Pentecost - May 23, 2010
Readings:
Genesis 11:1-12
Acts 2:1-21
John 14: 8-17, 25-27
Pentecost is about power and pronouns. It is one writer's (Luke's) account of the series of events that occurred after Jesus Resurrection that transformed the outlook of his followers with a consciousness of an inward power which was attributed to the coming of the Holy Spirit. It may not be an exaggeration to describe this event as celebrating the continuing presence of Jesus in their lives. The pronouns? Who are the THEY - the persons not otherwise clearly identified in the account? Does, for example, the dramatic appearance of the tongues of fire indicate a special even unique experience shared only among the disciples? If this is the case, the power hereby experienced and by implication granted to this group provides them and their successors with a status that is integral and inseparable to the very structure of the Body of Christ. Or, are THEY an indication that there was already in existence at the time of Pentecost (the Festival of Weeks) a sizeable community which had been affected by the earthly Jesus and were already meeting in such a fashion as would enable them to support each other and even plan for their future. If this be the case, and I think that Peter's sermon points in this direction - then their task was to put in a new perspective the history of Israel with which they were already as Jews thoroughly familiar.1
With this clearly Jewish context in mind let me now turn to the more familiar events from this account in Acts - the speaking in tongues. There is no question that several of those present in the room showed a response that is familiar throughout the history of religious experience, namely the speaking in tongues - a vocal outburst which is not a language form but an emotional response similar to crying or laughing. It is a very genuine expression which often means that the person involved has reached a level of integration in which what s/he knows and feels comes together in a dynamic and powerful way. The fact that Luke or the tradition on which he is dependent more than a half century later associates the speaking in tongues with the presence of the Holy Spirit is a bit misleading in that he suggests that speaking in tongues was the essential manifestation of the Holy Spirit. Paul argues in I Corinthians 12 (a letter written well before Acts came into print so to speak) that charismata in themselves were unedifying especially to those who were not part of the community. However that may be, the mention of that fact that the Spirit made it possible to speak to those who were from the nations is a fascinating theological insert which says a great deal about this Pentecost community. This linguistic aside requires a reworking of the Old Testament in a fashion to that employed by Peter in his sermon.
Our first reading was the final chapter in the account of prehistory as accounted in Genesis 1 -11. In the events leading up to the story of the Tower of Babel, we have in chapter 10, the Table of Nations which puts forward an account of the nations known to the writer. Israel is not listed being buried among the nay nations who none the less came through the struggles related including the story and Cain and Abel, the great Flood because the spirit of God which moved upon the water of creation was never absent. However, with the attempt to construct the great Tower which would allow the builders to attain the heights of God, God chose to no longer relate to his creation - the removal of his life sustaining spirit symbolized by the division of humankind into languages which caused division to appear with no source of common communication. The writer of this history is called the Jahwist because his name for God was Jahweh. In chapter 12 he introduces the call to Abraham and his great promise that his seed shall be given dominion over all the earth which in effect corresponds to that of the nations which had been dispersed after the destruction of Babel.2
The implication of the coming of the Spirit in Acts on Pentecost is the reversal of the dispersion of Babel. Once again the Spirit of God would be present in the nations - thus his followers were heard to speak not in tongues but in the languages of the day. I think this as a meaning beyond that of simply becoming missionaries able to speak to locals. The theological claim is that the spirit which hovered above the waters, guided the nations which arose, disappeared in the babble of scattered languages is now with us.
The reason for Peter's sermon is precisely to recount the history of Israel in a way which shows that the promise made to Abraham has seed fulfilled and that in the Risen Lord continually present in the Body of Christ his desire for justice, peace and mercy is inescapable and is able to be proclaimed in every language. This is, however, only the beginning of the story. Now that we have the language what are we to say and by implication do? The initial result as the great missionary enterprise which ensured that the good news of Jesus was spread to much of the world. Today we are both the benefactors as well as the victims of this magnificent effort. The world is a better place to the extent that the demands for justice, peace and mercy which were integrated into this effort helped transform the legal system upon which our civilization is based.
However the extent to which missionary success has been essentially inseparable from the vast colonial enterprise which has been one of the principle activities of western countries, we have to reconsider how or perhaps, if the message of Jesus present in the Holy Spirit has been synonymous with the western political agenda. The Christian community in its many forms has little experience in divorcing its message from the flags flown by its representatives. An obvious example is the difficulty western nations have in accepting the notion that Muslims or, Buddhist or Hindu to name a few can be trusted to become loyal citizens of our democracy viz should be allowed to flourish in a Christian context.
It is also wise to remember that none of the major religions just named has any real experience of world-wide multi-cultural presence and their adherents are struggling to discover what it means to be a Muslim or Hindu in a strange cultural context which expresses a sense of secularity regarding the function of all religions. What it means to be on equal footing with several other forms of religious expression is indeed a strange and unnerving experience. The Christian contribution to this state of affairs could be our recognition that in a secular political environment a common good is a matter of negotiation and compromise not religiously imposed. The commitment of the Holy Spirit to justice, peace and mercy can be a shared experience which drives our participation and enables us to encourage others to do the same.
The question posed by Pentecost to us today is whether we need to re-examine our understanding of the call to mission as traditionally understood. Are we prepared to trust the Spirit of the Living Christ as was known and we have come to know sufficiently to speak out on this matter? The justification that without such preaching, the world would be denied the opportunity for salvation in terms of another place beyond time and space seems to me to be of little meaning and is a denial of that Spirit that hovered above the deep and was heard again speaking the languages of the everyday world.
1. GHC Macgregor, THE INTERPRETERS BIBLE, Vol 9 New York, 1953, pp36ff.
2. Gerhard Von Rad, OLD TESTAMENT THEOLOGY. Vol 1, Edinborough, 1962, pp162f
