today is as far from this ideal community as can be imagined. Close to where I live there is a small church that has a sign in its front yard proclaiming it as a church “that was founded in the first century.” I assume they mean that what is practiced in that building is an exact replica of the very earliest Christian practice. I doubt it. I doubt the members “hold all things in common.” I doubt that they “sell their possessions and goods and distribute them to their neighbors.” Call me cynical, but I would suggest that what occurs at that church is pretty much what occurs in 99.9% of all American churches, and that is something like capitalism; we got ours, so all of you can just go get yours, if I may formulate it crudely. Christianity and capitalism go hand in hand in our land, and anything like socialism is decried as much inside our churches as outside. Why else do we see in nearly every sanctuary of every denomination both a Christian flag and an American flag? Is that not a sign that the worship of God has been tainted with the worship of a capitalist America? For many in our churches it is extremely difficult to disentangle the warp of America from the woof of Christianity as given to us in Acts.

And why is that confusion so important? What would it mean for us to use the high bar of Acts 2:44-45 as a guide for our 21st century actions? Let me suggest several implications for us, and by us I surely include me, too.

1.   Greed would be ruled out. The collecting of and grasping for more goods, ever more cash, would cease. Our goods and cash would be used for others, not just in our immediate community, but in our cities, states, country, and world. Years ago in a prophetic book, Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger, Ron Sider suggested the practice of a graduated tithe. As one’s income grew, one increased the percentage of one’s giving in such a way that one continued to live simply, that is on nearly the same amount of money, while offering increasing goods and money to others. It is a hard discipline that my wife and I aspired to but too often failed to fulfill.
2.   The treatment of others who are from a different class would change. If I have been blessed with opportunities for education, social advancement, and increased financial success, due to the color of my skin, the accident of my birth, and myriad other factors, in the light of Acts 2 I can no longer simply demand that others follow my path. My advantages cannot be readily duplicated in the lives of others, and instead of demanding that they be like me, I must sense my responsibility for their needs, more than I should be telling them how to act.
3.   All believers would be “together,” that is worshipping God and connecting across lines of race and class, instead of the silos we all currently inhabit as we find our ways to our churches. The scandal of denominationalism is unfortunately matched by the deeper scandals of racism, classism, sexism, heterosexism that divide us and implicate us as people of suspicion and fear rather people of hope and joy. Note that the first believers in Acts “broke bread from house to house (a more literal Greek than the NRSV’s “home”) and ate their food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46). When was the last time you ate food with a glad and generous heart?I readily admit that these are utopian ideas, hatched from the fires of early passions for the faith and told of three thousand excited and energetic people who felt the power of God coursing through their lives. But what is our Bible but a rule for which to strive, a rich series of possibilities and aspirations for which to reach? We all need more reaching, more aspiration, than we need “the cold light of realism” or “the art of the possible.” We Christians need to major in “the art of the magnificent” and “acts of the amazing.” As the poet has said, and has now become all too clichéd, “A man’s (sic) reach should exceed his (sic) grasp, or what’s a heaven for?” Indeed! Why read the Bible at all, if we do not strive for more than we think we can accomplish?

Marx was on to something, something that exceeded what people could finally perform. Luke too was on to something, something that later Christians have too often failed to do. But that does not mean that we cannot keep up the quest for a better, more humane, more generous life with all of God’s people.

(images from Wikimedia Commons)