New Thoughts: (09/05/22-09/06/22)
It is something of an unanswerable question, but the framing of this
instruction, in particular its repeated emphasis on all the
brethren, does make me wonder how the receiving of these letters
generally proceeded. These were early days for the Thessalonian church,
so it doesn’t seem likely there were specific processes in place, but
how did it flow? Would the letter not have been carried by those
well-known to them, perhaps Timothy among them? It’s not like there
would be question as to the authenticity of the epistle, is it? Or
perhaps it is. It seems that almost as fast as churches took root,
deceivers came to try and infiltrate and corrupt the work. After all,
much easier to get them before they matured. This was not some new
approach that Lenin and Marx came up with. It has ever been thus.
Corrupt them before they know better, and they never will.
But still, I expect this letter went to them in the hands of one they
knew. As such, I would not expect that there was need for, say, the
elders to first review the text and discern its legitimacy before
sharing it with the body. So, why this specific call to ensure that one
and all had heard its contents? I should think the return of Timothy,
or whoever it was who carried the message to them, would be rather
newsworthy, such that the next meeting of the church would be as fully
attended as could be managed. That said, Thessalonica was a bustling
port city, and while news travels fast, it might not have traveled fast
enough. Then, too, many in the church were of the poorer classes, the
slaves and servants, who could not simply come because they wished to,
but would need to have leave from their masters. That, it seems to me,
is the most likely reason some might have missed the first reading of
the letter.
As to those who bore the letter, Paul’s practice certainly seems to
have been to send his writings in the hands of those known and trusted
both to him and to his recipients. He would leave no room for doubts as
to the letter’s origin, taking care, particularly in later letters, to
sign them personally to remove all doubt. You know me. You know my
signature. This is truly my message. That would be more needful in
coming years, it seems. But I see no reason to suppose that there would
be questions as to what they had received. The question was whether all
who were of that church could be there to hear it read at the first.
And so, provision is made to ensure that if they missed that reading,
there would be care taken to ensure they had opportunity to do so
later. And observe, as well, that the call is to have it read to them.
This, too, says something about the population of that body. Not all
could read it for themselves, nor could they have afforded a scribe to
come read it for them. But God so arranges His children as to ensure
there are those among them who can read, who can interpret and apply,
who can perform all those duties needful for the well-being of His
family. He is a good Father.
Being a good Father, He sees to the fraternal health of His family as
well. While this could be viewed as little more than a fairly formulaic
salutation, particularly in the call to share a holy kiss with one
another, there is that stress upon all. It is not an
emphasis drawn from the word order in this case, but from the repeating
of that clause. See to it that all are included.
Each and every member of this body ought, without exclusion, to receive
and impart this holy kiss to one another. We are family, knit together
by God Himself. We are children of one holy Father, set into this new
family unit to demonstrate His parentage, and to be support one to
another. We cannot do that by drawing into exclusive subdivisions of
acquaintance.
Of course, there are going to be those to whom we are more naturally
drawn, and those relationships where that close connection or affinity
is felt in both directions. There are always going to be those we more
readily view as friends and close companions, and those with whom we are
less familiar. But we cannot allow that to develop into a habit of
ignoring all but the select few we account as close. That, it seems to
me, is the reason for this emphasis. Greet all. Read
this letter to all. Let none be forgotten, none be
neglected. Don’t you dare start implementing social tiers or any such
thing in the body. Elders, be careful that none begin to form a church
within the church. These are things that destroy fellowship, and this
fellowship is utterly necessary to the life of the church, the life of
that body of which Christ is the head.
There’s a call here to be attentive to those around us, those who are
family together with us. That can be challenging as numbers increase,
and new faces come in. I don’t suppose that’s anything new that has
arisen in our age. It might be more prevalent, given the greater
mobility of society in general. But again, this was a port city. I
should think it almost inevitable that some, perhaps many among this
body would find it needful to ship out on occasion, and others would be
coming in from those ships that came to port. I don’t know that crews
were necessarily permanent to the ship in that era. There may have been
some who worked passage between points, but then departed to start life
in the new location. That, after all, was one of the means by which
Paul himself traveled. My point is simply that while this is family, we
have to remain cognizant that it is a family with a changing makeup.
I could take the example of family gatherings with my wife’s side. She
came of a large family, surprisingly large, to be honest. And with two
generations having followed, its numbers have increased exponentially.
Coming as I do from a much smaller family, this is somewhat
overwhelming. Even when we get together more regularly, it still seems
like coming to a different group of people every time. There always
seem to be additions, new spouses added or new children. There are also
those who have moved away, or ceased coming to these events for whatever
reason, and are perhaps notable for their absence. But when family
numbers in the hundreds, it’s hard to know each one by face, let alone
name. Is this not our situation in the church? The family gets so
large. It’s hard to keep names and faces on file in our memories, so
when somebody is absent, it is not always evident to us.
Now, in our church we do practice a moment of greeting in the course of
service, but even then, time restrictions and the chaotic nature of
everybody looking for hands to shake, and the constraints of pews and
aisles tend to lead to the same folks greeting pretty much the same
folks week by week. And face it, we probably seek out those more
familiar to us to greet. After all, for many of us, this is the only
time we see each other, and within the setting of a church service,
there are minimal opportunities to really connect.
The early church had their shared meals as well, those events we
describe as agape love feasts. These were
more than just a chance to grab some food. They were a part of the
liturgy in their own way. But they were opportunities to connect, to
deepen acquaintance with one another, and perhaps, if we were mindful of
such things, to meet new brothers and sisters not previously known to
us. Kudos to Pastor Mathews as he has been seeking to incorporate
opportunities of this sort within the structure of our own church, and
encouraging us to seek out new people to say hello to as opportunity
arises. But it’s a struggle for many of us. We do like our comfortable
circle of friends, and time is short. Honestly, I think it has as much
to do with our own need for connection. We feel the need to be
acknowledged, to have those who would seek us out to talk to us, as well
as feeling the call to seek out and talk to others. And one can only do
so much.
Thus, we have this urging to inclusion. And the use of the term
brethren gives cause to seek that inclusiveness. Some of our more
modern translations are careful to expand this to brothers and sisters,
and that’s fine. It would have been understood in that sense of fullest
inclusion anyway. But I think the more critical thread here is the
inclusion. Don’t segregate. I don’t care what the lines are which
divide. Blur them. Erase them. We know that when dealing with
children we need to push back against the tendency to cliquishness, but
it’s not just the children. Somehow, as adults, we suppose that concern
no longer applies, and we can draw into our close circle of friends.
Not so. For one, that can only lead to stagnation. But more, we are all
family. We need to be concerned for all who
are in the house, or should be in the house. Who is missing this week?
Who has been missing now for several weeks? Is anybody aware of them?
Do we know what’s going on with them?
This is a huge challenge. Having served as elder for a season, I know
just how great a challenge it can be. There are so many who are little
more than faces to us; so many who come, sit in the pew, and are gone
before any contact can really be made, and it continues thus week upon
week. And then, one week, those faces are missing. But in the sea of
such faces, it may go unnoticed. In many cases, it may go unnoticed
until they send word, perhaps, that they are not coming back because
they never felt welcome. Well, we must recognize that this is a two-way
street, and if one doesn’t seek to connect the chances of connecting are
pretty slim. But we must also shoulder the responsibility for our own
part.
Do you see the antidote here? Greet one another with this holy kiss,
this embrace and familial welcome. This assures that at least somebody
in the family knows each other member of the family. Given our
propensity for sitting in the same place each week, or at least in close
proximity to the same place, this form of greeting would likely have you
connecting with the same subset of individuals week by week. Now there
is opportunity to note change. Say, where is so and so this week? But
what to do with that question? Well, don’t leave it to the elders.
They’re vastly outnumbered. You have noted the absence, you make the
contact. Let that brother or sister know that they are noticed, cared
about. Find out what’s going on with them. Connect!
See to it that each and every member of this body is thus greeted, thus
known to another, thus cared about by another. We can’t know
everybody. We can’t keep track of everybody. There’s a limit to our
capacity as individuals. But if the forms of our greeting are such as
encourage this full inclusion of every member, then the network of
individuals expands that capacity. You may remember that old
advertising campaign where she told two friends, and they told two
friends, and … Well, there’s a valid point there, isn’t there? If you
take it upon yourself to remain connected with some number of members in
this body, and they have other connections, and those have their
connections, then the whole body remains connected. But if you neglect
those connections, if you leave it as passing acquaintance, the whole
body suffers. See to it that it does not. Take responsibility for your
connections, and encourage one another to do likewise, and then, the
whole body grows, each and every member, without exclusion.
It’s easy to think of this care for greeting as something that was
needful to the early church because of the adverse conditions in which
they were planted. Thessalonica, for example, had the issue of a
jealous Jewish community stirring up opposition. Asia Minor had more
issue with competing religions seeking to pervert and subsume this new
Christian sect. Then, too, in short order, official persecution by the
Roman government would be a huge problem for the body. So, yes, they
needed to draw close to one another, to know one another, to care for
one another. But not so in our day, or so we suppose.
We’ve had it fairly easy. Our greatest concern has generally been the
habit of church-hopping, as any least disagreement or offense might lead
families to depart for some other local church that better meets their
felt needs. The commitment is not as total because the options are
greater. That is truly unfortunate. In many ways, it seems to me the
community was better served when there was but one church to choose.
But this is no longer the case, and so be it. Doctrinal differences may
give us cause to seek out a body whose understanding of doctrine more
closely aligns with our own, and that’s understandable enough. But
there’s something to be said for hearing out differing views, so long as
those views remain within bounds of orthodoxy. We are, after all,
capable of being wrong. That, too, is a reason for this familial
arrangement. We have the support of family around us, not merely to
weather the storms of life, but also to keep us true to the true Gospel.
That is the concern we have expressed in the second clause here. Make
sure everybody hears this letter. Don’t let anybody miss out on the
instruction it contains. Look. At this stage, particularly, the church
did not have a huge body of written instruction to which one could turn,
and as I noted, not all in the body could have read it even if it were
there. Yes, they had access to the Old Testament, but the New Testament
was still being written. This letter was still being written, and it
was among the earliest of Paul’s epistles. I rather doubt they had even
Mark’s gospel as yet, and Luke’s would come much later, John’s later
still. As for Matthew’s account, that was geared more toward the Jewish
community, and may well have remained fairly local to Jerusalem in early
days. I am, of course, speculating on this. I don’t have details of
how these writings were produced, copied, and distributed.
What I do have is this: God knits us together as family, and sets us
in these family units for cause. The precise nature of those family
units may have changed over the years – has changed, rather obviously.
But the family structure of them has not. The purpose of that structure
has not. It is at least twofold. At the forefront, we, as family, are
called to reflect our parentage. Our parentage is One; One holy Father
of whom we are all adopted as sons, and sons of that sort which share
not mere genetic connection, but essential connection,
as our renewed and reformed character takes on more and more of His
perfect character. Secondly, as family, we are called to be mutual
support one to another. We are family, and as such, have cause to care
for each member, from the greatest to the least. We are all, as it
were, parents one to another. If we see one misbehaving, it is our duty
to lovingly bring correction. If we see one lagging, it is our duty to
lovingly encourage. If one among us is hurting, it is our familial duty
to comfort. Our loving concern for one another should be
part of that essential character, demonstrating our true lineage as
being of our Father, Who art in heaven. And as we give faithful
expression to His character, the world will see and know. We, like
creation, will give evidence of His being and His nature. And is that
not a glorious reason to take care that we indeed practice what is being
preached here?
Before I leave these verses, I would consider the nature of this
greeting Paul urges. This is, in fact, far more than the handshake we
might give to one another in greeting. We might incline to write it off
as a cultural thing, a form of social interaction familiar enough in
Mediterranean regions, perhaps, but not really something we do here. It
begins with the simple mention of greeting. This isn’t a wave as we
pass by, nor even a handshake to acknowledge another. It is a full-on
embrace, a warm welcome. It’s going to take time. In a different
setting, one expects there would be asking after each other’s welfare,
family, and so on. But even this much is somewhat beyond our
comfortable norms. If we meet an old friend for lunch, it is not all
that likely we will share a hug or an embrace before taking our seats.
And we think this same polite distancing should apply in the church.
But here’s the thing. Move yourself into a family setting, into, let us
say, Thanksgiving dinner, or perhaps a reunion. Here are kinfolk we
haven’t seen for some time, but seeing them again awakens a whole
catalog of memories in us – hopefully happy memories. And what
happens? We hug. We pat one another on the back. Perhaps we even go
so far as to kiss the cheek, particularly if they are of an older
generation. You know as well as I that we will still kiss our parents,
if not, perhaps, our brothers or sisters. But even there, at least in
some families, I suspect that hugs and kisses apply.
And that takes us to the reason for this particular form of greeting in
the Church. It’s not a Mediterranean thing. It’s a family thing. We
are family. And being family, we ought really to act like it. Here is
my brother, my sister! It’s been a week since I’ve seen you. Come
here. Let me get a good look at you. It’s so good to see you again.
Things are well? How’re the kids? There is so much more opportunity
for real connection here because there is a real connection here. But
it’s beyond the physical act of embrace, and maybe that European style
kiss to the one cheek and then the other. That’s all well and good.
But it’s the connection, the warmth of interaction that is our concern
here. There is nothing sensual about it, certainly. That’s hardly the
point. One or the other of our articles suggested that in the Church
setting, man kissed man, and woman kissed woman, to ensure that things
remained chaste. But in practice, there is nothing unchaste about
this. Is there a question of chastity when you hug or kiss your
children? I should hope not. Yes, I know that sadly there are
exceptions to this, but let them not define the rule.
This is family connection. It is a recognition of our shared heritage
in Christ. It is also something of a marker for equal rank, this form
of greeting. The superior you might kiss on the hand, as we see the
Catholic practice in kissing the bishop’s ring, or what have you. In
earlier cultures, you might kiss the foot to indicate submission. None
of that here. This is a kiss of equals. It honors your brother or
sister as having the same standing as yourself. We are one. We are
one, and this warm greeting seeks to inculcate that very sort of
intimate fellowship which is a necessary and defining attribute of the
Church. The M&S observes that this was particularly needful in the
early church, but honestly, how is it any less needful today? Perhaps
the events of the last few years have reawakened us to our need for such
fellowship, such intimate connection with our fellow believers.
Perhaps I have grown more sensitive to this of late, as the sense of
isolation, working from home as I have for the last decade and more,
takes hold. It becomes more challenging, I think, with work happening
across time zones, leaving smaller windows of time in which to interact
with coworkers. In a fast-paced world, it gets harder still, as our
coworkers are busy with their own challenges just as we are. So,
communications falter. Questions get harder to ask, and answers harder
to find. And we turn inward, and that inward turn often leaves us
feeling vulnerable, amplifying our negative thoughts and giving no
support to the positive. Where, then, shall we regain our equilibrium?
We need one another.
Societally, things are hard as well. The Christian is not the norm, as
once was the case. Irreligion is on the rise, and often vehement and
downright angry in its rejection, particularly, of that Christianity
which used to be a defining feature of society, whether we consider
believers or unbelievers. Similar to that remote work setting, the lack
of feedback from those of like faith can leave us in a weakened state.
We may begin to assimilate the culture around us into our worldview
without even noticing. Honestly, it’s hard work not to do so. This
fellowship, this intimate connection with our brothers and sisters,
then, is a most needful thing for our strength and health.
It is also, to make a final point, a beautiful display of what the
Church is intended to be. The M&S observes how this greeting was
designed to reflect the ‘perfect reconciliation and
concord among the members of the Church’. Mind you, it cannot
reflect that where these things do not in fact hold. But let me suggest
something to you. If you find that your church is not a place of
perfect reconciliation and concord, perhaps a renewed focus on this sort
of greeting, this sort of intentional, concerted effort in seeing that
all are included might be the antidote and thus become the reflection it
was designed to be. You may have heard the phrase, “fake
it ‘til you make it.” There’s something to that. It’s no good
saying this just isn’t us, and then letting things fall into disunity.
It’s no good pleading my introvert ways as an excuse not to reach out.
It’s no good retreating to our small circle of close associates. Doing
so, seems to me, only assures that the circle will grow smaller still in
time. How much better to expand the circle, to reach outward rather
than inward. How much more it will reflect our Father should we put
into practice that godly instruction to consider others more important
than ourselves. How wonderful if we should cease from worrying about
getting our own needs met, and instead consider how we might be God’s
instrument to meet the need of our brother today.
Kennedy famously advised us that we should not ask what our country can
do for us, but rather, what we can do for our country. That sounds
almost romantic and too idealistic for the real world in our day. But
at the time, it wasn’t really such a stretch, nor should it be. But our
country, dear ones, is the church. Our country is the kingdom of God.
And here, that advice is far more applicable, far less unrealistic. Ask
not what your church can do for you, but what you can do for your
church. Honestly, take that mindset, and I dare say you will find the
church meeting your needs, your felt needs and your real needs, far more
fully than it ever did when your needs were your primary concern.
So, there it is. Embrace one another. See that nobody is neglected.
Get to truly know your coreligionists. That doesn’t mean we need to
have cult-like adherence to a rigid set of beliefs from which there can
be no deviation. I mean, yes, there are those core matters of the faith
apart from which there is no faith, and no basis for that sort of
concord that is advised. There is, again, a reason Paul wants this
letter read to that same all-inclusive brethren as we are talking about
with the greeting. We all need instruction. We all need establishing
in the fundamental tenets of faith. We all need tuning, to rid
ourselves of those societal accretions that we either carried in from
our past, or perhaps have picked up as we continue this new walk. We
are clean, once for all, in the blood of Christ, but our feet still need
the occasional touch-up, don’t they? Our hands may need the occasional
scrub. This is part of our purpose as community; to be those who aid
one another with that purification of sanctification. We care for one
another.
Does this define your church? If asked what you were about, would you
be able to honestly say that you care for one another? Would you be
able to honestly say that you even know one another?
If a newcomer pointed to some random member of the body and asked you
who they were, could you name them? Could you say what town they lived
in, how many kids they have, what they do for a living, how long they’ve
been a believer? And if you can’t, then the next question has got
to be, what are you going to do about it?
Let me say outright that this is a personal challenge from me to me. I
am assuredly one inclined to seek out the same few familiar faces week
by week. To intentionally seek out those I don’t know is something
incredibly hard for me. And, if I’m going to be painfully honest, there
are those with whom I must confess I actively seek not to have contact.
I don’t say this as something positive, assuredly. It is a place where
I need work, where I need to be working. These are family. That
includes those I know reasonably well, those I know and kind of wish I
didn’t, and those I don’t know at all. There’s that family reunion
thing again. You go there, and even with a relatively small family such
as my own, there will be those you can’t place, perhaps a grand-uncle,
or what have you, rarely seen through the years. Where does he fit in?
Well, you’ll never know if you don’t ask. And you might just find that
this stranger in the family is a most interesting individual. You may
not, but that’s not really the point. The point is they are family, and
as family, deserving of our care and our acknowledgement. They are kin,
and that matters. How much more, in the family of God.
Father, I hear the challenge. I hear it, and I confess, I incline
to do exactly what I have said can’t be done, and insist it’s just not
who I am. But then, I am not who I am, or at least, my past nature no
longer defines me. With Paul, I should be saying that it is no longer
I that lives, but Christ living in me. And this is certainly who You
are. Help me, then, my God, to become intentional about seeking to
connect with this family You have set me in. If I have been feeling
alienated (and You know full well that I have been), surely I have
myself to blame. Help me, then, to correct my course, to shake off my
introvert ways and reach out to connect with this beautiful family, to
get to know more than the select few, and to embrace them
wholeheartedly. Let it begin with me, Father, that I may better
reflect You.
