PAPER I – Ecclesial Authority in the Book of Acts
Course: ACTS OF THE APOSTLES - Winter 2011
Intstructor: Prof. Rod Remin
The risen Christ "promises that the apostles will become the 'witnesses' to his resurrection". The apostles thereafter understand their work in this light, and "Paul's work also is characterised as that of witnessing".[1] The apostles, including Paul, are at the heart of the Church and are persistently referred to as authorities regarding the correct practice / teaching of the faith; that is clear. However, the apostles practice their authority 'collegially' or collectively, so to speak, in that they collaborate with the elders of the Jerusalem Church which apparently included Mary the mother of Jesus, and other women in some consultative capacity. Acts illustrates that whatever power the Jewish religious authorities had after the resurrection of Jesus "religious authority over Israel – considered God's people – [had] passed to the apostles. They rule over the twelve tribes of Israel."[2] Luke further establishes the deacons as "prophets who carry the mission [of the Church] beyond Jerusalem" under the authority of the apostles[3] who affirmed this diaconal and missionary ministry again in conjunction with the wider community of believers.
Acts 1: 1-2; Jesus chose the apostles through the guidance of the Holy Spirit; Acts 1: 12-26; a congregation of 120, including Mary the mother of Jesus and other women, is gathered. Peter leads the group and they collectively select two potential candidates to be considered for election to the group of 12 apostles thus replacing Judas. The congregation prayed, drew lots, and elected Matthias.
After his death and resurrection Jesus instructs the apostles through the Holy Spirit in all things including the selection of the new apostle Matthias who is to return to fullness the number of apostles that Jesus himself had chosen; twelve. "Through this instruction the 'apostles' become the official transmitters of the gospel that Jesus himself had preached. So Luke stresses the Spirit-guided apostolic character of the Christian gospel."[4] Only Luke states that Jesus 'named apostles' in a manner that "limits the 'apostles' to the Twelve, and the Twelve to the apostles. This limitation [governs] a number of details in the Lucan story as the sequel in Acts unfolds".[5] The title of apostle is not clearly traced to Jesus himself "but represents rather an important title that developed in the early pre-Lucan and pre-Pauline church in Judea, where it was used of a group of Christian emissaries greater than the Twelve."[6]
Fitzmyer, acknowledges the practice in the early Church of assigning a particular authority to the role of the apostles in guiding the community of faith. In my reading of Acts 1: 1-2; Acts 1: 12-26 I see the apostles holding an authority that has them presiding over the wider community of believers in a communitarian manner, i.e. what would most likely have been somewhat common to the contemporary cultural practices of the Jewish people in that region. That there is a large gathering of 120 persons of significance to the local Church is notable in that there appears to be what today might be referred to as a 'consultative model' upheld in the guiding of the community. Further, that Mary the mother of Jesus and other women are included in this company of 120 is highly noteworthy indicating perhaps that their contributions were of significance to the discernment process undertaken by the apostles and other Church leaders.
4: 32-35; all live in unity, the apostles holding tacit authority over the Christian community.
The apostles, having been personal witnesses of Jesus resurrected from the dead stand to the Christian community as forceful testifiers to the fact that Jesus is risen.[7] Believers in turn brought all their wealth and goods to be lain "at the feet of the apostles" to be distributed to all to support and sustain all according to their need.[8] Clearly the apostles have a role of at least tacitly accepted leadership within the community and a trust held by the common believer that allows for a common acceptance of the apparent servant leadership practiced by the apostles.
Every community needs leadership and Jesus clearly chose the disciples to provide that guidance to his followers to come in the future. Jesus' directive to Peter, "Feed my lambs; Feed my sheep" as well as Jesus' directing the apostles at the last supper to provide servant leadership to the Church indicate that it was Jesus' intent that they lead (Jn. 13:14); that Peter was to be the leader of the apostles is to be easily inferred from the Gospels (John 21; Mt. 16:18). Most Christian congregation are modeled on this pattern to some degree or other either implicitly or explicitly.
5:12; the apostles are one in heart as they work miracles in the service of God's people.
It appears that the apostles are those whom Jesus leaves with the power to work miracles amongst those in need, and this naturally results in a particular respect being given the apostles that was distinct within the community. Further, there appears in 4:5 mention of 'leaders, elders, and scribes' in the community who rank as three 'classes' of community member supporting the Church and the ministry of the apostles.[9]
That servant leadership is the model for how the Christian community should be guided is clear from Jesus' actions and words at the Last Supper. The apostles appear to be the only figures in the Jerusalem community who have been infused with gifts of miracle working; certainly Jesus' choice of the apostles to be the sole workers of such acts of power would have given their role in the wider Church a certain weight of authority and it was on their authority in a number of cases that others were sent out to preach and teach what was considered orthodox Christian belief and practice, i.e. Paul's meeting with Peter regarding preaching to the Gentiles and the controversy at Antioch where Peter's support was considered necessary for there to be a final resolution to conflict.
6:1-7; the apostles summoned a gathering to direct the disciples to elect deacons. The apostles would continue to devote themselves to prayer and the "service of the Word".
The apostles, 'the Twelve', "are presented as having authority to summon the community, to counsel action, and to determine criteria for those to be selected" as deacons.[10] The apostles are designated to preside over Christian forms of cult and to bear witness in a manner 'set apart' from the rest of the community, a special ministry of sorts within the community.[11]
Today pastors are more involved in their congregational ministries than what seems to be presented as normative in 6:1-7 as regards the activities of the apostles within the community. Monastic communities today seem to follow the above model more explicitly, especially Orders like the Carthusians (O.Cart.) and other eremitic Orders like the Camaldolese Benedictines (O.S.B. Cam.) where lay brothers provide for the material supports necessary to the hermit priests who live a strict solitary life of prayer and study along the lines of the ancient practices of the Desert Fathers and Mothers.
9:26-30; the disciples in Jerusalem are afraid to meet Paul, having only heard of him as a persecutor of the Church, so Barnabas takes Paul to meet the apostles. Paul thereafter began preaching with the apostles in Jerusalem.
After meeting Peter through the aid of Barnabas, Paul is permitted to preach in Jerusalem after being accepted by the other apostles and disciples.[12] It seems here that Paul is accepted as a Christian and a leader in the Church only after being declared so by the words and public appearance of Peter and other Church leaders alongside Paul, at least initially. If a generalized authority of the apostles were enough to gain Paul an accepted place in the Jerusalem Church Peter would surely have not had need of being named in association with Paul.
10:9-16; Peter has the authority to teach something contrary to the 'norms' held by Jews prior to the coming of Jesus in the form of a letting go of dietary laws and the mixing of Jews with gentiles. Peter's 'new teaching' was based upon the revelation he received in a dream regarding the ritual cleanness of all things made clean by God, in conjunction with the revelation received by Cornelius that he should send to meet with Peter who was then resident at a place miraculously revealed to Cornelius. Peter's authority seems to have been given by Jesus, then in turn recognized by the apostles, and successively accepted by the wider body of believers. 10:34-35; Peter has the authority to state that "God has no favourites but He accepts any who fear Him" and believers in Jesus seem to accept such an 'innovation' unquestioningly when Peter unites his testimony to the corroborating vision of Cornelius and then an outpouring of the Holy Spirit when Peter gives account of these extraordinary events to the Jewish Christian believers at Jerusalem.
Peter spoke with an authority that was testified to be a movement of the Holy Spirit, in matters that would have been considered religious innovations to the Jewish Christian community of Jerusalem, i.e. the relaxation of dietary laws and prohibition from mingling with non-Jews.[13] In this particular case one might consider Peter's experience to have been a 'private revelation' that would not necessarily be applicable to the Church as a whole. Yet, his insistence that the vision occurred three times, and had corroborating evidence in the events relating to Cornelius and the consequent outpouring of the Spirit on the Jewish congregation as a confirmation of Peter's interpretation of these dreams and events gives his new teaching the weight of authentic Divine revelation and therefore orthodoxy. Peter's authoritative role in the Church is here supported by the common experience of a wide range of believers in the community, what might today be referred to as the Sensus Fidelium, or 'Sense of the Faithful'.
11:1-18; Peter's testimony regarding God's revelation to him concerning food and gentiles converting to the faith seems to be regarded as 'binding' by Jewish Christ followers.
"Words coming from [Peter, as] the leader of Jewish Christians of Jerusalem are enough to put an end to all further criticism, especially since Peter has shown how the authority of God has been involved."[14]
15:1-2; controversy at Antioch takes Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem to consult the apostles and elders; 15:3-12; the apostles and elders "with the whole Church" chose delegates to send to Antioch with an apostolic letter; the letter is from the "apostles and elders, … brothers" to the believers in Antioch, and claims authority for the apostles over and above those "acting without any authority" bestowed upon them by the apostles.
These passages infer a difference being made between the Church as a wider body, and the ministry specific to the apostles and presbyters, in this particular matter in the search for an authoritative or definitive declaration of what should be considered the 'orthodox' approach to circumcision.[15]
15:28; "it has been decided by the Holy Spirit and by ourselves not to impose on you any burden…".
"The Spirit guided Church of Jerusalem passes on its instructive decision to its daughter Churches… about no circumcision and no need to observe the Mosaic law." [16] The Church of Jerusalem clearly has primacy of place in terms of her teaching authority apparently in light of the presence there of Peter in addition to other apostles, and 'pillars' of the Church, like James the brother of Jesus.
19: 13-17; Paul had the spiritual authority, in Jesus' power, to cast out demons but certain others (Jewish exorcists) did not.
The superior spiritual authority of Jesus and Paul over and above that of Jewish exorcists is made clear here by the demon's recognition of Jesus and respect for Paul.[17] As stated above, the apostles were those of the Jerusalem Church whom Scripture testifies had the power to work miracles which in turn would have most likely given them a unique degree of spiritual authority within the community of believers. That Paul also bears this hallmark of authentic Divinely derived authority, an authority to work miracles on an equal footing with that of the Twelve, seems likely to have given an authority to his words and actions that clearly outstripped that of the non-Christian Jewish leaders with whom followers of the Way were having interaction. In the fight for souls Paul is here evidenced to be the spiritual leader with power and what made him different from other Jewish religious authorities was his worship of Jesus as savior / redeemer.
[1] Gaventa, Beverly Roberts. 'Acts of the Apostles' in NIDB, vol. 1. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2006. P. 45.
[2] Johnson, Luke Timothy. 'Book of Luke-Acts' in ABD, vol. 4. Toronto: Doubleday, 1992. P. 415.
[3] Johnson, 416.
[4] Fitzmyer, Joseph A. Acts of the Apostles, ABC, vol. 31. New York: Doubleday, 1998. P. 196.
[5] Fitzmyer, 196.
[6] Fitzmyer, 197.
[7] Fitzymer, 313.
[8] Fitzmyer, 314.
[9] Fitzmyer, 328.
[10] Fitzmyer, 348.
[11] Fitzmyer, 349.
[12] Fitzmyer, 440.
[13] Fitzmyer, 466.
[14] Fitzmyer, 472.
[15] Fitzmyer, 541.
[16] Fitzmyer, 566.
[17] Fitzmyer, 650.