Observers can be
assured that hierarchical structures, which, in that day, were thoroughly
wrapped up in the very competition for honor that is rejected by the church of
the crucified Messiah, is nowhere in sight in this treatment of the
qualifications for those that aspire to the position of overseer.
Lest it be presumed
that an unwarranted step is being here taken by linking “overseer” with the
meal assembly that was the regular setting of the gathering of the church in
its earliest days, and lest it be deemed that too much weight is being put on
actions centered upon the meal as an effective counter-cultural witness, it is
possible to bolster this position by acknowledging the letter’s movement
directly from “overseer” to “deacon.”
In verse eight of the
third chapter Paul writes “Deacons likewise must be dignified, not two-faced,
not given to excessive drinking, not greedy for gain” (1 Timothy 3:8).
This allusion to drinking cannot be looked upon as a general principle, plucked
out of mid-air as an ideal. Rather, it must be understood to be
concretely connected to the eating and drinking of the church at its meal
table. That meal table, to be sure, in its arrangement and in the way it
was conducted, as it was rooted in the meal culture that was foundational for
society in general, and as it held to the witness of the meal tables of Jesus
and the way in which He conducted Himself and spoke at those tables, was a
powerful image of the kingdom that the Christians proclaimed, and of the God
that was being honored and worshiped at the gatherings of their association.
Along with this, it
is incumbent to add to an investigation of the letter a perusal of the
introduction of the “deacon” to the church. To do so it is necessary to
look to the book of Acts. Now, it is highly unlikely that Timothy had
access to the book of Acts as the church has it today, but it is certainly
plausible that Timothy would have been familiar with the story that described
the advent of the position. Since deacons are referenced, it is a given
that the recipient of the letter did not need to have the position explained to
him, being well aware of the “how” and the “why” of their function within the
church.
So what was that
function? Why was the position in existence? In the sixth chapter
of Acts Luke writes that “in those days,” which were some of the very earliest
days of the church, “when the disciples were growing in number, a complaint
arose on the part of the Greek-speaking Jews against the native Hebraic Jews”
(6:1a). Here, one encounters the all-too-familiar divide between Jew and
Gentile within the church, though it is somewhat masked by the fact that both
sides of this divide were said to be Jews.
What was the source
of this particular division? Division between the Gentiles that were Jews
by conversion and those that were ethnic and national Jews came about “because
their widows were being overlooked in the daily distribution of food” (Acts 6:1b).
This food-related divide is probably best illustrated by the experience that
Paul recounts from his time in Antioch. This record is found in
Galatians, where Paul writes “when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his
face, because he has clearly done wrong. Until certain people came from
James, he had been eating with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he
stopped doing this and separated himself because he was afraid of those who
were pro-circumcision” (Galatians 2:11-12). What Paul describes in
Antioch, which is from a time period after the events recorded here in chapter
six of Acts, first played itself out within the church at an intra-Jew level
before playing itself out at an intra-church (between Jew and Gentile, and between
Gentile and Gentile) level.
No comments:
Post a Comment