James R. Gorman
I learned the names of all the Apostles about a year ago, thanks to song by Brian Serchio. And since learning them, I've been intrigued by the slight difference in the lists as they are reported by the several authors of the New Testament.
The list here in the book of Acts is identical to the one in Luke (which should be no surprise since the author of the book of Luke is also the author of the book of Acts). But the list is slightly different from the lists in Matthew and Mark. And John's Gospel does not have a complete list.
Across all of the lists there is agreement on the following names: Peter (of course) Andrew, Philip, Nathaniel (who is also named Bartholomew), Judas Iscariot (of course), James and John, sons of Zebedee, Thomas the Twin (the one who doubts). Then there's Matthew the tax collector, the other James, Simon the Cananean (sometimes called the Zealot). And a guy named Thaddeus (or who is called Jude in some of the lists).
The lists of the Apostles in the book of Acts is interesting in that while all the other lists are almost in the same order, the list in Acts is drastically out of order. Some scholars have wondered whether or not some Apostles had been demoted somehow.
Then again, maybe they're just thinking too much. My guess is that when the secretary of the meeting took the attendance, these guys were just sitting in a different order. You know, when they passed the attendance sheet around. . . .
A closer look at the names of the Apostles is revealing. Most are Jewish names. James is really Jacob. Andrew is Andreas. Simon is Shimon like Shimon Peres.
But at least two of the names are Greek in origin. Philip certainly is. Peter's original name was also Simon but you remember that he was given the name Peter by Jesus because it was a play on the Greek word for rock and from which we get the word petroleum and petrified. It is interesting to note that while Jesus' original tongue was a dialect of Hebrew called Aramaic, he makes this play on the word Petros in Greek. Did Jesus and the disciples speak Greek? Certainly they all knew enough Greek to get the joke.
This is a small detail here, but it is important in the larger story of these first two chapters of the book of the Acts of the Apostles. For next Sunday is Pentecost, and we will hear the grand story of all the Jews who come from so many different cultures and lands and skin colors all to one place, where they will hear the Gospel as if they all spoke the same tongue. For they knew then what seems more compellingly true now, that we are bitterly divided according to race and language and skin color. And we just don't know what to do about these natural barriers around us.
We sometimes think that we have invented the problem of multiculturalism and that it is only a modern challenge for the Church. But in a close reading of the Gospels and all of the New Testament we see the obvious, that this was a profound challenge for the early church as well. Indeed it is a challenge deeply embedded in all of the Scriptures, Old and New Testament alike.
The clash of cultures shows up in the genealogy of Jesus, where Ruth shows up to remind us that part of Jesus' own ancestry is Moabite, which is a non-Jewish culture from the other side of the river Jordan. We read later in the book of Acts that the Greek widows were discriminated against in the daily distribution of food. We read the shocking story of the conversion of an Ethiopian by Philip as recorded in Acts chapter 8. The Ethiopian says, "Well, there's some water here, what would prevent me from being baptized?" "Well, nothing I guess," says Philip.
The divisions in what we would come to call race and ethnicity and language were an issue and a stumbling block even then. In Peter's speech in this morning's reading, he tells of what happened to Judas Iscariot and that Judas fell into a plot of land called "Alkaldama" which is an Aramaic word, but Peter finds it necessary to translate the word for his listeners as if some of his listeners did not speak Aramaic. When Peter quotes from the book of Psalms, he quotes from the Septuagint, which is the Greek form of the Old Testament translated years before Christ's birth.
What's going on here?
The issue of accommodating new cultures and new languages and new customs was an issue from the very beginning of the Church. And the early church dealt with it with some sensitivity. For they understood that giving in to the racial and ethnic divisions that consumed their world would be an essential contradiction of the Gospel of their Lord.
But I'm sure that this program of accommodation to new cultures was resisted. I can just see the old traditionalists rolling their eyes as Peter halts in the midst of his speech to translate a word that they all know. He's doing this for the "new people" who don't speak the language Jesus spoke. These Greeks, who never belonged here to begin with. These Greeks, who just don't understand all of the subtleties and sub-texts that language provides.
All of a sudden, even before the great Pentecost event that would bring together all the races and languages and tongues, even before the sending of the Holy Spirit that unites the community and ignores all of its built in boundaries and barriers, even before this powerful event, Peter has begun to make adjustments in the way he preaches and teaches. He can no longer assume that everyone will understand what he has to say. He has to carefully keep everyone on board and talking with one another about this Jesus who came to save us all without regard to our skin color or language or ethnicity.
I sometimes worry that I might be one of those old traditionalists; irritated that Peter is trying to include people who I'd just as soon not accommodate. "Peter," I might want to say, "don't translate for them. Make them learn the language that Jesus spoke if they want to follow him."
This is a profound issue for our contemporary church and it is an issue I don't think I work hard enough at, if I'm honest. Including those who don't speak the language of faith is not an easy thing.
I'm amazed that the Serbian Orthodox Church in Yugoslavia has not come out to condemn the ethnic cleansing in Kosovo. Maybe they have, but I have not heard of it. This Orthodox church, which so treasures their direct connection to the Apostles themselves, ought to get the essential insight into the Gospel that they represented. I wish that they could say to Milosevic that the first Apostles had to deal with ethnic mixtures, and they did so by making accommodations in their life in order for the new people to find a place in their midst. I wish the Primate of the Serbian Orthodox church could state clearly that ethnic cleansing is a crime against our Lord. And our Lord has no patience with those who cannot find ways of crossing the very barriers that he died to destroy.
I love reading the book of the Acts of the Apostles because it is just so honest about what it means to be a community of disciples of our Lord Jesus Christ and how easy it is to deny him in our living.
It is said that the United States in just a few decades will no longer be a majority of European background folks. We will be a profoundly mixed people from a variety of ethnic backgrounds, nations, tongues and races. Then it might be most important to become a truly apostolic church. Ready to reach beyond the boundaries in our common life.