A new community blossomed after that first Christian Pentecost. Not only did 3,000 get baptized into the Body of Christ after Peter’s first sermon. They found an effective way to live the faith together — a way so appealing to outsiders that
day by day the Lord added to their number those who were being saved. (Acts 2:47, NRSV)
Those of us in shrinking congregations or declining denominations may well wonder,
How can we get that going here?
My suggestion: Invest in infrastructure.
Tall buildings need strong foundations. Cities by rivers need bridges.
To my eye that is what they did back in the second chapter of Acts. What led to that constant daily growth?
They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. (Acts 2:42, NRSV)
Four simple priorities.
They spent their time working on four specific areas. Simple, but not easy. I promised I would look at each of them in coming weeks.
Priority One: “The Apostles’ Teaching.”
They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching. That was maybe easier then, since the apostles were right there in the community.
But we aren’t at a terrible disadvantage: The Church has carried the apostles’ teaching down through the ages for us. You probably have it on your bedside table in a nice leather cover.
I want to suggest two ways churches today can do what they did in Acts, where
They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching (Acts 2:42)
First approach: teach the Bible, bite by bite.
The New Testament contains what the Church clearly saw as the apostles’ most important teachings. And from Matthew to Revelation they teach us the value of the Old Testament: the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings.
Devotion to the Apostles’ teachings was one of the strokes of genius in Calvin’s Geneva and other 16th century Reformed communities. They tossed out the lectionaries and began to preach their way through whole books of Scripture, explaining each passage in turn.
Passage by passage, book by book, the Reformers helped their congregations understand and live the biblical faith.
Disagreement with the city authorities drove Calvin into exile. Later they begged him to come back. Stepping into the pulpit, he started with the next passage from the book he had left off preaching several years before.
Pastors can do that today too.
- Imagine preaching through a book from beginning to end.
- Imagine an adult forum to discuss the text preached each week.
- Imagine providing questions for study and reflection so every small group and committee could be discussing the book while it is being preached.
- Imagine reminding everyone to read and pray the book on their own.
- Imagine getting and recommending good resources on the book for the church library.
If the leaders worked out a full court press for every book they preached through, what do you think might happen?
- Do you think people might understand each book of the Bible better?
- Would they begin to think about their own lives in terms of that book’s teaching?
- Would it maybe come up in conversation throughout the church?
When a congregation really devotes themselves to the apostles’ teaching, it has a way of reshaping their lives.
Second approach: teach the Bible, fully digested
In the Reformation era, they didn’t figure their devotion to the apostles’ teaching was complete because they taught individual books. Knowing individual passages and individual books leads naturally to bigger questions.
How do all these passages and books fit together? How can I make sense of the whole of the biblical faith?
The Reformers were not just convinced that the Bible was important. They were convinced that behind all Scripture’s diverse voices, literary forms, and cultural sources, the Bible taught a faith that actually makes sense.
So they wrote catechisms. Usually in question and answer format, the catechisms of early Protestantism led kids and grown ups through the basics.
What should a Christian actually believe? Catechisms presented the Apostles’ Creed, with line by line explanation, as a synthesis of biblical faith.
How should a Christian behave? Catechisms presented the Ten Commandments, with line by line explanation, as a synthesis of biblical ethics and morals.
How should a Christian relate to God? Catechisms presented the Lord’s Prayer, with line by line explanation, as a synthesis of how Jesus taught us to grow in intimate communion with God.
We too can teach a coherent biblical faith. If you want to know what it cam mean to engage with these core basics today, check out some of my posts on the Heidelberg Catechism.
It doesn’t have to be simplistic or legalistic. If it is, it isn’t the faith taught by the Apostles.
In fact, the fully digested biblical faith in Reformed and Lutheran catechisms is intellectually rich and aims to bring us to spiritual freedom.
We certainly need a better understanding of our faith in our Christian communities today. It isn’t just that we need it to be able to share the faith–though that is true too.
We need a solid grounding in the apostles’ teaching so that if someone does try to cross the bridge and join us, there is actually a community of people there who know how to live it.
————
Do you know a good example of a community devoting itself to the apostles’ teaching? What might your community do to move forward on this?
————
This post is the second installment in a series. To go to the beginning, click here.
A very stimulating post, as always!
I’ve always thought of the apostle’s preaching – the kerygma – a bit differently.
The crucifixion and resurrection of Christ caused the apostles to look again at scripture (the Old Testament) and see it in a whole new way. From the perspective of Christ crucified, they were able to see that the entirety of the Old Testament spoke of Christ. Thus, in this way, Christ was preached according to scripture.
So, Christ crucified becomes the hermeneutical key that unlocks a new understanding of scripture, and this becomes the center of the apostolic preaching. It is true, however, that without this key, one wouldn’t naturally see Christ in the Old Testament. Therefore, the early Church Fathers – such as St. Irenaeus of Lyon (who we just celebrated this past Sunday) – wrote summaries, such as the Rule of Faith, so that others could also unlock Christ in scripture.
It are these Rules of Faith that become baptismal confessions, and then creeds. It is my understanding that only creed agreed on by the entirety of the Church is the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, not the Apostle’s Creed. I believe this one is only a western confession, and not from the apostles?
One question I do have: why were the Reformers so harsh with the lectionary? The Church Fathers state that the lectionary readings date as far back as the 2nd century (probably from Jerusalem). It would seem, then, that they preserve a part of the apostolic preaching, or at least a tradition of instruction from the earliest days of Christianity, no?
Also, are you familiar with the work of Frances Young? She makes the argument that there are two early traditions in contemporary Christianity. The first is the tradition of instruction and catechesis (e.g., Origen’s School in Alexandria), which she argues is a continuation of the Greek form of education, known as paideia. She argues that the Alexandrian school followed the philosophical schools, and the Antiochian school followed the rhetorical schools (not sure where Calvin’s gatherings and studies would fit in). The second tradition was a continuation of ancient religion. Here she argues that, in the 4th century, Christianity took on aspects of ancient religion: “baptizing” local shrines, encouraging the veneration of martyrs and saints, receiving gifts and endowments like ancient temples, and making the eucharist and baptism into a “mystery” initiation (mystery rites). So, in other words, her argument pits the religion aspect of Christianity against the school-like legacy of Christianity. Very interesting, in light of a discussion about teaching.
Thanks Fr. Dustin. Sorry for the delay in replying.
In this passage it is not the preaching/kerygma of the Apostles, but the teaching/didache. Though of course I quite agree with your sense that the saving events of Christ’s cross and resurrection gave Christians then and now the interpretive key to both OT and NT.
Yes, of course the only truly universal Creed is the Nicene. The Apostles’ Creed is indeed a Western creed, stemming from Baptismal rites very early on. But like the Nicene, is not of direct apostolic origin. That does not stop it from embodying the ancient tradition handed down or developed organically from the Apostles’ own teaching, which is most importantly preserved in the documents of the NT.
As to the Reformers tendency to leave the lectionary behind, it is a matter of late medieval Western history. They saw the state of Christian knowledge among the populace and judged rightly that they were very ignorant of the basics. They set about to teach them the Bible, which was not being coherently or effectively taught by the Catholic Church. Worship was the primary time when such catechesis could take place, and they were convinced that they needed to preach the texts that were read in the worship service. The existing lectionaries (not unlike the Revised Common Lectionary widely used today) were very selective and made teaching the Bible coherently a difficult task.
This deep dive into Scripture, largely in the context of Reformed worship, was tremendously appealing. Historian Roland Bainton found some source from Zwingli’s Zurich saying he felt he was being pulled to attention by his hair (or some such) in his shock at hearing passages of scripture read and taught from the pulpit that, in his terms, had been hidden by the Church for a thousand years.
I’m a recent convert to Catholicism after being an active Protestant for 45 years. The catholic view of church Christianity over being bible Christianity made sense. The church is the pillar and foundation of all truth not a book. Jesus never left us a book he did leave us a church ?
Hi Mark. Thanks for your comment on this old post.
So glad for you that you have found your spiritual home in the Catholic Church.
Your comment that Jesus didn’t leave us a book but did leave us the Church is catchy, but not a good argument.
Actually he didn’t leave us at all: as he said before ascending, “Behold, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” (Matthew 28:20)
The post is part of a series in the four things that Luke mentioned as steady practices that built the new community in Acts. One of these was their devotion to the Apostles’ teaching. That teaching was on a person, Jesus, who made sense of a book, the Bible in the form of our OT, and their teaching was preserved in a book, the Bible in the form of our NT.
But they show no sense of growing on nothing but the Bible. They also had “fellowship” (the community), “breaking of the bread” (Eucharist), and “prayers” (surely both in worship and in private).
It is not a useful dichotomy to put Bible against Church. We have Church growing by proper use of the Bible, as well as proper use of other good things. If you dig into St Augustine and St Thomas Aquinas you’ll find they knew the Bible astonishingly well and based their teaching on it.
How do intellectuals, scholars , Theologians and historians from many Different tribes Come to so many different conclusions. Thank you
Hi Mark.
Scholars in different fields ask different questions and use different methodologies.
Without specifics it’s hard to say more!
Blessings,
Gary