The Danger of One Pentecost Story

This is a 12 minute read, I think. My apologies to my non-UMC readers - you can just skip the PAUSE section.

Pentecost is not my favorite liturgical holiday (that’s Ascension Day), but I love preaching on the the first few chapters of Acts. There is something exciting and intriguing about the formation of the early Church. I’ve often looked at those passages wondering if there’s something our ancestors in the faith knew, and if we’d just return to it, maybe we’d experience some of the miracles and awe that filled the stories in Acts. While I actually believe our best days are ahead for the movement of Jesus, I also think there’s much we can learn from the early Church. So every year, about 50 days after Easter, I find myself in these chapters - looking for a fresh idea (ie word) from the Text. This year’s revelation has me rethinking my assumptions about the unity of the Spirit.

In Acts 2, we’re told that the disciples, 120 women & men, have been in the upper room together for 10 days. I’ll just be honest and say I would’ve bailed after day 2. But apparently they were in that place together and some translations say “in one accord.” I’ve heard a few sermons on that particular phrase as a precondition for the kind of miracles found in the book of Acts; that Pentecost comes, the Church grows and miracles follow when the Church is unified. This is the frame I’ve always used in reading Acts 2 and it has shaped my ideas of what unity looked like for the the early Church. I’ve held that unity picture up next to the parts of the Church (local and global, past and present, general and specific) that I’m connected to and found them to be starkly different. I thought, where the early church seemed to be in one accord, the church I’m a part of can’t agree on much. The Acts 2 community of believers are found waiting patiently in the same place for days; my Christian friends and colleagues start struggling when gatherings last more than 2 hours. I read the accounts about flames of fire and folks speaking in languages they never learned, but I sit in church meetings that go off the rails and stand in worship services that don’t feel quite right. It’s actually an unfair comparison. However, the monotony and mundane nature of everyday Christian life makes us nostalgic for a time we never experienced; and so we look at the Acts 2 church as a community who figured it out and wonder how we might recreate that same environment in our day. That’s how I’ve read the text for most of my adult life.

And then I read the Acts 2 passage for the 36th time...

This time, something jumped out at me and now that I see it, I can’t ignore it. According to the text, the Holy Spirit fills the believers and they all began to speak in other languages. You might assume that it’s gibberish (like those words you other people say when you they are wine-drunk), but folks outside the upper room are in earshot and surprisingly hear their native languages. Luke, the writer of Acts, goes on to list many of the languages that were heard that morning. I confess that whenever I preach on Acts 2, I often skip over the languages out of fear that I won’t pronounce them correctly and go straight to v.11 where it says “...we hear them declaring the mighty works of God in our own languages!” This hasn't bothered me in past years because the many languages being spoken & understood isn’t the point of the story right? Clearly, we can assume these folks are all hearing the same litany of the mighty works of God, just in a different language right? Right?

If you have worked with linguistics or translations, you know it’s a lot more complicated than that. For instance, one word in English can be interpreted as 2 or more words in another language. And the choice one makes in translation can create a picture that only makes sense in a specific linguistic context. Furthermore, I’m not sure it’s fair to assume that we all interpret “the mighty works of God” in the same ways. One person’s prayed for and 'miraculously' open parking space could also be another person’s unanswered prayer followed by a long, exhausting walk. One person’s promotion could possibly be due to someone else being let go. And we are coming to realize that some momentary financial blessings are often connected to unkept historical promises made to others. My point is, all of those folks outside the upper room who heard the mighty works of God in a language they understood probably didn’t hear the same thing. And to miss this point is to flatten the miracle into one story.

When we talk about unity, we often assume that everyone sees the world the same way, agrees to converge around the same ideas, and all intend to go in one specific direction. My understanding of disunity is that there isn’t agreement around the way the world should be, and therefore there is a divergence around important ideas, which inevitably means people will have to move in separate directions. I think you could make the case that the story for the 120 disciples in the upper room was one of unity. But I don’t think that’s the exact story those outside of the 120 experienced - at least not a simple unity story. It was not the cohesion & convergence of the original group that caused the multitudes to stop and ask questions. It was, in fact, the sound of multiple languages being spoken that was the true miracle of Pentecost. It was the pouring out of the Holy Spirit on the original group, causing them to speak in such a way that “outsiders” heard something that was not only compelling, but also understandable that caused one story to become more than one story. This is the point that in many ways flips the script for me regarding spiritual unity. And I think it’s an important point that can’t be overstated.

If you read the rest of Acts or peer into the history of Christianity, you might come away with a conclusion that our inability to come together as one body and family in Christ (ie adopt one single and dominant story) is why the movement hasn’t been able to do all that we think it should in the world. Indeed, this is the assumed implication, if not the cause, of our witness being diminished in the world. We often say, “it’s our disagreement over this idea” or “our distraction around that issue”, that causes us to lose energy on infighting instead of making disciples and bringing glory to God. Under our breath, the explicit cries for unity give cover to implicit pleas for others to reject their lived experiences with the Holy Spirit and adopt someone else’s narrative of how God has moved in the lives of Jesus-people. And if we can’t all get behind the same story, we work hard to silence any divergence from the dominant narrative. If that doesn’t work, we separate or worse excommunicate those who refuse to speak the accepted language. I used to subscribe to this line of thinking, trying to get all the diverse Christians to unite under one story and speak one language, until I realized that often it’s our inability to hold multiple stories about God’s grace and calling that has caused the Church to miss the mark. It’s this relentless project to get all of us to agree on one single story about Jesus and his movement that, in my opinion, keeps tripping us up. From the feeding of Hellenist Jews in Acts 6 to the inclusion of gentile believers in Acts 15, as well as the ordination of women and the cries for justice from marginalized people groups; our struggle is not a misunderstanding of one story, but the inability to consider the ways the Spirit can inspire multiple stories that are able to fit in a larger Christian narrative without any being flattened, dismissed or ordered in the service of sameness. I don’t know how you get from Acts 2 to Revelation 7 without becoming comfortable with diversity that is centered on the work of Christ while also maintaining its own linguistic and historic integrity; people, nations and tribes that do not have to submit to the tyranny of a single story in order to be accepted as sacred.

PAUSE (FOR SOME INSIDE UMC BASEBALL)

I don’t normally blog about the UMC. I prefer in-person, off-line spaces when talking about the denomination I love, even as it consumes most of my time and energy. But these are transitional days for the UMC. Our Church is wrestling with many questions around who we will become, who will be allowed to lead and who feels called to leave. And while much has already been said and written about the UMC drama, the Acts 2 passage and the idea of multiple Pentecost stories has reshaped how I see our current impasse and future.

I have many thoughts about the Wesleyan Covenant Association (WCA). There are people that I love who are a part of the WCA. And once upon a time, I would’ve been counted among them. The story the WCA is telling is fairly simple: we cannot agree on if and how queer followers of Jesus should be included in the life of the Church, so the best thing for the sake of Jesus and the mission is to split into two Methodist denominations - a new traditional one and a progressive, institutional one. They go on to project how much better both denominations will be because we’ll be freed to live into our preferred visions. Some (maybe most) in the WCA are not really interested in the future of the denomination they are leaving; they’re only interested in the vision of being a global orthodox body that no longer has to argue about human sexuality, who can get married and who can be ordained. While they highlight the diversity of their soon to be Global Methodist Church (GMC), their diversity is, in my opinion, in the service of sameness. This is my opinion because what they are building is a church that thinks the Gospel, if followed in a specific way, settles all the issues that pop up when we encounter differences in our ranks. They are proposing a kind of unity that should exist naturally and easily as long as all stay focused on the mission. They ignore our long history of Protestant splintering as a result of the way Christians have read and responded to the Gospel. They are hoping that their collective commitment to [their version of] the orthodox story will be able to hold their unity together, even as they watch other similar denominations wrestle with the multiple Christian stories being told today. Most don’t say this part out loud, but the WCA would prefer a flattening of the Pentecost stories told by people of color, queer and trans folks, disabled and differently-abled Christians. They don’t mind the Gospel story told by women or celibate gay Christians as long as it doesn’t disrupt or compete with [their understanding of] the orthodox version of the story. So you will not hear the Spirit-inspired anti-racist story told in the GMC because it would hurt the feelings of white Christians who don’t think systemic racism exists. The WCA’s project is one that silences any divergence because they are unable to imagine a truly diverse and inclusive church that could make disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world.

I get it. My friends on all sides of this struggle are tired. Unfortunately, the WCA’s blind spot is that there is not a single organized group in the world that is completely homogeneous. And all the ones you could name that might fit the description have more than likely found a way to successfully silence or reject the voices that would disturb the dominant story. In my view, the members of the GMC will quickly reckon with the multi-layered stories about Jesus and His grace in the world whether they like it or not. There will be divergence in their post-separation story, even as they attempt to create a structure that values a "one accord" sameness in the midst of its natural diversity. Indeed, this is one of their main criticisms of the UMC - too many valid perspectives, too many diverse voices, too many elevated and celebrated stories. The WCA rightly predicts that the Continuing UMC will have many topics to wrestle with, multiple narratives to hold and many rigorous conferencing sessions around various ideas. This is because "Big Tent Methodism" views inclusion as an implication of [not a distraction from] the Gospel. The Continuing UMC views the journey of anti-racism and the work of justice to be functions of [not interruptions to] discipleship in the way of Jesus. Those who feel called to stay in the UMC implicitly understand that the Holy Spirit will be poured out on all who are gathered at the table of the Lord. They understand that the Spirit draws a diversity of people, a multiple of languages and a divergence of perspectives. You see, the WCA is more concerned with recapturing the “unity” of the 120, not the disruptive outpouring that includes all the Spirit-inspired stories of the mighty works of God being told in multiple languages - all welcome, all equal, all valid, all necessary for us to be the Church we are called to be.

UNPAUSE

Whether it was a Passion Conference in Atlanta, a trip to Hillsong in Australia or a gathering of local ministers in Jacksonville, the message I have heard most of my adult life is that we all just need to gather around the name of Jesus. The suggestion is that once we do that, differences will be muted and we'll be able to join together in making the love of Christ known in all the world. In other words, our differences [in language, perspective, theology and practice] is the problem we must get over if we are going to be the Church God wants us to be. Yet, the history of the Church that started at Pentecost is one moment after another filled with Gospel-inspired passion that tells a different story, which leads to clear reasons for an amicable separation over those Gospel-inspired differences. We keep praying for unity, and we keep disagreeing on what faithful witness looks like. Maybe this fascination with one single, unifying story is the problem. I am beginning to wonder what the history of the Church would’ve been if we looked at Acts 2 as a moment when the Holy Spirit was poured out to intentionally disrupt the single, dominating story; that as the Spirit continues to breathe on believers from all over the world, Jesus intends for a diversity of perspectives to gathered, heard, and honored. What might happen if those of us who followed Jesus abandoned the single story story project and instead, said yes to the outpouring that makes room for multiple languages and diverse stories to be told?

If you haven't watched the 2009 Ted Talk by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, The Danger of a Single Story, I highly recommend it. Even though it is has been years since I first heard this talk, it continues to echo in my soul. Chimananda ends her talk with this statement: "When we reject the single story, when we realize that there is never a single story about any place, we regain a kind of paradise." I can't help but wonder how Pentecost was the reclaiming of multiple stories for the sake of Jesus and His desire to see as many people as possible gathered around His table - a vision we often call Heaven. According to Acts 2:41, the outcome of Pentecost is the expanding of the community of believers from 120 to 3000 in one single day. Is it possible that Peter's message was the reason for such an increase? We preachers would love to think so. Yet, I can no longer read this passage and skip over the languages heard that day. Each language represents a unique story, and each story enlightens our understanding of how God moves in people's lives. There is more than one Pentecost story, and the family of Jesus is not complete until we have made room for them all.