THE ABUNDANT FLOCK

 Sermon preached by the Rev. Michael Anderson Bullock

[Acts 2:14a, 36-41; 1Peter 1:17-23; Luke  24:13-35]

I remember running a Bible Study group, much like the one we have here at St. Philip’s, where the scriptures used for the upcoming Sunday’s worship are carefully looked at and discussed.  It was this time of year, spring.  Liturgically, the upcoming Sunday was the Fourth Sunday of Easter: “Good Shepherd Sunday”.  I remember vividly one of the class participants reading the lesson from Acts, and coming across the description of the first group of baptized, Holy Spirit-filled-members of the Jesus Movement and how they oriented their lives around what St. Luke identifies as “the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, the breaking of bread, and the prayers”.[1] 

Now I trust that line (the one I just mentioned) rings a bell with you.  It should, given that it is a key part of our baptismal vows.[2]  But I think I am on secure ground in saying that the next part of St. Luke’s description of how our spiritual forebears expressed their faith publicly might give us pause.  Specifically, the outstanding characteristic St. Luke mentions tells us that these infant Christians held “all things in common”.  Moreover, St Luke further described that these folks “would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need.”[3]  It was at this point that Frank, a wonderfully crusty, old character out of the pages of a Southern novel, perked up and said loudly, “That’s Communism!”

Aside from being an uncharacteristic outburst from an otherwise cuddly-bear-of-a-man, Frank’s assessment was not discussed among us, much less debated; and I suspect that his sudden evaluation of this scripture is shared by many, if not most of us here.  Because we are too polite or too disinterested to echo Frank’s observation, we, nonetheless, tend quietly to dismiss this scriptural account as too primitive or too unrealistic.  And of course, we don’t want to mix politics with religion! 

I didn’t mix them then, and I won’t mix them now: Save to say that Vice President J. D. Vance’s papal protest notwithstanding (that the Bishop of Rome ought to be “careful” with this theology).  Yet, here is my point: Unless and until we are clear about the theology of this scene and passage, we otherwise will miss a life-changing reference for our life together in Christ.  Let me step back a bit and get a running start to make my case.

The tenth chapter of John’s gospel finds Jesus trying to communicate with his followers about such a theological point.  Curiously, the Lord seemingly offers a parable about entering the “sheepfold by the gate”: that if anyone tries to hop the fence or otherwise sneak in, that person is a thief or a bandit.  Jesus then follows up with an expanded description of the role of the sheepfold’s gatekeeper.  Later on in the tenth chapter, as Jesus continues to attempt to convey his point, he makes it clear that he is the personification of the “gate” and what a “good shepherd” is all about.  As the authentic shepherd of the sheep, the flock knows his voice and they follow where he leads.  Yet, in stark contrast, the sheep exhibit “stranger danger” when imposters attempt to take charge of the flock.  They don’t recognize his voice. 

Good stuff, right?  But what does it mean? 

St. John tells us that our question is the question the disciples had.  “… they did not understand” Jesus’ metaphor and what he was trying to say to them -- too often neither do we.  So, like any committed teacher, Jesus gave it another try, more direct this time, saying slowly and with emphasis: “I am the gate for the sheep … Whoever enters by me will be saved, and will come in and go out and find pasture.”  And finally the essential point: “I came that [the flock] may have life and have it abundantly.”[4]

So, what does the keeper of the sheepfold gate have to do with “abundant life”?  And what might this gospel metaphor have to do with those baby Christians in our Acts reading and their “unrealistic” behavior of sharing “all things in common”?

In the context of shepherding, the gate is the place where sheep enter the sheepfold at night for protection from predators.  The flock is not on its own.  Yet, the gate is also the way the sheep are led out to pasture during the day to flourish and develop.  In the ancient practice of shepherding, if necessary, the shepherd would literally be the gate: that is, physically lie down on the ground, placing his body across the sheepfold opening; explicitly demonstrating an “over my dead body” warning to any and all the fence jumpers and predatory interlopers. 

Having just gone through the events of Holy Week and still now in the midst of Eastertide, the theological content to this image should be clear to us.  The most simple and direct expression of the Paschal mystery you and I have shared is: God-in-Christ has done for us what we cannot do for ourselves.  This is Cross and Resurrection, the demonstration that God’s love is stronger than fear of death

Christ-the-gate frees us from the clutches of the fence jumpers and those who would steal us for their own purposes.  Christ-the-gate opens to us the feeding pastures and the refreshing waters of new and lasting life.  Christ-the-gate has eternally shown that God is faithful and that we belong to God – “come hell or high water”.

So, let me make the essential theology clear one more time.  As I say, here in our community of faith, we have couched the Easter message in terms of a threefold proclamation.  First, God-in-Christ has given us what we need and cannot provide for ourselves, the very thing that Jesus himself described as “abundant life”.  Second, as our mothers have taught us: Mind your manners, and say “thank you’ for the gift!  And lastly, share the gift.  That’s what gifts are for.  Share; don’t hoard the gift. 

This threefold proclamation is the lens through which we can see and receive the “gifts of God for the people of God”.  At its essence, this theological summary of ours is a strong and guiding Easter proclamation.  And (as with the example of our spiritual forebears referred to in our Acts lesson), we also need to determine the extent to which we allow Easter’s reality to shape the way we live. 

The crucial theological and existential issue for us is that you and I live in the midst of the constant temptation to live (as people have always lived) without God at the center.  After all, our specific culture offers its highest praises for “self-made men and women” and all the constructed “isms” by which we are tempted to be “saved”: Socialism; Communism; Capitalism; traditionalism; progressivism.  These and all the other constructs we absorb as our functional “religion” do not and cannot provide the life we deeply and eternally need. 

So, what about God and life on God’s terms?  If (as we so easily say) “all things come of Thee, O Lord; and of Thine own have we given Thee” – well, to what extent do we dare live from this assertion; or are they just words?

What St. Luke records about those early, baptized and Spirit-filled followers of Jesus reveals their response to God’s gift of mercy, hope, and compassion -- how they shaped their lives as a living “thank you” for what God had done for them in the Risen Jesus.  Their “thank you” manifested in a bold sharing of what they had been given, to the unusual – yes, unusual -- extent that the basic life-needs of all were met.  Gratitude for the gift – the Easter gift – lay at the heart of their behavior and motivated their expressed way of living.  It was those – always those -- who were threatened by their example or more likely threatened to work at living with God at the center, who conveniently remove God and the God-life from their existence.  They turn for some outward, human construct -- some “ism” – that is believed to provide both life and salvation.  

So it is that, pushed to do so, most of us would think that the Jesus Movement described in Acts is “unrealistic”.  True, not everyone can or should live in a monastery and abide by its rule of common life; but it is an undeniable fact that some of us should give away all our possessions so there is room for the life we cannot buy or possess.  Others among us need a job so that they can have something to give away as a dignified expression of gratitude for the gift of the God’s abundant life.  For the rest of us, our spiritual task is to remember what St. Paul taught: That we are to “work out [our] own salvation with fear and trembling”.[5]  This is to say, the rest of us need to determine how we express our gratitude to God – not only with our lips but in our lives”.  And what “ism” would our expression of gratitude bear?  No “ism” at all but a simple, “thanks-giving”?

I am the gate.  Whoever enters by me will be saved, and will come in and go out and fin pasture…I came that [everyone] may have life, and have it abundantly.[6]

And in response, all God’s people said, “Thanks be to God.”  Amen.

---

[1] Acts 2:42.

[2] Book of Common Prayer. “Holy Baptism”, p. 304-05.

[3] Acts 2:44-47.

[4] John 10:10.

[5] Philippians 2:12.

[6] John 10:10.