And by “emerging Christian movement,” I speak not of the “Emerging/Emergent Church” movement of today but rather the original Christian movement while it was first emerging, during the period of Paul’s letters.When Jesus was walking about on the earth he did have followers, but what they believed was not Christianity in the normal sense. According to the gospels, they struggled with who he was, failed to comprehend the message of his impending death, had no idea of the coming resurrection, and were miles away from the influence of Paul. Jesus taught generosity, which he did not attach qualifiers to. Give to those who ask. Loan out money without expecting any in return. Don’t worry about material things.
As Christianity post-Jesus (I mean that in a limited sense) began to emerge, the Church discovered that its generosity was breeding a peculiar group of folk who did nothing but gossip and live off church generosity. And so Paul, without abandoning the original gospel orientation toward generosity, worked towards shaping an attitude and set of church practices which would preserve the original spirit of generosity while seeking to remove the incentive towards laziness. In one of his letters he gives a view of the Church’s developing stance toward finances. And now I’ll quit talking and let Paul have his say. 2 Thessalonians 3:
1 Finally, brothers [and sisters], pray for us, so that the word of the Lord might spread speedily and be glorified, as it has been among you, 2 and that you may be delivered from the unreasonable and evil men [who seek to persecute you], for not all are of the faith. 3 The Lord is reliable; he will build you up and guard you from evil. 4 We are confident about you in the Lord, that you do and will continue to do what we command you. 5 May the Lord direct your hearts to the love of God and the patience of Christ.
6 We command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to withdraw yourselves from every brother who walks disorderly, and not according to the tradition you received from us. 7 For you yourselves know how it is right for you to imitate us, for we did not act disorderly among you. 8 We did not eat bread free of charge from anyone, but in labor and toil we worked not and day so as not to be a burden to any of you. 9 This is not because we did not have authority, but in order to give you an example to imitate us. 10 Even when we were with you we commanded you that if anyone refuses to work, let him not eat. 11 For we hear about certain people walking disorderly, never working, but meddling in the business of others. 12 We command and exhort these people through our Lord Jesus Christ that they work quietly and eat their own bread. 13 And you, brothers, do not become tired of doing good. 14 If anyone does not obey our word in this letter, take note of this person, and do not keep company with him, so that he might be ashamed. 15 Don’t regard him as an enemy, but rather correct him as a brother.
16 And may the Lord of Peace himself give you peace at all times and in every way. The Lord be with you all. 17 This is the greeting which I, Paul, have written by my own hand, signing it as I do every letter. This is how I write. 17 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.
2 Comments
This is simple, yet incredibly profound. I feel like a lot of times, Paul’s words about “let him who refuses to work not eat” are taken over against Jesus’ words about generosity. They Paul as a means to get out of giving stuff away. They ignore the reality that Paul was dealing pastorally with a specific issue among Christians.
Part of why I wanted the whole chapter up there was because of the temptation of missing the point that exists when we deal in single verses. Paul’s teaching has to be viewed as an extension of the Jesus-based worldview, or else we cut up the gospel into little pieces and partake only of the bits we like. And if I’m reading rightly here, it looks to me like the “let him not eat” comment is at most a command to withhold church aid from those who are habitually lazy and refuse available labor. We’d be distorting it if we were to see it as a command to go forth and force the people of the world to work by taking away their food supply, and we’d also be distorting it if we were to somehow take it as a justification for automatically condemning those struck by unemployment.