REFLECTION FIVE: ONE IN CHRIST
For just as the body is one and has many members, and
all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ.
(1 Corinthians 12:12: )
Paul shows a profound concern for unity among the community of faith,
which he expresses in terms of a Christocentric relationship. Paul's concern
is for the unity of the young church. The flip-side of a concern for unity
is, of course, disunity, division or opposition. Paul faced considerable
opposition to his mission and work. This was from Jews, who regarded him
as an apostate troublemaker and from the Jerusalem-based, Jewish Christians,
who advocated a nomistically oriented perspective and practice. Gay and
lesbian Christians are also rejected, in much the same way, by nomistic
Christians of their own time. It is to such groups and opinions that Paul
addresses the proper evangelical question of unity in Christ, lest the
self-righteous ones set themselves up in ghettoes of exclusion through
the creation of "insiders" and "outsiders."
In claiming Paul's Christological basis for unity and inclusivity,
as an authoritative theology of confrontation with the church, gay and
lesbian Christians confront the church in the same way that Paul confronted
the Jerusalem leaders in his day. For Paul, that confrontations was within
the context of a struggle over primacy within the Gentile churches. For
gay and lesbian Christians the struggle is for a rightful place within
the church, even to participate in its leadership. As in Paul's time, that
struggle is to define and maintain the truth of the gospel and the unity
of the church grounded in that gospel truth, for the purpose of developing
organisation among the churches.
It is this understanding that took Paul to the Jerusalem Conference
of apostles (Gal.2:1-1); convinced him to take up a collection for the
church in Jerusalem (Rom.15:26-27); brought him to censure Peter and Barnabas
in Antioch (Gal.2:11-14) and lead him to pronounce a curse on "Judaisers"
in Galatia (Gal.1:7-9) and on the "other gospel" in Corinth (2 Cor.11:4).
It is this understanding that leads me to write this work and to outline
Paul's concern for unity as an inclusive model for Christian diversity
and unity.
Paul's concern for unity derives directly from his belief in one
God, one Lord and one Body which is Christ. The unity of God is basic Pauline
theology (1 Thess.1:9; Gal.3:20; Rom.3:30; Eph.4:6; 1 Cor.8:4, 6, 11:12,
15:28) and was also basic to Judaism as expressed in the Shema (Deut. 6:3ff.).
Unity was also fundamental to the Stoics and the middle Platonists, who
held all gods ultimately to be aspects of the One. Unity was
the desired social expression of faith. This belief underscores Paul's
christology that we are one in Christ.
Paul's frequent use of "Christos", as his most characteristic
designation for Jesus, carries the definitive Christological meaning that
Jesus is the one whose death and resurrection brings eschatological salvation.
The Messianic significance of the name and title, 'Christ', was intended
by Paul and understood by his readers as such. In this, Paul stands united
with the Palestinian communities, in preaching Christ, the Messiah, the
crucified and resurrected One. This usage was known in Antioch prior to
Paul's conversion, and was preached by him in his missionary work, probably
as recorded in Acts.
For Paul, "the unity of the church was given to it once and for all
by God's justifying act of grace in Christ (Rom.5:17-21; 2 Cor.5:14)."
This understanding is an essential core of Paul's preaching, in which the
kerygma, as the word about Jesus Christ and not the teaching of Jesus Christ,
links with his understanding of himself as an apostle, one who is sent
to preach the gospel. His focus is upon the saving nature of the Christ
event, comprehended in terms of the salvic meaning of the death and resurrection
of Christ. It is the truth of the Gospel that gives the basis if unity
for Paul’s concerns that the church proceed as one body.
Paul characterised this new preaching as a "stumbling block to Jews
and a folly to Gentiles" (1 Cor.1:22). Thus, in another place he can write:
For I am not ashamed of the gospel; it is the power of God
for salvation to everyone who has faith, to the Jew first and also to the
Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed through faith for
faith; as it is written, "The one who is righteous will live by faith.
(Romans 1:16-17)
Here, Paul points to the new age that is uncovered through faith, in
which the Gospel is the power of God for salvation to everyone who has
faith. This gospel is an inclusive one, of Jew and Gentile alike, and Paul
claims a direct link for his gospel with the one that went out from Jerusalem
and quoted by him in 1 Cor.15:3-5, as belonging to all the apostles. It
is seen as one Gospel, yet, in reading Paul's Letters, there emerges a
consistent concern for unity in Christ, that suggests that there is more
than one gospel (Gal.1:7; 2 Cor.11:4) and against which Paul struggles
to establish acceptance of his decidedly different gospel. What made his
gospel a stumbling block for Jews, was the understanding of the Crucified
One as Messiah. Paul, himself, and his concepts of freedom from the Law,
and of justification by faith, were a stumbling block for his Jewish Christian
opponents. Paul's understanding of the gospel, as concerning a radically
new and decisive event, in which God's power effected salvation in Christ,
placed him in direct conflict with the apostles based in Jerusalem.
The circumstances in Acts 15:6ff., cast the dispute as between Jewish
Christians who insist on adherence to circumcision and the Law, for the
new, Gentile converts, on the one hand, and the liberal attitudes and practices
of Paul and Barnabas and those whose mission was among the Gentiles, on
the other. The Conference produced a compromise solution that allowed Paul
to continue with the agreement of the Jerusalem community, under the following
concession:
"we should write to them (the Gentile Christians) to abstain only
from things polluted by idols and from fornication and from whatever has
been strangled and from blood. For in every city, for generations past,
Moses has had those who proclaim him, for he has been read aloud every
sabbath in the synagogues." (Acts 15:20-21)
It is significant in relation to questions of unity-in-diversity,
and of authority, to note the operation of compromise, here. It is important
to note that two fields of influence emerged from the Jerusalem Conference,
that of Paul and Barnabas, among the Gentiles, and that of James, Cephas
and John, in Jerusalem. Each recognised the importance of the other's ministry
and operative domain - or, at least, this is what Paul would like his readers
to understand.
Thus in Galatians we read,
when James and Cephas and John, who were acknowledged pillars,
recognised the grace that had been given to me, they gave to Barnabas and
me the right hand of fellowship, agreeing that we should go to the Gentiles
and they to the circumcised. (Gal.2:9.)
While there is not specific reference to the apostleship of the Jerusalem
leaders and of Paul and Barnabas, clearly Paul understood the Conference
affirming his apostolic authority (recognised the grace that had been given
to me) and validating his gospel. It is also apparent that the wording
of Acts 15:21 assumes that the Paul's Gentile converts are to be treated
in much the same way as God-fearers were within the broader setting of
Judaism. The two accounts that we have of the Conference outcome, hold
divergent opinions regarding that outcome. Nevertheless, a compromise was
seen to be working.
The unity of the church is existentially and demonstratively summed
up in Paul's gathering of the collection for the Jerusalem church, among
the Gentile churches. As Beker points out, the act of making a collection
symbolises the unity of the church and the indebtedness that the Gentile
churches have to the Jerusalem community, as a sort of thank offering to
the Jewish origin of the Christian faith. Yet it was more than this for
the Gentile communities, for it was a demonstration of the unity of the
churches. Through alms, the Gentile churches showed compassion and unity
with the Jewish Christians. The political advantage to Paul through the
collection is that he can be seen to be working for both Gentiles (as apostle)
and for Jewish churches (as helper of the poor). This is clearly the point
of Galatians 2:9-10. Paul took both the collection and affirmation
of his apostolic mission as serious outcomes of the compromise agreement.
Despite the compromise, Paul still encountered opposition. The opposition
to Paul encountered in Galatians suggests that the Jerusalem accord was
not maintained, or at least it had not solved the problems with more intolerant
persons. It would seem that Paul's claim to apostleship was not taken seriously.
(Sound familiar!?) A party of "Judaisers" succeeded in countering
Paul's teaching and subverting his gospel, in Galatia. Paul's apostleship
was disputed and probably ridiculed (drawing inference from Gal.1:1 and
1:12.) and demands were won, imposing circumcision, Jewish observances
of days, and other legal prescriptions, upon the Gentile Christians.
The main thrust of Galatians concerns Paul's vindication of his gospel
through his claim as an apostle, whose authority comes through a revelation
of the Risen Christ, and God, who raised Jesus from the dead. Interestingly,
this gives Paul's apostleship an eschatological origin. Paul also links
his conversion experience with his commission, as apostle to the Gentiles,
as one and the same revelation of Jesus Christ. Paul's opponents deny his
apostolic authority on two main grounds. Firstly, that he did not see Jesus
in the flesh, and did not receive a direct commission from Him, as did
the apostles in Jerusalem, and especially Peter. This, in effect, denies
Paul's charismatic election or the validity of his Damascus road experience
as entry into apostleship. Secondly, they regarded Paul's refusal to live
off the resources of the church, to be a sign that he is not an apostle.
In this they see Paul's actions as being contrary to the dominical instructions
mentioned in Mark 6:8, Matt.10:10 and Lk.9:3.
The teaching of Galatians 3:28, that there is no longer Jew or Greek,
there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for
all of you are one in Christ Jesus, asserts Paul's gospel over that of
his Judaising opponents. The call for unity in Christ being concerned with
countering the nomistic demands of those who were still concerned that
Paul was causing the Jews of the Diaspora to deny their specific Jewishness.
Paul dismisses marks of distinction as a proper concern and proclaims
a gospel of freedom in Christ. Just as circumcision and strict adherence
to the Law are inappropriate distinctions for the new community in Christ,
so are the distinctions claimed for Christ's apostles. Paul neither wishes
to create a new law regulating apostles, nor does he wish to deny following
the Law to those who are on that path;
for neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is anything;
but a new creation is everything! As for those who will follow this rule
-- peace be upon them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God. (Gal. 6:15-16
)
Thus it is Paul's central Christology and the soteriology based upon
that Christology, that both sets him apart from his opponents and forms
his understanding of Christian unity. It is by dying with Christ that one
obtains new life in the new creation. It is by being a member of the body
of Christ that one belongs to the redeemed community, and that membership
is through faith alone. In other words, it is by faith that one is "initiated"
or incorporated in Christ, as symbolised and actualised in Baptism. (Rom.6:3-8;
1 Cor.15:29) In this way all baptised people of faith share the status
of Christ. Righteousness is associated with this act of incorporation
through faith rather than by any acts that preceed of follow upon it.
Paul's multiple correspondences with the church at Corinth indicate
that Paul's authority as an apostle was under attack there, too. It would
appear that, from the lack of any issue over circumcision, Paul's opponents
in Corinth were of the mediating party at the Jerusalem Conference." Their
concern was primarily that of his authority as an apostle. It may well
be that after the Conference, a revisionist attitude sought to bring the
Corinthian church under closer control of Jerusalem, by way of counter-mission.
As this would incur "Judaising", Paul again writes several letters, to
recoup or regroup his church.
Hence, when Paul defends his conversion, his call as apostle to the
Gentiles and his insistence upon justification by faith, alone, he is defending
his teaching regarding unity in Christ. Conversely, when stressing unity,
Paul is implicitly relating his Christological view of salvation, that
is now won in Christ and not the Law. Thus Paul's concern for unity is
firmly established in his concern that the people remain faithful to the
gospel that he preaches, in order to keep the faith that he has preached,
in which incorporation in Christ is the key element.
Paul's motif of unity connects conceptually with other motifs, such
as the motif of oneness (Gal.3:28; Rom.15:6; Phil.1:27; 2:2; 1 Cor.6:17;
12:13); the motif of the "one" and "the many" (2 Cor.5:15; Rom.5:12ff.);
the motif of participation in Christ, as "you in Christ- Christ in you"
(Rom.6:1-5; 8:1, 10; Gal.2:20). As Paul responds to living situations within
the church community, he variously employs these motifs, with others, to
make his case. For example, in Galatians 3:28b, "for all of you are one
in Christ Jesus", Paul combines the imagery of oneness with that of "the
one and the many" as well as with that of being "in Christ." In this Pauline
doctrine celebrates diversity!
Being "in Christ" is the meeting place of God with human beings.
The theological phrase, "in Christ," refers to an existential attachment
to God in Christ through faith, in which the person is a radical, new creation
(2 Cor.5:17). In this way it also symbolises the unity of all members of
the church, as a sign of the equality, as an expression of oneness. Upon
this rests the true evangelism of Paul.
In 1Cor.12:27; "Now you are the body of Christ and individually
members of it", Paul's use of metaphor shifts to an ontological reality.
A similar ontological notification is made in 1 Cor.6:15a; "Do you not
know that your bodies are members of Christ?" Here the body motif (a motif
also use by Livius, II 32; Plato, State, 46c-d; Josephus,
Bell.Jud.
4:VIII:406) is used to invoke participation or incorporation in Christ,
in which those addressed are individual "bodies" that make up the unit
that is Christ, The Body. In both cases, the stock "body analogy" of the
ancient world, that is usually addressed, conservatively, to the status
quo, is applied to the radical unity shared by those who have faith in
Christ, in order to guarantee its health and cohesion.
It is interesting to note that, in so far as Paul applies that metaphor
to members of the church or to those "in Christ" and not the body politic
of Rome (1 Cor.12:27; Rom. 12:4-5), Paul inverts a metaphor that he has
already adapted, and perhaps even subverted, and applied to Christ, "The
Body" (1 Cor.6:15; 1 Cor 10:17). Thus, those in Christ, are the body of
Christ. Their unity is a given reality for Paul and it seems incongruous
to suggest division by way of class, life-style, gender or ethnic origin.
This is the point of 1 Cor. 6: 9-11, that being in Christ removes previous
marks of distinction. Being in Christ constitutes a new beginning, within
the wholeness that is Christ's body.
The unity of the church is thus
grounded in the redemptive act of
the one Lord of the church. Thus Paul asks the evangelical questions,
"Is
Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you?' (1Cor.1:13); and he
answers,
"one has died for all; therefore all have died." (2 Cor.5:14). And
thus,
Paul never calls for faith in the church or exhorts Christians to
become
the church or "body of Christ." The body of Christ is a given reality
in
Christ. (1Cor.12:12-27; Rom.12:4-5). " By use of the body motif, Paul
allows for diversity of Christian expression, also. Unity does not mean
a conforming sameness, but it does insist on the unifying activity of
consideration
and care for each other (1Cor. 11:33; 12:25) and the oneness of love
(1Cor. 13:1-8). Unity is via the Spirit and is expressed as unity in
Christ:
For in the one Spirit we were all baptised into one body - Jews or
Greeks, slaves or free - and we were all made to drink of the one Spirit.
Indeed, the body does not consist of one member but many. (1Cor.12:13-14)
As for factions, Paul believes that they are necessary to determine
those which are approved (1Cor.11:17ff.). Again, Paul's criteria for discernment
is unity in Christ, with care for "weaker" members by way of constraint
and consideration. This concern for mutuality is developed in Philippians
2:2, (make my joy complete: be of the same mind, having the same love,
being in full accord and of one mind ), which brings the imperative, ontological
understanding to include the idea of unity of mind. Paul also expresses
this element of mutuality in 1Corinthians 12: 9, 11, where he speaks in
terms of the "same spirit". In 1Cor.1: 10, Paul's appeal is to mutuality
and unity in judgement, and in 1Cor.12: 25 & Rom.1: 16; 13:5, Paul
stresses mutuality and unity as aspects of care and humility: "that
there may be no dissension within the body, but the members may have the
same care for one another"
(1Cor.12:25). In this way Paul emphasises
relational values that build up the body. Such values are an expression
of the love the Christ has for those caught up in Him. They point to a
practical way of living in response to the love of Christ.
Gay and lesbian Christians are caught up in the same love of God
in Christ through faith. Through baptism they are made part of the Body
of Christ. Those others who surround themselves in a ghetto of exclusion
and homophobic prejudice do an injustice to their fellows. They disrupt
and cause dissension in the Body and deny the inclusive, evangelical voice
of Paul, the Evangelist and Apostle of the Gospel.
wla 6/98
© This article is adapted from an essay by W. L. Anderson and is
published here by Tehomot Publications, Port Willunga, South Australia,
2004.
The other articles in this series are:
|
