"TO A CHURCH THREATENED BY DISSENSION, CHRIST GIVES DEACONS SO THAT THE WORD MIGHT INCREASE."

Singing: (Psalms and Hymns are from the "Book of Praise" Anglo Genevan Psalter)
Psalm 16:1
Psalm 85:2
Hymn 38:1,2
Psalm 133:1,2 (Ordination: Psalm 134:3)
Psalm 67:2,3

Beloved Congregation of the Lord Jesus Christ!

The passage of Scripture we read relates for us the time that Christ first gave deacons to His Church. This passage tells us why the office of deacon was instituted, tells us then too what task is essential to deacons’ work. We learn that Christ gave deacons so that His people might be enabled to give as freely as He Himself gave.

I summarize the sermon with this theme:

TO A CHURCH THREATENED BY DISSENSION, CHRIST GIVES DEACONS SO THAT THE WORD MIGHT INCREASE.
 

1.  The threat to the growth
2.  The answer to the threat

The verse I have chosen as text for this morning reads in our translation like this: "So the Word of God spread." That’s a curious translation, for the word translated as "spread" does not at all mean "spread"; the word means "increase", "grow". We read of Jesus in Luke 2 (after His mother found the lad in the temple) that Jesus returned to Nazareth and grew (Luke 2:40) – same word. The lilies of the field are described in Jesus’ parable as growing (Mt 6:28) – again, same word. Then it’s true that in our text the growth of the Word of God meant that the Word spread –we’ll come back to that later on– but what the Lord tells us in our text is that His Word "grew".

What, however, does it mean that "the Word of God grew"? Is this a reference to the fact that the Bible grew in size, that God revealed more and more? Shall we say: quantitative growth? That cannot be, for there’s no reference in our passage of the Bible growing, or of God giving further revelation. Yet there was quantitative growth, for the second part of vs 7 tells us that "the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem." To this degree, then, we do indeed have to understand that the growth of the Word of God meant that the Word of God spread.

Yet we’re also to understand, beloved, that more is meant here than simply that the number of church members increased. The fact that the Word of God grew is reference also to the fact that those who had already come to faith in Jesus Christ came to know more about their Saviour; here is a reference to qualitative growth, spiritual growth in the existing congregation. As we seek to understand our text, it’s both factors –the spiritual growth as well as the numerical growth, the qualitative growth as well as the quantitative growth– that we are to keep in mind.

Growth. As it is, Luke has already told us that there was great growth in the congregation of Jerusalem after Pentecost. On the day of Pentecost itself, we read in ch 2:41, 3000 souls were added to the existing congregation of 120 members. That same chapter tells us later that this enlarged congregation increased in number daily as the Lord added to their ranks those who were being saved (2:47). In 4:4 Luke tells that another 5000 men (let alone their wives and children) joined the congregation; that’s going to give numbers of over 20,000! And after the death of Ananias and Sapphira in chap 5 "believers were increasingly added to the Lord, multitudes of both men and women" (5:14). To say it with the words of our text: "the Word of God increased, and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem."

This growth in number did not, however, destroy the communion of saints. We read from chap 2 that the body of 3000 "continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers" (2:42). In fact, the believers stuck together, "had all things in common" to the point that they "sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as any had need" (vs 44f). And chaps 4 and 5 tell us that this spirit of self-denial for the benefit of the brother continued strongly even when the congregation grew by the thousands. Acts 4:35 says that the apostles "distributed to each as anyone had need" – and the Greek uses a form of the verb that describes an ongoing practice.

But, says our chapter now, "a complaint" arose. In the days when the congregation grew, in the days when they had all things in common, in the days when they sold their possessions for the advantage of the poor, when they ate bread together, when they were held in high esteem by all men because of a glowing communion of saints, then it was that complaints began to be heard in the congregation.

Complaints, grumbling. In our understanding of congregational life, we quite expect some grumbling; after all, every crowd has its malcontents. But that, beloved, is a reality we should not take as normal. Jesus, after all, had once prayed to the Father –Jn 17- and said: "I...pray...for those who...believe in Me...that they all may be one." And the oneness Jesus desired was the closest oneness possible; said He: "as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You." Believers, in other words, were to have a unity as close as that between those two Persons of the holy Trinity! And why? Said Jesus: "That the world may believe that You sent Me" (Jn 17:20f). And see: the close unity for which Jesus prayed had existed in the early church, for they had all things in common, and they ate bread together with glad and generous hearts, and the richer gave of their wealth for the advantage of the poorer in their midst. And –as Jesus had also prayed– the effect of that close unity amongst the members of the early church was that the believers had favour with all the people (2:47), with as result that the number of believers grew astronomically; they’re oneness prompted many in the world to believe that Jesus of Nazareth really was sent by God.

But now that oneness was broken, a complaint arose; there was murmuring, discontent, the communion of saints was somehow strained, breaking. Given the prayer of the Saviour, we understand that the result of such grumbling can only be that growth for the church is threatened! And the growth that was threatened was not only numerical growth, quantitative growth; the growth that was threatened was also qualitative growth in faith, spiritual development within the congregation. For we well understand: where there is discontentment, where there is grumbling, one cannot grow in the Lord.

Well, now, what was the problem? What prompted the complaint, the grumbling? Luke describes the problem this way: "there arose a complaint against the Hebrews by the Hellenists, because their widows were neglected in the daily distribution" (vs 1).

This note about these widows being neglected has been commonly understood to mean that they were bypassed in the daily distribution of food, with as result that these widows had little or nothing to eat. Their being forgotten in the daily handout of food is then ascribed to the fact that there were evidently two groups in the congregation: the Greek speaking Jews who had lived for years and generations in the dispersion, and the Hebrew speaking Jews who grew up and lived in or around Jerusalem. And then it’s said further that, though the congregation of believers is to be one –such was Jesus’ prayer– Satan had managed to divide this young congregation in Jerusalem into two parts, parts that did not get on so very well for linguistic or cultural or maybe for nationalistic reasons. In that particular understanding, the office of the seven brothers appointed in response to this split would be to bring the two sides together and ensure that the gifts of the one side would be used to fill the needs of the other side of this divided communion of saints. That understanding has so affected translation that the NKJV and the RSV and the NIV all speak in vs 1 about "the daily distribution", and the NIV goes so far as to speak about "the daily distribution of food." That’s the standard exegesis.

But that exegesis has of late come under criticism, and rightly so. For the fact of the matter is that the Greek text doesn’t mention food at all. In fact, it doesn’t even speak about distribution. The Greek text says literally that these widows were overlooked in "the daily service", the daily ministry; the Greek word is ‘diakonia’. What that word means? Please remember that 4:35 had described not a one-day snapshot of the congregation, but ongoing reality; from the goods the congregation laid at the apostles’ feet, "distribution was made to each as any had need" (RSV) so that "there was not a needy person among them" (4:34). That was an ongoing reality; none was hungry in the early church – not these Greek widows either.

What then? The word ‘diakonia’ –we get our English word ‘deacon’ from this word, and it means ‘service’, ‘ministry’ - the word ‘diakonia’ captures the conduct of the congregation as described in chap 2 and 4, the notion that the believers were altogether, all helped the other, shared. The ‘diakonia’, this ‘service’, this ‘ministry, was nothing else than the communion of saints activated; the daily ministry was simply that the members of the body were looking after the various needs that existed amongst other members in the body.

But: in that daily ministry, in the privilege of being able to help another, these widows were passed by. The point does not appear to be that these widows had nothing to eat, that they were not on the receiving end of things; rather, these widows had much to give, but were passed by on the giving end of things. They were neglected in the daily work of service, overlooked in being told where the needs were. How come? They were Grecian Jews, spoke Greek, had the culture of places like Athens, Ephesus, Crete, while the rest of the congregation spoke Hebrew and acted according to the practices acceptable in Jerusalem and Judea. Those in our midst who migrated from Europe to Australia can relate to the frustration that comes with language and cultural differences. You want to give of yourself to the community, you want to participate, but the consequences of the Tower of Babel make it so hard.

The result for these widows? They were isolated from the rest of the congregation, and so they could not give as readily as ought of whatever abundance they had, and therefore could not freely express gratitude either for the wealth of the salvation God had mercifully given to them. In turn the congregation –to its own hurt– could not benefit from the talents God had given to these sisters…. All of it together did not give proper expression to the unity God had worked in His people in answer to Jesus’ prayer of Jn 17. So the world wasn’t encouraged to believe that Jesus of Nazareth was sent by God…. All of it together was a threat to the growth of the Word of God, be it growth in quantity, be it growth in quality.

We move on to our second point:

The complaints in the congregation, we learned, did not originate from one faction of the congregation snubbing another, did not arise out of sin or sinful attitudes. So the apostles did not respond with a reprimand about brotherly love and the need to share with all the needy in the flock. The problem arose out of communication difficulties, and so the answer to the problem lay in the area of organization. If the Greek widows could not participate in the daily ministry of the communion of saints because of a communication problem, then persons should be appointed who would have to see to it that the persons of these diverse language groups could be involved in the daily service, that service of sharing all things, of eating together, of supplying each other’s needs. The apostles themselves were busy with the preaching of the Word of God, and so had no time to organize everybody’s involvement. Hence their suggestion to the congregation: "Brothers, choose seven men from among you who are known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom. We will turn this responsibility over to them." And so it happened; seven men were chosen and installed into their office, seven men all with Greek names and so undoubtedly able to communicate with those of a Greek background.

And let this be clear, beloved: it was not so that these 7 were now to do "the daily ministry" from which the Greek widows had been excluded. Think on it: how would it ever be possible that seven men do all the work involved in the daily ministry so that all the members of a congregation of some 20-25,000 persons were satisfied! No, that daily ministry, that daily serving each other in the communion of saints, remained the responsibility of each member of the congregation. But these seven formed a board, as it were, who were responsible to see to it that these Grecian widows would no longer be forgotten in the communion of saints; they were responsible to see to it that all –despite cultural backgrounds– would be able to participate daily in the ‘diakonia’, the ‘ministry’ that characterises a communion of saints. In the words of the Form for the Ordination of Deacons (where that Form comments on the appointment of deacons in Acts 6): "it is therefore the responsibility of the deacons to see to the good progress of this service of charity in the Church." In effect this means not only that deacons "shall acquaint themselves with existing needs and difficulties"; it means also that deacons shall "exhort the members of Christ’s body to show mercy" and help to make this display of mercy possible. See there the task of the deacon, as we discover it in Acts 6.

What, now, was the result of the labours of these 7 brothers in the Church of Jerusalem? The result was this, says Luke, that "the Word of God increased." The growth threatened by that lack of communication between those of Greek culture and those of Hebrew culture was now made possible again; through the labours of these 7 deacons, those who believed in Christ through the preaching of the apostles were made able again to show their oneness – a oneness even as the Father and the Son are one. And the result of that display of oneness was that many in the world believed that God sent Jesus. Says our text: "so the Word of God increased," yes, "the number of the disciples in Jerusalem multiplied greatly," including even a large number of the priests (6:7b). See there the result of the work of the deacons.

The following chapters give more colour to the growth the Lord granted on the work of the deacons. We’re told at the end of chap 6 that Stephen (one of those 7 deacons) was arrested because of His preaching about Jesus of Nazareth, was tried by the Sanhedrin and stoned to death. The resulting persecution chased the believers out of Jerusalem, and scattered them throughout the region of Judea and Samaria (8:1). But see: in their dispersion and affliction these Christians were not quiet about their faith; no, in the short time since Pentecost they had grown so much in their faith and knowledge that they were able to speak the Word of God wherever they went (8:4). Here, beloved, is another tangible fruit that the Lord was pleased to give on the labours of these 7 deacons: through their labours the saints were equipped for the work of service to themselves and to others. And the world saw, with as result that through out Judea and Samaria many believed that God Himself had sent Jesus of Nazareth into the world to save His people from their sins. Behold here the blessing of God! And marvel how Jesus Christ gathers His church, brings His chosen to Himself, causes His chosen to grow. He uses office bearers, including deacons....

Now, it is true that the deacons we have today do not have the identical task that the deacons of Acts 6 had. The deacons of Acts 6, after all, also preached the gospel; think of Stephen. Philip, another of the deacons, is later described as an "evangelist". To some degree, it appears, the office of deacon has refined itself as the apostles died off and the organization of the church settled into established patterns. None of that takes away, though, from the fact that with Acts 6 we uncover the heart of the task of deacons. In His care for the Church for whom He died, Christ has given not only elders to shepherd the flock; He has also given deacons charged with the mandate to see to it that everybody is able to participate in the benefits of the communion of saints, including both giving and receiving, both receiving and giving.

It’s a point I need to belabour. For our part, we tend to think of deacons as the brothers who collect and distribute money for the benefit of the poor. So we don’t expect the deacons to come visit us, unless we’re in a financial pinch. And then we expect them to write us a cheque; that’s their job. And should the deacons visit us without there being a financial pinch, we’re piqued that they dare ask us for our time.

But I trust it’s clear, beloved, that in the deacons Christ did not give to His Church simply a social agency, a Good Samaritan organization. Christ before He died prayed that those who would believe in Him would be one as He and the Father were one, and He wanted His own to be one so that the world might be prompted to believe that He was the Christ sent by God. It is specifically for the deacons to make sure that in practice the believers are one, that there is no cause for grumbling. Diakonia, service, generous giving of self and one’s possessions is to be characteristic of the believers, of those who have received so much in the forgiveness of their countless sins and the abundant outpouring of the Holy Spirit in their hearts. Then yes, the deacons have a role to play in the distribution of monies to the needy. But when all is said and done, that’s not at all the heart of the deacons’ task. It is you yourselves, brothers and sisters, as persons freed from slavery to sin, who are to share willingly, generously, spontaneously with those around you who have need. Properly speaking, it is only when a complaint arises to the effect that the communion of saints is not working as it ought (be it because of the Tower of Babel or because of shyness or immaturity or lack of awareness of the needs of others, etc) that the deacons should get involved. And then their involvement should at bottom not be the giving of money; their involvement should primarily be ensuring that mechanisms are in place for the members of Christ’s body to be able to give freely and be able to receive freely. That’s the lesson of the appointment of deacons in Acts 6.

So it is, my brothers and sisters, that you should not at all be surprised when the deacons knock on your door. For they come not first of all to find out whether you might be amongst the poor. They come first of all to encourage you to give of your gifts for the benefit of others, to see whether there might be ways and means for you to improve your participation in the communion of saints. Christ’s care for the flock He bought extends so far that He wants more than that none "live uncomforted under the pressure of sickness, loneliness, and poverty." Such is His care for His flock that He wants no one to be burdened under the yoke of selfishness, of being slow to give. Christ has set us free, and few masters are so cruel as the master called Selfishness, Me-centeredness. Christ has set us free, and so it’s for all of us to give, freely give for the benefit of others – even as the church of Acts 2 did. Let the deacons come, then, my brothers and sisters, and welcome them eagerly, and let them encourage you in how you can give more effectively of yourself and your gifts for the benefit of others. We can’t get around it: complaints, dissatisfaction in the communion of saints means that the Word of God cannot increase as it ought, neither to the inside nor to the outside, neither in the strength of their faith nor in the number of believers, neither qualitatively nor quantitatively. So: welcome the deacons God gives, let them work in your homes and families so that the unity which the congregation has in Christ may receive fuller expression – that in turn the Word of God grow, first within the congregation, and therefore also without, according to God’s promise in Jn 17.

And, brothers deacons, labour diligently in the congregation, in accordance with the reason why your office was formed in the first place. Labour diligently, so that Christ’s congregation in Kelmscott increasingly reflects the oneness, the unity, of the Father and the Son – that the world may believe that the Father has sent the Son, to the greater glory of Triune God. Amen.