RAMBLINGS BY ELIZABETH M. MAGILL
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Workshops
  • Contact Me

WRITING FROM THE SIDE

Act 6:1-6 Do the widows want to eat or to serve?

8/1/2016

0 Comments

 
Part 1 of 3.

Acts 6:1-6
Unlike Matthew 25:31-46, Acts 6:1-6 is not at the tip of anyone’s tongue when discussing charity, although it may be a story of early church food ministry at its best—and of course at it’s worst. In the midst of adding more and more followers, a group of widows have been neglected perhaps in the rotation to serve, perhaps in receiving charitable handouts. The whole church is gathered around this challenge. New leadership is recognized and in the verse after this pericope, the church continues to grow.
 
Now during those days, when the disciples were increasing in number, the Hellenists complained against the Hebrews because their widows were being neglected in the daily distribution of food. 2 And the twelve called together the whole community of the disciples and said, “It is not right that we should neglect the word of God in order to wait on tables. 3 Therefore, friends, select from among yourselves seven men of good standing, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may appoint to this task, 4 while we, for our part, will devote ourselves to prayer and to serving the word.” 5 What they said pleased the whole community, and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit, together with Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolaus, a proselyte of Antioch. 6 They had these men stand before the apostles, who prayed and laid their hands on them. (Acts 6:1-6 NRSV).
 
More recent scholarship on this text falls into three broad categories. Feminists engage the widows themselves, and wonders if widow necessarily means poor. Post-colonial scholarship identifies this as a story about the interaction of two cultures. Reta Halteman Finger and Andrew McGowan focus on the way this text contributes to our understanding of shared meals in the early church. First I’ll provide some of the traditional critical background to Acts and to this story. Most critique suggests this is a transition story intended only to introduce Stephen and other new leaders in the church.[1]
 
According to Robert Wall in the commentary “The Acts of the Apostles” in the New Interpreter’s Bible, Acts was written by the same anonymous author Luke, and addressed to a new or immature believer, Theophilus (Wall 5), to consolidate the diverse membership of the church, to be a Christian apologetic (Wall 8) and to deepen the faith of new believers (Wall 9). It is likely that the writer (who scholars call Luke) was not present for the stories found in Luke and Acts and thus is dependent on stories that were handed down (Wall 13). Of the many theological purposes of Acts, most relevant to this project is to help believer’s to be filled with the Holy Spirit and to join this community that shares everything in common (Wall 23).
 
Acts 6 continues the image of sharing material belongings from Acts 2:42-44 (Wall 71) but addresses conflict arising out of the sharing: the widows have been neglected (Wall 112). While Wall identifies that diakonia is translated “distribution” when referring to widows, and “ministry” when referring to the apostles (Wall note 244 p111) he still accepts the traditional reading that the widows have been overlooked in the distribution of charitable handout (Wall 111). While the story is about a break-down in the equal sharing of goods he finds good news in the decision to show solidarity with a full community meeting (Wall 114). Wall defends the apostles by noting that the existing leaders cannot “preach and do bookkeeping at the same time” (Wall 115), although it is hard to see how the criteria in Acts 6:3 (“men of good standing, full of the Spirit and of wisdom”) could point to bookkeeping. Wall’s argument is that here, and in the pastoral letters, the requirements point to the Greek ideal of choosing leaders based on character rather than skills (Wall 115). It still seems to me that these requirements imply leadership more than simply keeping the books, and at least some of the seven do go on to be church leaders, more than managers of a meals program.
 
Bruce Malina and John Pilch in Social Science Commentary on the Book of Acts suggest that the purpose of Acts 6:1-6 is to introduce these new leaders, especially Stephen (Malina and Pilch 55). They note that each narrative in Acts begins with everything fine in the community, introduces a disturbance, and then neatly resolves the disturbance to ends with the restoration of “equilibrium of life, their collectivistic life story” (Malina and Pilch 10). The disturbance is created in part by the cultural differences between the civilized Hellenists and the barbarian Hebrews (Malina and Pilch 29), the Hebrews are insiders and focused on Judean customs, while the Hellenists, returned from the Jewish Diaspora, would have adopted Greek customs and language  (Malina and Pilch 56). The seven appointed new leaders are Hellenistic based on their names, starting with Stephen, who is critical to the next story in Acts; the last is Nicolaus, a foreigner (Malina and Pilch 56). Thus the story of the widows exists mostly to introduce leaders, to carry the story forward, and to show the growth of this new Christian community.
 
Acts 6:1-6 is about widows
Gail R. O’Day in The Women’s Bible Commentary focuses on the failure of the community to name women to solve the widow’s neglect.  She notes that Hellenistic women are likely to have high standing since we know that the women Paul meets in Greece are identified as leading women of their communities (O’Day 396). O’Day accepts that the story is about almsgiving (O’Day 397) but notes that Luke is reinforcing the concept that table ministry, assigned to seven men, is identified as less important than the preaching ministry of the twelve (O’Day 397). The value of the widows is further downplayed when we see that the widow Tabitha is identified as doing good works (not ministry) later in Acts, while the work of the men assisting widows in this text is identified as ministry (O’Day 399).
 
Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenza, on the other hand, is certain that this is an argument over the Eucharist. In Memory of Her explores the biblical language around service and finds that “serving at table”, found also in Acts 16:34, Luke 10:40, 12:37 and 17:8 is not giving away money but is table service at a meal, “most likely the Eucharistic ministry” and includes all the prep, serving during the meal, and clean up, which we know from Acts 2:46 was happening every day (Schussler Fiorenza 165). Schussler Fiorenza argues that to be overlooked the widows could “were not assigned their turn in table service or they were not properly served” (Schussler Fiorenza 166). She notes that it is likely that Hellenistic women would have expected to be included ‘breaking of bread’ while the Hebrews may not have allowed it (Schussler Fiorenza 166). The solution of assigning the twelve to do the diakonia of the word, and the seven to do the diakonia of the table (Schussler Fiorenza 162) adds to Luke’s earlier Martha/Mary story which also makes clear that diakonia of the table is the lesser ministry (Schussler Fiorenza 165).
 
Once the conflict is about serving rather than eating, it becomes clear that the widows who feel neglected may not be poor. Schussler Fiorenza notes that the text does not say either way (Schussler Fiorenza 165). Certainly women involved in this new church movement were not all poor, for example Mary, mother of John Mark, who was cousin to Barnabas (Col 4:10) is likely in charge of a Hellenistic house church in Jerusalem (Schussler Fiorenza 166). Her argument is that Mary would not be named if John Mark’s leadership that was most important, and Schussler Fiorenza wonders if Mary is not one of the dissatisfied widows in the story (Schussler Fiorenza 166). Thus this is a story about identifying the importance of table service, not about charitable giving, and the widows complaint is about not getting a chance to serve, rather than about whether they are given charitable resources.
 
Scott F. Spencer in “Neglected Widows” notes that it seems to be hard for scholars to stay focused on the widows themselves (Spencer 718). As we have seen in our study of food ministries, it seems to be hard to stay focused on the people in need. Spencer traces the widows throughout Luke-Acts, starting with Anna in the birth narrative (Luke 2:36-38), the widows at Nain and of Zarephath (Luke 7:11-17 and 4:25-25), the persistent widow (Luke 18:1-8), the poor widow (Luke 21:1-4, 20:27-40, 45-47), the neglected Hellenistic widows (Acts 6:1-7), and ending with Acts 9:36-43 and the supported widows at Joppa (Spencer 718). “These scenes featuring four individual widows accumulate over the course of the gospel to constitute a group of Lucan widows in the reader’s mind” (Spencer 719 italics original). He notes that while widows certainly are women whose husbands have died, biblical studies generally assume they are all also destitute and unappreciated, which fails to recognize the biblical widows who are not (Spencer 720). Still Spencer notes that Hellenistic widows, by virtue of being far from home, are cut off from family support (Spencer 728). He disagrees with Malina and Pilch that this story is neatly resolved, instead he notes that the apostles are more concerned about being distracted from preaching than about members going hungry, and they refuse to be part of the solution (Spencer 729). Spencer argues the apostles fail at the test to act as Jesus would act (Spencer 730). For Spencer this is a story of a community failing to make caring for one another a top priority. They have failed to provide food for the hungry, and then failed to let needs of people who are hungry trump the authority of the leaders.

O’Day, Gail R., “Acts” in The Women’s Bible Commentary, ed C.A. Newsom and S. H. Ringe; London SPCK; Louisville Westminster John Knox 1992 check all this 305-12.

Malina, Bruce J. and John J. Pilch, Social Science Commentary on the Book of Acts. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2008.

Schussler Fiorenza, Elisabeth, In Memory of Her A Feminist Theological Reconstructions of Christian Origins, Tenth Anniversary Edition, New York: Crossroad Publishing Company, 1994. 

Spencer, F. Scott, “Neglected Widows in Acts 6:1-7” in The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 56, no 4 Oct 1994, 715-733. 

Wall, Robert W. “The Acts of the Apostles: Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections” in The New Interpreter’s Bible Vol X, Leander Keck et al, ed. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2002. 

[1] I have not included the related arguments made by some scholars that this story must not be about widows but about an underlying dispute between the Hellenists and Hebrews. Recent Scholars, including Wall and Finger, show those arguments are unsupported, but they do not add to or take from my arguments about food ministries.
0 Comments

What's a Small Church to do about Eucharist?

9/28/2015

0 Comments

 
Picture
As we gather for the course Theology of Ministry in Small Churches, we start with the basic question: what is church? It is important that the first question is NOT about what is small, but only about what is church. And so we list some important traits of church: that it is relational, missional, focused on Jesus Christ, that it is in sacred space, it is spirit filled, it is incarnational, it is eucharistic.

Many of these terms require further discussion, but for this post I'd like to take on the challenge of what it means to say that a church is Eucharistic. Not the theological depth of the question of what is Eucharist, although that  is a discussion a church should have, but the practical question of what it means if a church says that by definition a church is Eucharistic. Specifically, in the Episcopal tradition, in the Disciples tradition, if you you must have Eucharist to be a church, does that mean that you must have an ordained priest to be actually "be" church? If you do not have a priest, and are not having Eucharist, is the gathered community no longer church? How often do you need to have Eucharist to be church? Can the Eucharist be in the form of the reserved sacrament from another parish? Can the person who blesses the sacrament be visiting clergy, and if so, what does that do to the definition of church as "relational"?

I don't believe there is a single right answer to these questions, but it is right, and necessary for small parishes to have this discussion, and decide what is the right answer for their diocese, their geographical location, and for their local community. 

For many parishes the answer is yes, we must have Eucharist, and the way we do that is through a process of local ordination. A team of parishioners together take on the role of priest, and one of the team is ordained for the purpose of blessing the sacrament. Or a local individual is identified and formed and licensed to the role of minister. Or an Elder or a committee of Elders share the role of the minister, blessing the sacrament each week. 

In other churches the answer is yes, we must have Eucharist, and we can be relational with each other, and bring in outsiders to bless the sacrament. Or that the covenant relationship with the diocese or region means that we ARE in relationship with the visiting minister or priest, simply not the same kind of relationship we have with a member of the local congregation. 

Still other parishes decide the answer is yes, and therefore raise the money necessary to pay a seminary trained minister or priest. Because the theological discussion of what is required to be church precedes the financial discussion of how to fund the Eucharist, the budget discussion is about how to meet the mission of the church, not a guilt producing plea for more money to make the budget. 

And other parishes decide that morning prayer, or, for one Northern Virginia parish I know, evening prayer, is what makes them church, that Eucharist can be once a month, or only when the Bishop visits, or quarterly, or when the congregation visits the Lutheran Church in the next town. 

What makes all of these examples into examples of vital church is the discussion that the members have about what is essential to be church. It is the wrestling with the theology, and with each other, and with the application of the theology to our real church lives that creates vitality and energy for the future.

It is easy for small churches, really for any church, to get hung up in the discussion of how get more resources, how to find volunteers, how to increase the budget, and how to get new members. But those are the discussions of clubs, not of churches. 

Churches discuss our lives in Jesus Christ, our challenges in following Jesus' way, our need for comfort, and our need to be in the world doing mission. In short, the call of the church is to discuss theology: what it is, and how to live it out, and how to support one another as we struggle to live it out. 

For your parish, is it critical to be Eucharistic? Have you talked about what that means? How do you carry that out? We'd love to hear your story.


0 Comments

Mega Church Visit 

9/20/2015

0 Comments

 
(I visited this church in 2010.)

When I first heard that my retreat group was going to visit a mega-church, I giggled. I was serving a parish with 15 parishioners in a storefront, at a church living off its endowment. Somehow, I didn't think there was going to be much for me to learn about being a parish leader by visiting a congregation with an average Sunday attendance of 10,000.

And indeed, at the staff worship on Tuesday morning, it seemed clear I was right. There were 18 of them, plus the 12 of us visiting, making  worship service twice as big as my regular Sunday worship. The five hospitality volunteers in the kitchen made up a group the same size as my church council. And the meeting room, filled with round tables and a pass through to the kitchen, was just about double the size of our worship space, where my desk sits in back corner.

After introductions and a tour of the "campus" we settled down to observe their staff meeting. It was stunning. First report, the budget. Giving was down, which could be explained by the recession, but attendance was down, too, to just less than 50% of membership. And the number of pledging units had dropped by 12%. I wrote myself a little note. Our figures, as a percentage, were a bit better than that! We'd added a few givers, and our average giving was holding steady. Our attendance is consistently a bit higher than our membership.

Then the financial officer put down his notes and talked honestly to the group. "You know, its almost like building that great endowment has hurt us. People think it is ok to live off the endowment."

Well yes, I do know that!

The small group ministry team reported next. Less than one third of the 10,000 on the roles were involved in small groups. Three years ago the figure had been 37%. There was reporting of figures for bible focused groups, social action groups, meals groups, and affinity groups like marrieds, stay-at-home moms, and others. And then the whole staff brainstormed questions and suggestions about timing and surveys and new small groups that might attract the missing majority.

Small church, of course, is its own small group, but we also had two break-out groups--a bible study on Sunday afternoons, and a worship team that met right after church. I quickly did the math, 66% of my congregation was involved in small group ministry. I wrote down a couple of the suggestions for getting a few others more involved.

And so the meeting continued, with discussions of the fair, and how to plan Lent and Easter season, and how to support one another in their ministries and how to be visible out in the community.

And it sounded just like our board meetings. We have the same problems, the same challenges, the same hopes for our future. Theirs are all big, ours are all small. But still big church can still struggle, small church can be stable. 

0 Comments

    Liz Magill

    Random comments on Church, Intentional Community, Leadership, and how we live and love together. 

    Archives

    July 2020
    October 2019
    June 2018
    May 2018
    June 2017
    January 2017
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    October 2015
    September 2015

    Categories

    All
    Abundance
    Addictions
    Bible
    Buildings
    Change
    Church Change
    Church Size
    Cohousing
    Comedy
    Conflict
    Counseling
    Difference
    Dmin Thesis
    EDS
    Food Ministries
    Hopelessness
    Leadership
    Love
    Mental Health
    Mission
    Music
    Oppression
    Sermon
    Smoking
    Suffering
    Theology
    Welcome
    Worcester Fellowship
    Worship

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Workshops
  • Contact Me