The Life of the First Community

What impresses us most in the life of the first community is its spirit of fellowship. It is the picture of a family that meets us here. "The multitude of them that believed were of one heart and soul. And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of bread and the prayers." They called each other brother and sister. They greeted one another with a kiss. In larger or smaller groups they took frequent, if not daily, meals together. It was a fellowship of life as well as faith and worship. They cared for the poor. "Not one of them said that aught of the things which he possessed was his own. Neither was there among them any that lacked."

Some of the phrases which Luke uses in this narrative have led certain students to believe that this was a case of strict community of goods, or communism. He says: "All that believed were together, and had all things in common; and they sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all, according as any man had need" (Acts 2:44, 45). A little scrutiny will show that Luke is generalizing here from particular instances, and that there was no fixed rule. John Mark's mother, evidently a prominent member of the community, retained her home (Acts 12:12). Peter definitely tells Ananias that he was under no necessity of selling his property. What we have here is not a formal order, but a great spiritual impulse, a movement of spontaneous love and devotion which impelled men to share what they had with all that were in need. Probably the feeling that the coming of the Lord was near at hand had its influence also. One man is noted especially, because he sold a piece of ground and gave over the proceeds. It was this that was the undoing of two other disciples. They saw the esteem and honor that came to Barnabas through his generous deed and coveted it for themselves. So they sold their property too. They could not, however, bear to give over all the proceeds. They wanted to have the applause for generosity and yet keep some of the money. Their sudden and tragic end made a deep impression.

Whatever there was of communism here disappeared very soon, and we do not hear of it elsewhere. But the churches elsewhere followed this first example in the care of the poor. Everywhere this same spirit of love appeared. Back of the need of the individual believer there stood always the resources of the whole community. At Jerusalem there seemed to be special occasion for such help. Part of it may have been due to the fact that the disciples that came from Galilee would have lost their regular means of support. At any rate, it is one of Paul's special tasks later on to send gifts to the mother church.

Of formal services of worship we read nothing. The disciples participated in the worship of the temple. Their own gatherings were in their homes. We read that they "continued steadfastly in the apostles' teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of bread and the prayers." This suggests the nature of their gatherings. The teaching would concern the words and deeds of Jesus, including the vision of the risen Lord, and the exposition of Old Testament passages which foretold all this. Then, as they were moved by the Spirit, there would be prayer and exhortation.

All the worship of the early church must be thought of as wholly free and spontaneous. These disciples were Jews, and so accustomed to the worship of the synagogue. That worship was informal and democratic, giving opportunity for any one to speak who had a message, and laying special stress upon the reading of Scriptures and teaching. Besides this, there was in the early church the belief in the gift of the Spirit as belonging to all disciples. It was not office or education that determined whether one should speak or pray. but the impulse of the Spirit.

The words "breaking of bread" have a religious meaning here, as is indicated by their connection with prayers. The reference is to the Lord's Supper, as in Acts 20:7, 11. How the Lord's Supper was celebrated we do not know. It seems that here, as later at Corinth (1 Cor 11:20-22), the Lord's Supper was a part of a common meal which was taken together. Apparently, the disciples met together for such meals quite frequently. The exact form of ceremony we cannot tell. If we follow the suggestion of Paul's words written but a score of years later (1 Cor 11:23-25), the leader at some place in the meal took a loaf of bread and broke it, repeating the words: "The Lord Jesus in the night in which he was betrayed took bread; and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, This is my body, which is for you: this do in remembrance of me." The broken bread was then distributed to be eaten by those present. Then the leader would take a cup of wine and add: "In like manner also the cup, after supper, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood: this do, as often as ye drink it, in remembrance of me." Perhaps at first they used the simpler words of the earliest gospel: with the bread, "Take ye: this is my body"; and with the wine, "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many."

Besides this simple service, one other form was in use from the beginning, that of baptism. It marked the reception of new members into the fellowship. The simple form used at first was into the name, or upon the name, of Jesus. It was not till later that the church used the form in Matt 28:19, "In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." The baptism into the name of Jesus meant that the believer confessed himself as belonging to the risen Lord.

How was the early church organized? Was it episcopalian or congregational? Such questions do not apply at this period. There was no formal organization at all. There was a company of disciples, and they had their leaders, as any such company will have. The leaders in this case were very naturally the twelve. The later church has usually called them simply the apostles, but there were other apostles besides them. Strictly speaking, the apostles were the men who gave their time wholly to missionary work; as such they were the founders of Christian communities. Paul is one of them, though he was not one of the twelve. In 1 Cor 15:5, 7, he mentions first the twelve and then the apostles as though these two did not mean the same. Barnabas too is an apostle (Acts 14:14). The twelve were, of course, of the number of the apostles, for Jesus had chosen them not only to be with him but to carry his message.

This seems to have been the distinct function of the twelve at Jerusalem. They were witnesses, teachers. When one was to be selected in Judas's place, the requirement is put forward that he is to be one of those who had been associated with Jesus and so could be a witness (Acts 1:21, 22). But the apostles did not choose him. It was the church that came together and decided as. to the choice by means of lot. The twelve, of course, exercised other leadership besides that of teaching. They had supervision at first of the poor relief, but it was the church, and not the twelve, that selected the men to take their place in this. They were to give themselves to prayer and teaching (Acts 6:4). From their association with Jesus and selection by him, the twelve would naturally be the leaders and spokesmen of the community in general matters.

Besides the twelve there were "the seven," who were chosen to look after the daily meals for the poor. Perhaps this daily ministration, for which the phrase "serve tables" is also used, may have had to do with the arranging of the daily common meals for the whole company. The seven are not called deacons, and were perhaps only a provisional committee. One other name becomes more and more prominent as time passes—James, the brother of Jesus. The brothers of Jesus had not believed on him from the first. Indeed, they even considered him beside himself. Paul tells us that Jesus appeared to his brother James after the resurrection, and the brothers of Jesus are found in the early church almost from the beginning. Their relation to Jesus would naturally win for them special regard. With James, however, there must have been in addition a strong gift of leadership. Later church writers speak of him as the first bishop of Jerusalem, but we read nothing of any bishop at Jerusalem or of the election of James to this or any other office.

It has been a common conception that these first disciples after the resurrection met together and organized the Christian Church. By some it has been held that supreme authority was given to Peter or to the twelve, or that during the days before his ascension Jesus gave to his disciples a divine plan of organization. What has just been noted shows nothing of this kind. Strictly speaking, there was no separate church at first, only a community of disciples, who felt themselves one, but still counted themselves a part of the Jewish people. The twelve were not church officials, and neither Peter alone nor they all together exercised any supreme authority. They were teachers and witnesses because they had been with Jesus. When a step of importance had to be taken, the body of disciples took it, as in filling Judas's place or appointing the seven. There was no plan of bishops and elders and deacons which they knew of as a law for the church. What Paul says later describes the even simpler life of these first days: "Ye are the body of Christ, and severally members thereof. And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, second prophets, thirdly teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, divers kinds of tongues" (1 Cor 12:28). This is not a list of offices to be found in every church. These disciples formed a brotherhood, one body of Christ with one Spirit in them all, and in the life of that brotherhood they all took part each as he was led by this Spirit. The careful organization of the church was to come later.

Directions for Reading and Study

Read Acts 1:15-26; 2:41-47; 4:23 to 5:11; 6:1-6.