Second Sunday of Easter in Year B (Ormseth18)

ā€œHow very good and pleasant it is when kindred live together in unity!ā€ Dennis OrmsethĀ reflects on community, trinity, and unity.

Care for Creation Commentary on the Common LectionaryĀ 

Readings for the Second Sunday of Easter, Year B (2018, 2021, 2024)Ā 

Acts 4:32-35
Psalm 133
1 John 1:1 – 2:2
John 20:19-31

We continue our exploration of ā€œfirst thingsā€ or basic principles of our practice of Christian faith occasioned by the observance of Easter and their relationship to practices of care for creation. In the comment for Resurrection of Our Lord, we saw that the Resurrection of Jesus reveals the eschatological presence of God in the community of Jesus’ disciples, as that community brings to the world the message of the God’s victory over the death. Jesus’ resurrection is, in the words of John Dominic and Sarah Sexton Crossan, a ā€œliberation of past, present, and future humanity from death in, by, and simultaneously with Christ,ā€ in which all creation is eventually to be drawn by God away from destruction and toward salvation ā€œon a transformed earth and within a transfigured world.ā€ Distinguishing marks of this presence are the non-violent character of relationships in the community, in conformity with the nonviolent practice of their crucified Lord, and the fellowship meal in which those relationships are celebrated.

The readings for the Second Sunday of Easter encourage us to amplify the significance of those marks, again with special significance for care of creation. The non-violent character of the community is secured in these texts, as in the Easter narrative of Mark, by the affirmation of continuity between the crucified Jesus and the resurrected Lord. While Mark provides for that continuity by having the disciples sent back to Galilee, in John’s narrative, composed significantly later and more fully developed theologically, Jesus himself appears to the disciples, first without Thomas and then with Thomas; when they see the marks of the nails in his hands and the hole in his side, they know that this is the crucified Jesus. He then addresses the fear that keeps them behind locked doors with his word of peace, breaths upon them the Holy Spirit, and commissions them by the power of the Spirit for the mission of forgiveness of sins. The continuity of the resurrected Jesus with the crucified Jesus serves to restore the community they experienced prior to his crucifixion. But with the additional acts of breathing upon them and the blessing of peace, Jesus also anticipates a transition in the community from those disciples who see the crucified and resurrected Jesus and thus believe, to those who have faith only by virtue of the presence of God as the Spirit brings the community to life in an ongoing new creation.

The encounter is intended to be understood as an eschatological moment of new creation. This set of messianic practices constitutes the means for creating community with and amongst the disciples, not just in the moment of this encounter, but enduring into the future. Going forward, the breath, the blessing of peace, and the commission will sustain the formation of communities in which Jesus is worshipped, as in the praise of Thomas, ā€œMy Lord and my God.ā€ As Raymond Brown notes, in John 20:17, it was

ā€œ. . . promised that after Jesus’ ascension God would become a Father to the disciples who would be begotten by the Spirit, and also would in a special way become the God of a people bound to him by a new covenant. The words that Thomas speaks to Jesus are the voice of this people ratifying the covenant that the Father has made in Jesus. As Hosea 2: 25 (23) promised, a people that was formerly not a people has now said, ā€œyou are my God.ā€ This confession has been combined with the baptismal profession ā€œJesus is Lord,ā€ a profession that can be made only when the Spirit has been poured out (I Corinthians 12:3)ā€ (Raymond E. Brown,Ā The Gospel According to John (XIII-XXI),Ā New York:Ā Doubleday, 1970, p.1035).

Thus the members of the community of the crucified and resurrected Lord, reconciled by the power of the Holy Spirit and empowered to similarly reconcile others, are gathered in the presence of their Creator. Brown called particular attention to this creational emphasis, as he notes, ā€œfor John this is the high point of the post-resurrectional activity of Jesus.ā€ He comments:

ā€œBefore Jesus says, ‘Receive a holy Spirit,ā€ he breathes on his disciples. The Greek verbĀ emphysan, ā€œto breath,ā€ echoes LXX of Genesis 2:7, the creation scene, where we are told: The Lord God formed man out of the dust of the earth and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life.ā€ The verb is used again in Wisdom 15:11, which rephrases the creation account: ā€œThe One who fashioned him and . . . breathed into him a living spirit.ā€ Symbolically, then, John is proclaiming that, just as in the first creation God breathed a living spirit into man, so now in the moment of the new creation Jesus breathes his own Holy Spirit into the disciples, giving them eternal lifeā€ (Brown, p. 1037).

That Yahweh the Creator is present to the community is made more explicit in the second half of the reading, in Jesus’ encounter with Thomas. As Thomas moves from disbelief to belief, he confesses his faith in Jesus as ā€œMy Lord and my God.ā€ This is, in Brown’s view,

ā€œ. . . the supreme christological pronouncement of the Fourth Gospel. In Chapter I the first disciples gave many titles to Jesus . . , and we have heard still others throughout the ministry: Rabbi, Messiah, Prophet, King of Israel, Son of God. In the post-resurrectional appearances Jesus has been hailed as the Lord by Magdalene and by the disciples as a group. But it is Thomas who makes clear that one may address Jesus in the same language in which Israel addressed Yahweh.ā€

This confession, Brown emphasizes, is not a dogmatic assertion, but rather an act of worship. ā€œIt is a response of praise to the God who has revealed Himself in Jesus . . . . Thomas speaks the doxology on behalf of the Christian communityā€ (Brown, pp. 1046-7).

Such praise, it is important to note, entails a characteristic reorientation to the creation of the Creator. As Brown notes, the peace and joy noted in John 20:20 are for John, as for Jewish thought generally, ā€œmarks of the eschatological period when God’s intervention would have brought about harmony in human life and in the world. John sees this period realized as Jesus returns to pour forth his Spirit upon menā€ (Brown, p. 1035). Appropriately, this vision is then also manifest in the first lesson for this Sunday, Acts 4:32-35: they ā€œwere of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in commonā€ (Acts 4:32). Their unity of spirit, in other words, was embodied in the economic practices that secured their well-being, in the face of their minority status within the larger society. Helpfully Ben Witherington takes care to point out that this was not a ā€œcommunism,ā€ in which everybody turns in ā€œall their assets to the church and then those assets being doled out equally to everyone.ā€ The point was rather that

ā€œ. . . no one claimed owner’s rights. No one exhibited selfishness or possessiveness. The issue was to make sure no believer fell into a state of malnourishment or homelessness or sickness . . . . Notice the sharing was done without thought of return. The ancient reciprocity conventions were no part of this practiceā€ (ā€œThe Season of Easter,ā€Ā New Proclamation Year B, 2003:Ā Ā Easter through Pentecost, pp. 17-18).

The community now found the center of their life in ā€œthe testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesusā€ (4:33) and an associated awareness of ā€œGod’s graceā€ which was fostered by the meal they shared, when ā€œthey broke bread at home and ate their food with glad and generous hearts, praising God and having the goodwill of all the peopleā€ (2:46). Their new life in Christ maintained in strong measure the sense of living fully in God’s presence previously expected by the Hebrew community in its life centered in temple worship.

The distinctive attitude towards ownership of property envisioned here indeed represents a transformed relationship to creation. It represents a vision of the world as it should be. As M. Douglas Meeks describes it in his bookĀ God the Economist,Ā this new economy is grounded securely in creation faith, as contrasted with the modern economy of capitalist society:

ā€œThe secret of property in theĀ basileiaĀ economy has to do with the relationship of those within the household. Household relationships come first, then the definition of property. In our society property is defined as the premise; then household relations must conform to requirements of property abstractly defined. Human relationships are subservient to property. The communal relationship with the Jesus movement and the primitive community of Acts 4 leads to different forms of property . . . . For the household of God the tendency of property to create domination is to be overcome inĀ oikiaĀ relationships of mutual self-giving, in which possessions are used for the realization of God’s will in the communityā€ (M. Douglas Meeks,Ā God the Economist: The Doctrine of God and Political Economy, Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1989, P. 113).

Key to this understanding, Meeks argues, is ā€œthe self-giving life of the trinitarian community of God,ā€ which provides a grounding in the theology of creation for a critique of the self as private property that is reflected in our approach to ownership of property.

ā€œGod has a claim on the creation and all creatures not as maker (labor theory of property) or owner (first occupancy), but rather as creator and liberator. At the heart of God’s act of liberating/creating is God’s suffering and self-giving. God’s work of suffering is the source of God’s claim in, that is, God’s property in creation. God brings the world into being through God’s costly struggle against the power of theĀ nihil. God has suffered for the creation and will not allow it to fall into vanity or be alienated.Ā Ā The creation is properly God’s because God’s power of righteousness makes its life fundamentally a gift of God’s grace.ā€

God’s owning, Meeks concludes, ā€œis not grounded in self-possession but rather in self-giving.Ā Ā The mode of God’s possessing is giving, not the hoarding by which human beings claim dominionā€ (Meeks, p. 114).

In the wake of Jesus’ resurrection, the followers of Jesus have become like those Hebrews of whom the Psalmist sings, ā€œHow very good and pleasant it is when kindred live together in unity!ā€(Psalm 133:1). They do indeed ā€œdwell together in unity,ā€ the blessing of ā€œlife forevermoreā€ (Psalm 133:3b).Ā Ā It is striking that a scriptural basis for a trinitarian foundation for this understanding of property and its relationship to the doctrine of creation is given in the texts assigned for this Sunday. The gospel reading, we noted, concerns the gift of the Spirit to the disciples, in which the presence of Yahweh the creator is newly communicated. And in the second lesson from 1 John 1, we encounter the notion that Christian community is fellowship ā€œwith the Father and his Son Jesus Christ,ā€ who is the ā€œatoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole worldā€ (1 John 1:3, 2:2). Congregations who confess their trinitarian faith in worship this Sunday might accordingly move readily to lay hold of the many opportunities for showing their deep gratitude for God’s suffering love in the practices of their community’s ā€œownershipā€ of property. Care of creation begins at home, where the church dwells together in unity, not only amongst themselves, but in community both with God and with all God’s creation.

Originally written by Dennis Ormseth in 2018.
dennisormseth@gmail.com