Our Sunday Message

Giving Witness After Easter: Acts 4:5-12
Rev. Dr. Kenneth A. Corr
May 7, 2006
Fourth Sunday of Eastertide

   It is after Easter. How does the Easter experience continue to shape the way that we think about our faith and spirituality, experience God’s presence in our daily lives, and share those experiences in meaningful ways to our neighbors? Let me tell you a story.
  A lame beggar was healed outside the temple. If you were here last Sunday, you know the story. Something completely unexpected and unpredictable happened to signal that life would never return to normal after Easter. In her commentary on this text, Beverly Gaventa insightfully notes, “The healing of the lame man . . . is only a symptom of the new reality that is breaking in upon humankind as a result of Jesus’ resurrection.”1 Listen carefully to how she describes this miracle of healing. “A new reality” was “breaking in upon humanity” and life was never going to be the same.
  And so . . . “The next day their rulers, elders, and scribes assembled in Jerusalem with Annas the high priest, Caiaphas, John, and Alexander, and all who were of the high-priestly family.” In contemporary vernacular, we might say that they had brought out the big guns. This was an impressive and imposing list of personalities to hear a complaint about the healing of a lame man.
  This impressive group is even more amazing when we read in v. 13 that the men on trial are “uneducated, ordinary,” and we might add, “unimportant.” Why would this seemingly insignificant incident bring such a strong reaction?
  Let me give some background. Rome was firmly in control of this region of the world. Rome had little interest in the religious views and differences among the people. But Rome had a lot of interest in maintaining peace and collecting taxes.
  Rome appointed local leaders to keep the peace and collect the taxes. These local leaders were chosen from among the wealthy families because they were the ones who benefited the most from Roman rule and had the most to lose from civil disobedience. The temple became the central political and religious institution and it was ruled by a temple hierarchy beginning with the high priest, the elders, and the scribes.
  In their book, The Last Week, Marcus Borg and John Dominic Crossan note, “The high priest and the temple authorities had a difficult task. . . . They needed to collaborate enough with Rome to keep Rome happy, but not so much as to anger their Jewish subjects.” It was a particularly difficult job. Again, Borg notes, “Though Jewish law mandated that the high priest was to serve for life . . . Rome replaced high priests with great frequency. There were eighteen high priests from the time Rome shifted local rule from Archelaus to the temple in 6 CE to the outbreak of the great revolt in 66 CE.”2
  Apparently, Caiaphas was very skilled at the political maneuvering that was required. He ruled as high priest for eighteen years, longer than anyone during this period. His father-in-law, Annas was something like “high priest emeritus.” Even though Caiaphas held the title, it was Annas who still held the power. In his trial, Jesus appeared first to Annas. It was Annas who then sent him to Caiaphas. Interestingly, Annas is called “the high priest” in our text. This event was deemed so serious that Annas was called out of retirement to sit in on this judgment.
  With that context in mind, it makes sense when we read that the “rulers, elders, and scribes assembled in Jerusalem with Annas the high priest, Caiaphas, John, and Alexander, and all who were of the high-priestly family.” Obviously, the healing of this lame man by uneducated and ordinary men was a real threat to the status quo. They needed to act quickly to get life back to normal. They needed to act decisively to squelch this popular movement. They needed to act boldly to calm any religious enthusiasm.
  “When they had made the prisoners stand in their midst, they inquired, ‘By what power or by what name did you do this?’” Certainly this assemblage was intended to intimidate Peter and John into submission.
  Stand up straight!
  Don’t hesitate.
  When I ask a question,
  Be quick and elaborate.
  Who do you think you are?
  What name or power brings you to this bar?
  We have come with some urgency,
  To calm this minor emergency,
  So be quick and explain,
  You are not here to entertain.
  The trumped up charge was the authority for the healing. In other words, “Who authorized you to heal this man?” This was a charge that was often brought against Jesus. It is clear that the disciples are now continuing the actions of Jesus.
  How will Peter and John respond? The last time that Peter was challenged to speak for his faith, he failed. Do you remember that night in the garden? Three times he had a chance to align himself with Jesus and three times he failed. It was a slave girl that first time that intimidated Peter into denying Jesus. Another unnamed man, sitting by the campfire, intimidated Peter into denying Jesus. Finally, another, this time the slave of Caiaphas, intimidated Peter into denying Jesus. How will Peter respond this time? It is clear from the text that Peter is a changed man. It is after Easter.
  Peter boldly called their hand and exposed the duplicity and sham of this trial. Beverly Gaventa has paraphrased his response to give an essence of the drama of the moment, “How absurd . . . that we should be clapped into prison for doing something that was, by any measure, a good thing.”3 “Let it be known to all of you, and to all the people of Israel, that this man is standing before you in good health by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth.”
  Something totally new was in their midst. “When they saw the man who had been cured standing beside them, they had nothing to say in opposition.”
  This same God, this same Jesus, this same Holy Spirit, is in our midst today: in this place, and in our lives. It is after Easter. How do we share our experience of the resurrection, our belief in Jesus Christ, with a world that is seemingly uninterested and in many cases openly hostile to the Christian faith?
  Our son Zachary was recently in London. He was in a public square and on one side was a Moslem imam. On the other side was a Christian evangelist. A large crowd had gathered and the preachers took turns trying to convince the crowd. First the imam would speak and then the evangelist would answer. In many ways that is a parable of our western world. Two very different worldviews are competing in the marketplace for the attention of a crowd that is largely uninterested. Many Christians are very anxious and even frightened by this prospect. How do we get a hearing for the Christian faith?
I asked Zach, “Who was the most convincing?” To which he answered, “The imam was more entertaining.” We will not convince our world by clever programs or exciting entertainment. We will not convince our world by arguments, polemics, or apologetics. What do we do?
This story in Acts is a clue. The story of the early church is simply called, Acts. It is not a story of successful programs, but of changed lives. Show me today where God is acting to change people’s lives and I will show you where the church will have a hearing.
  Ann Lamott is an unlikely candidate for Christian vocation. A former drug addict and product of a broken home, church attendance was not a part of her life and church vocabulary was not a part of her language. But first by coincidence and later through the influence of loving friends, Ann Lamott had a dramatic religious experience. She is now a popular Christian writer. Ann Lamott is convincing, not because of her clever arguments, or theology, but because of her story.
  Where is God acting today? That is where the Christian witness will be the most powerful.

1 Beverly Gaventa, Texts for Preaching: Year B, p. 299f.
2 Borg & Crossan, The Last Week, p. 19f.
3 Gaventa, p. 298.