How one church father saw Christian baptism prefigured in the story of Naaman the Syrian in 2 Kings 5:1-14.

Look here for my thoughts on the promise in the water.

Naaman washing, stained glass, from Mariawald Abbey, Germany. Circa 1510. Image © Victoria and Albert Museum, London. Used under the "personal use" terms of the license agreement.

Here is the chiasm in Mark 1:21-28

A – Location – They went to Capernaum; and when the sabbath came, he entered the synagogue and taught. (v. 21)

B – Teaching with Authority – They were astounded at his teaching, for he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes. (v. 22)

C – Unclean Spirit – Just then there was in their synagogue a man with an unclean spirit, (v.23)

D – Dialog – and he cried out, “What have you to do with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are, the Holy One of God.” (v. 24)

D – Dialog – But Jesus rebuked him, saying, “Be silent, and come out of him!” (v. 25)

C – Unclean Spirit – And the unclean spirit, convulsing him and crying with a loud voice, came out of him. (v. 26)

B – Teaching with Authority – They were all amazed, and they kept on asking one another, “What is this? A new teaching–with authority! He commands even the unclean spirits, and they obey him.” (v. 27)

A – Location – At once his fame began to spread throughout the surrounding region of Galilee. (v. 28)

What good does it do to see the literary structure of the pericope (i.e. literary unit of thought) ?

For one thing, seeing how the author organizes his material gives you some insight into how he understands its meaning. We see, for example, that Jesus’ authority applies not only in academic and intellectual spheres of life, but even over the powers of evil.

Most of the action in the first part of the chiasm belongs to Jesus and his disciples; they enter the synagogue and teach.  In the second half of the chiasm, most of the action is a response to Jesus: the demon comes out, the people are amazed, and Jesus’ fame spreads.

The chiastic structure itself shines a spotlight on whatever is at the center of the “X”. In this case, it is the ironic confession of Jesus as the Holy One of God. The evil spirit knows the truth about Jesus even if the rest of the world does not. The center of the chiasm is a dramatic confrontation with evil, and Jesus will in fact overcome the evil spirit.

Mark is greatly concerned with the question of who Jesus is. Announcing that Jesus is the Holy One of God based on acts of power alone is inadequate. Thus, Jesus commands the demon to be silent. Later in his gospel, Mark will show us who Jesus is, primarily in the great confrontation with evil that takes place at the end of the gospel, the story that ends with a bloody cross and an empty tomb.

You don’t have to know the structure to see these things, but it helps.

Related:
Demonic but Accurate but Incomplete

Both the Old and New Testaments of the Christian Bible talk about prophets, men and women who speak for God. Are there prophets today? Christians sometimes identify themselves as prophets or say that they are speaking prophetically. I avoid such language because I think it implies something that is not true. Modern day prophets do not generally do what the Old Testament prophets did in Israel, or even what New Testament prophets did in the early church. God still speaks to his church, but there is a qualitative difference between how God usually speaks today and how God spoke through people like Elijah, Samuel, Isaiah and Ezekiel.

Biblical Prophets

Prophecy in the Old Testament

The story of Israelite prophecy begins with Moses and Miriam and takes different forms at different points in Israel’s history. The Biblical narrative tells us about prophets like Deborah, Samuel, Nathan and Elijah. The canon also contains written prophecy attributed to prophets like Isaiah, Amos, Ezekiel and Malachi.

A close look at the canonical prophets quickly reveals that they each had their own concerns, their own ways of expressing themselves and their own ways of relating to their target audiences. Still, the canon asserts that despite their differences from each other, each spoke unconditionally and authoritatively for God.

“I will put my words in his mouth “(Deuteronomy 18:18) God says of the prophet. “Thus says the Lord,” says the prophet in a phrase that appears over 400 times in the Old Testament. There is no tentativeness or contingency to the prophet’s declaration. There is no need for communal consensus or rational analysis. The Old Testament prophet is simply repeating the very words of God.

Without the prophets, there would be no Old Testament. Military leaders, kings, priests and sages all have their place in the Old Testament narrative, but it is the prophets who move the story forward from Moses through the conquest of Canaan into the age of kings, and then into the exile and eventual return to the land of promise.

Prophecy in the New Testament

In the vast majority of cases, when the New Testament authors speak about prophets, they are referring to the seers of the Old Testament. Jesus brings the story of the law and the prophets to completion.

There are instances, however, when the New Testament authors recognize the existence of contemporary prophets in the New Testament church.

In Matthew 10:41, Jesus compares the twelve disciples whom he sends in his name to prophets. Jesus sent the twelve as penniless beggars to proclaim the coming of the kingdom, heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse lepers and drive out demons. They depended on the kindness of strangers to survive. To those he was about to send, Jesus said:

Anyone who welcomes you welcomes me, and anyone who welcomes me welcomes the one who sent me. Whoever welcomes a prophet as a prophet will receive a prophet’s reward, and whoever welcomes a righteous person as a righteous person will receive a righteous person’s reward. (Matthew 10:40-41)

In this single reference, Jesus seems to be using the word “prophet” indirectly, in a analogical or typological sense. Jesus’ messengers are like the Old Testament prophets. It doesn’t appear that he intends to bestow the title “prophet” on his disciples. Still, they speak and act for Jesus, who speaks and acts for the Father. How people treat the disciples reveals what they think about Jesus, and their response to Jesus is really their response to the one who sent him. And like the Old Testament prophets, Jesus’ disciples will sometimes face opposition and martyrdom.

Following Jesus’ resurrection and the coming of the Holy Spirit, the church began to refer to the twelve as apostles, not prophets. There were, however, others in the church to whom the title “prophet” applied.

We see evidence of this in several places. The book of Acts relates that there were prophets in the church at Jerusalem and Antioch. In Ephesians 4:11, Paul says that “Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers.” Similarly, in 1 Corinthians 12:28 Paul says, “God has placed in the church first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, of helping, of guidance, and of different kinds of tongues. ” The office of apostle comes first in both lists, followed by the office of “prophet.” Finally, the author of Revelation identifies his writing as a prophecy, and recognizes the presence of prophets in the church.

While we find evidence of the office of the prophet in the church, one has to pay attention to see it. Unlike prophecy in the Old Testament, prophecy in the New Testament is a minor theme, almost fading into the background. One might say that the office of the prophet in the early church is the receding echo of Jesus’ own prophetic ministry.

The most prominent discussion of prophecy comes in Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians. The Corinthian church was filled with what contemporary Christians would probably call “charismatics.” The church not only had prophets, it had people who performed works of power and miraculous healings. There were people who spoke in unintelligible tongues and those who had visions under the inspiration of the Spirit. Most of Paul’s energy in 1 Corinthians goes toward correcting what the Corinthians thought the doctrine of the Spirit implied, and explaining what Paul believed it really meant.

1 Corinthians 14 gives directions for prophets who speak in worship. Christians, Paul says, are to desire the gift of prophecy (1 Cor 14:1), at least more than they desire the gift of speaking in tongues. At least you can understand what the prophets are saying. Still, even the prophets should not get carried away. At most, two or three prophets should speak, and others should weigh what is said. (1 Cor 14:29). The spirit of the prophets are subject to the control of the prophets (1 Cor 14:32). If anyone thinks they are a prophet, they should acknowledge that what Paul is writing is the Lord’s command (1 Cor 14:37).

Paul does not give this much attention to charismatic gifts – or prophecy – in any other letter, nor does any other New Testament author. Still, 1 Corinthians 14 is evidence that at least part of the early church believed its members were empowered by the Spirit just as Jesus’ disciples were during their Galilean mission. New Testament prophecy is part of a package that includes what ordinary people would call miraculous acts of power. When I read Paul’s list of spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians 12, I assume that they are exactly what they say they are, supernatural endowments and not glorified natural talents. When Paul talks about gifts of healing , I think he is talking about the kinds of things that Jesus did for the blind and the lame, not about medical care. When he talks about the gift of prophecy, I think he means directly inspired speech and knowledge, not the result of careful study and analysis.

The question becomes, then, is this paradigm still the model for how the church operates under the spirit. I don’t think so. Couldn’t God still work this way in his church if he wanted to? Yes, but that’s not the question. I would be happy to accompany a Christian prophet to a funeral home to raise the dead, but I don’t think that’s going to happen. I would love to accompany a Christian healer to a hospital to pull the tubing from the bodies of patients in the ICU, but that won’t happen either.

Some parts of the New Testament church experienced the kinds of spirit power that Jesus exhibited and bestowed on his disciples. The history of the church begins on the day of Pentecost, when the apostles tell the story of Jesus, miraculously, in many different languages under the power of the Holy Spirit. In the Book of Acts, Luke (its author) says that Pentecost is a fulfillment of Joel 2:28-29.

In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams.

The further in time one moves from Jesus, however, the less significance these acts of power have. The Book of Acts reports that the apostles worked a few miracles, but the most important thing they did was spread the gospel and build the church. In the churches they founded, directly visible acts of spirit power have even less significance. In the so-called catholic epistles, bishops, elders and deacons have become the primary leaders of the church, and preaching and teaching the primary modes of communications. Why that should be so, I do not know. Why God chooses to act the way he does is known only to him.

Even where the prophets are to be found in the New Testament, their authority has diminished. First, there was the problem of false prophets and erroneous prophecies. The authors of Revelation and 1 John raise the issue of false prophets in the church. In 2 Thessalonians 2:2, Paul states that the church is not to believe a prophecy that says the day of the Lord has already come.

Even where the prophet was mostly right, he or she might not be completely right. The oldest document in the New Testament is Paul’s first letter to the Thessalonian church in which he says,

Do not quench the Spirit. Do not treat prophecies with contempt but test them all; hold on to what is good, reject every kind of evil. (1 Thes 5: 19-22)

The church must respect the prophets and not put out the spirit’s fire, but it also must test everything the prophet says. Hold on to the good, Paul says, but toss out the garbage.  Similarly, the author of 1 John says:

Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. (1 John 4:1)

The New Testament prophet does not speak with absolute, unquestionable authority. The prophet’s word is subject to the community’s judgment: “the others should weigh carefully what is said” (1 Corinthians 14:29). Paul’s direction in 1 Corinthians 14:37 also makes it clear that prophetic authority is subordinate to apostolic authority. For the post-apostolic generation, apostolic authority has been encapsulated in the canon of the Bible.

Modern-Day Prophets

Prophecy as Social Criticism

Some modern-day prophets practice what I would call a “de-mythologized” form of prophecy. Prophecy is defined down to a form of cultural criticism aimed at the church or society-at-large. The following quote attributed to Allen & Williamson in Preaching the Old Testament captures the essence of this train of thought:

A prophet is similar to an ombudsperson whose work is to measure how well a community lives out its values, and to points [sic] at which the community embodies its deepest understanding of the divine purposes. Of course, the community needs to have conversation about such matters. Thinking together often brings to the surface questions and perspectives that do not come to individuals reflecting alone. (Quoted here)

There are no literal burning bushes in this form of prophecy, no audible voices calling in the temple. Instead, inward conviction or a burning sense of injustice drive the prophet. The prophet actively thinks and reflects on the issues of the day; he or she is not merely a passive instrument who passes along the very words (ipsissima verba) of God.

This is a “de-mythologized” form of prophecy because its practitioners tend to see the Old Testament prophets through the lens of their own practices. The Old Testament prophets were more or less just like them. The “mythological” baggage of theophanies and miracles are insignificant; it’s the message of social justice, cultural change or ecclesiastical righteousness that really counts.

There are good rhetorical reasons for speakers to wrap themselves in the prophet’s mantle. The use of prophetic language not only endows the social critic’s thoughts with unquestionable religious validation, it casts the critic’s opponents as evil and their ideas as unworthy of respect.

Prophecy as a Charismatic Gift

At the other end of the spectrum, there is that segment of charismatic Christianity that takes prophecy more literally. Some report dramatic encounters with God in which they discover their prophetic call. Subsequently, their thoughts and feelings are not merely their own; they are very directly the word of God. The charismatic prophets get “a word from God” or “a word of knowledge” that very literally reveals the hidden mind of God. The word can pertain to things both great and small, perhaps telling someone to take a particular action or perhaps explaining why a particular event occurred or even predicting an event that will occur. Sometimes the prophetic word has a newspaper horoscope vagueness about it; it is worded in such a way that it can almost apply to anyone. At other times, the prophetic word is very specific but not falsifiable. That is, it is specific but cannot be shown to be wrong, as in an explanation why someone is ill or a direction that someone should accept a particular job. Occasionally, the prophetic word is both specific and subject to objective verification, as when a prophet predicts the date of Jesus’ return. Whether specific, verifiable prophecies frequently come to pass, I do not know. I doubt it, because I have not seen it to be true.

We’re Not Classical Prophets

I think both modern-day forms of prophecy are basically in error. The Old Testament prophets, I believe, were in fact similar to what the modern charismatic prophets believe themselves to be. They were not merely social critics who dressed up their criticism in religious language. I do not believe, however, that charismatic prophecy is, as a rule, the manner in which God guides the church today. Today, I think, God works primarily (and indirectly) in our thinking and reflecting, both individually and communally. Our thinking and reflecting are anchored in the Holy Scriptures, which are God’s enduring and objective revelation for his church.

It is much better, I think, to take responsibility for our own ideas and decisions than to attribute them directly to God. God is at work in our thinking, feeling and deciding, but so are our mental preconceptions and limitations. So are our fears, biases and emotional attachments. So are our behavioral preferences, learned responses and ingrained habits. All of our rational and emotional processes take place in the human brain and they carry enormous neurological baggage.

It is impossible for me to tell where the spirit’s inspiration stops and my own mixed-up thinking kicks in. I trust that God is at work through it all while I acknowledge that God might not be the source of it all.

Is it not possible that God would inspire 21st century Christian prophets in the same way he inspired the prophets of Israel nearly 3000 years ago? Of course he could. The question is, does he? Again, it does not appear to me that he does.

The Way of Wisdom and Character

Instead of claiming to be prophets who speak for God, what if we simply tried to develop wisdom based on what God has shown us to be true in the Holy Scriptures? The way of wisdom develops over time as our minds take on the mind of Christ. Our characters are transormed and reshaped by the Holy Spirit through word and sacrament. Our lives are changed as we abide in Christ and in his church. The law of God is written on our hearts.

The way of wisdom does not offer instant or final solutions to the problems of the church or the world. Wisdom develops over time. We could not claim to speak with infallibility or absolute certainty. Instead, we would have to say things like “here is what I have come to believe to be true, and why. ” Our thinking would be subject to change based on new evidence or alternative lines of reasoning, and we could not expect that everyone would come to agree with us. We would not always get our way. I have no problem with any of that. Claiming prophetic authority does make any of these problems go away.

When someone says “God told me so,” that doesn’t inspire confidence in me. I would be at least as likely to listen to someone if they said, “I was thinking,” or “I had this experience that led me to believe” or “I was reading this part of the Bible when I started to realize.” When someone claims to be a prophet or speak prophetically, it adds nothing to the person’s argument. At worst, claiming prophetic authority can reveal a damnable and presumptuous arrogance (Deuteronomy 18:20). At best, the prophets still need to make their case based on scripture and reason.

God Still Speaks

Let me end on a positive note. God still speaks. On a global scale, we see him speaking in the Protestant Reformation under teachers like Luther and Calvin and in the evangelical awakening under preachers like Wesley and Asbury. More recently, we’ve seen him speak through men like Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Martin Luther King, Jr. An honest look at all of these men, though, puts them in a category different than Old Testament prophets. They were right about a lot of important things, but they weren’t always right about everything. Some of their ideas took us places we didn’t need to go. That’s understandable. They were human beings. Even with the most influential leaders in the Christian community, we need, as Paul said, to weigh everything.

Sometimes, this process is quite messy and confusing. Perhaps the best example of this that I have come across lately is found in Philip Jenkins book Jesus Wars. Jenkin’s tells the story of the Council of Chalcedon and the struggles of the church in the fifth, sixth and seventh centuries. On a human level, it is a ugly story filled with jealousy, ambition, vindictiveness and violence. However, each of the church’s combatants (for I know no better word) also had something important to say. It is amazing to me how, at the end of the day, such an ugly process produced anything close to the truth, but it did. The Council of Chalcedon basically got it right. (And three cheers for the Tome of Leo!)

At the other end of the spectrum, God still speaks to individuals and small communities of faith. Through reading, studying and meditating on the scriptures. Through the liturgical and sacramental and teaching life of the church. Through Christian conversation and reading Christian authors. Through our individual and communal experiences. Through thinking and reflecting on all of these. This kind of speaking does not always produce the kind of certainty, clarity or specificity that we want. We continue to live in faith even when we don’t understand it all.

But it certainly does happen. In the midst of reading the scriptures, something new occurs to me. While listening to the preached word or reading a Christian author, I have a new thought, a new understanding, a new direction to take, a new command to obey. Again, I must weigh everything, but I can’t wait for absolute certainty. When I hear the voice of God, as best as I understand it, I must listen and respond in faith.

Shane Raynor recently wrote on the same text in How Not to Speak for God.

Related:

• From Pyrotechnics to Prophets
• He has Spoken through the Prophets
• On Spiritual Gifts and Love
• More on Spiritual Gifts
• In Fulfillment of the Scriptures
• When I Sent You Out
• A Traveling Band

O Lord, our Lord, how majestic is your name in all the earth! When I look at the heavens and consider the vastness of the universe you have made — what are human beings, that you think of them; mere mortals, that you care for them? Yet you made them little less than angels, and crowned them with glory and honor.

Our God, indeed what a precious resource are human beings, that you would entrust their lives to us. We are truly grateful for outstanding work of the men and women of the Adjutant General Corps whom we honor today. Their faithful service sustains the daily life of our Soldiers – their careers, their livelihoods, their ability to provide for their families and even their hopes for the future – and their work lays the foundation for our strong Army teams. Through their example of excellence, inspire us all to do our best for the men and women whose well-being depends on us. Give us eyes always to see the men and women we serve as human treasures to be prized, and not just as tools to be used. Empower us to be faithful stewards of all that you place in our care, for the good of all those made in your image. In your name we pray, Amen.

What we see in this Sunday’s reading from Deuteronomy 18:15-20 is one of a number of turns that take place in the history of God’s dealings with his people. It is one way-station in the covenantal journey from Abrahm to Christ.

This section of Deuteronomy looks forward to the time when Israel will inhabit the land of promise. In Deuteronomy 18:9-14, Moses commanded the people to have no dealings with religious practices of the Canaanites whose land they would possess. Among those practices were various sorts of divination, interpretation of omens, communicating with the dead and connecting with invisible spirits. Everyone from kings to farmers appealed to these magical practices for guidance. Kings needed guidance on war and peace; farmers needed guidance on when to plant their crops. Everyone needed divine guidance on something.

In the wilderness of Sinai, the people experienced divine guidance very directly, through hearing the audible voice of God and literally seeing the fire of his presence. Moses knew the people would still need divine guidance after they entered the land of promise, but it was time for the means of that guidance to change. The people could not continue to bear the glorious, unmediated presence of the almighty, and they would be tempted to fill the void with the practices of their Canaanite neighbors.

When you enter the land of promise, Moses said, God will still lead you and speak to you. God will raise up a prophet (“one who speaks for someone else”) like Moses who will speak God’s words to the people. The people should obey the prophets, just as they obey God. And prophets should only say what God tells them to say. People can bear the presence of a human prophet in their midst more easily than they can bear the glorious and holy presence of God face-to-face.

In Deuteronomy 18, then, the story of Abraham’s family is taking another turn. Instead of a thundering voice and a pillar of fire, the people will get prophets. Indeed, the Old Testament gives us a number of different kinds of prophets at various points in Israel’s history.

The story continues through many turns until it arrives at Jesus. Jesus is truly the prophet par excellence whom God raised up among his fellow Israelites (v. 18), but he is also more than a prophet. There is a qualitative difference between what Jesus did and what Isaiah and Jeremiah did. In the human Jesus, we human beings encounter something like the glorious divine presence of Sinai. To be sure, this is a different kind of glory. It is glory revealed on a cross and in an empty tomb. It is glory revealed both in acts of power and acts of humility. It is, nonetheless, the immediate presence of God in a human life. Jesus did not just speak God’s word; he embodied God’s word.

The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John 1:14)

This, to me, is how the passage fits into the gospel story. God has been speaking and making himself known in many ways. Now, he speaks to us and makes his presence known in Christ. The author of Hebrews also understood this to be true:

In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe. The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven. Hebrew 1:1-3

There is a qualitative difference between what Jesus did and what the prophets did, but Jesus’ story is rooted in God’s ancient deallings with his people Israel. Jesus brings God’s prophetic story to completion.

Continued at: Prophets Then and Now

Here’s my answer: it is not only a Christian prayer, it is the Christian prayer. It is the church’s prayer, and its use by bodies other than the church is highly presumptuous.

h/t Religion Clause

Related:
The Lord’s Prayer: A Prayer for Itinerant Disciples
The Use of the Lord’s Prayer

McKnight contrasts what I would call the apostolic gospel with what he calls the “soterian” gospel, and a “gospel culture” with what he calls a “salvation culture.” His target is a reductionist version of Reformation teaching, one that has been narrowed down to a bare-bones plan of salvation: God loves you. You are a sinner. Jesus died for you. Believe in Jesus to be saved. While these statements are true, McKnight says, they are not the gospel. The story of king Jesus as the one who brings the story of God’s dealings with Israel to its climax is the gospel. Separated from the story of Israel, the salvation message is incomplete at best and misleading at worst.

One of the things that McKnight wants the church to do is to recapture what he calls a “gospel culture.” To that end, McKnight shows a remarkable appreciation (for an Anabaptist) for the historic creeds and the liturgical calendar. The Nicene Creed and Apostles Creeds are closely related to the proto-creed of 1 Corinthians 15. In the liturgical calendar, the church immerses itself in the story of Jesus’ life. Even the sacraments of baptism and communion help the church live immersed in a gospel culture, even though McKnight can’t quite bring himself to say that God acts or gives himself to us in the sacraments. And at one point, McKnight seems to say that sacramental Christianity (with its emphasis on belonging) is sub-evangelical, even as evangelical (with its emphasis on deciding) is sub-gospel. I wish McKnight had a greater appreciation for how God gave us the sacraments as the means of entering and living in this gospel culture he describes. Both evangelical and sacramental Christians need to hear McKnight’s message. Liturgical and sacramental Christians should have an “a-ha” moment as they read McKnight: “That’s exactly what we do when we worship!”

Overall, McKnight’s The King Jesus Gospel is an important contribution to American evangelical Christianity.The book is very accessible to a lay audience; it’s not too technical and is a fast read. It would make a great book for a church discussion group.

The passing of the peace before communion shares some characteristics with the evangelical greeting ritual: it is a greeting, and usually involves shaking hands. The similarity, however, ends there.

In the historic liturgy, the offering of peace to each other does not come at the beginning of the worship service, but before the offering and the Eucharistic prayer. It comes after the reading of the scriptures and the preaching of the sermon. In other words, we offer our peace to each other in response to God’s word. Our peace is not the natural state of affairs; it exists only because it has been created by the word of God, and by what God has done for us in Jesus Christ. When we offer peace to each other, it is an act of faith, believing that God has called and empowered us to do this.

The greeting of “Peace” has its roots in the ancient Hebrew greeting of “Shalom.” The Hebrew word encompasses a wide variety of meanings: peace between people or nations, peace between God and human beings, human welfare or well-being, safety, or a quiet, restful state of mind. Shalom is “wholeness,” a life where things are as they should be. The church took over the greeting of peace (eirene in Greek, pax in Latin) from its Jewish forbears, and Islam carried it into Arabic: as salaam alaikum. At its most basic, when people greet one another with the word “peace,” it means “you don’t have to be afraid of me and I wish for your well being.”

“Peace” became a common Christian greeting very early in the New Testament era. The oldest Christian document in the New Testament is a letter (1 Thessalonians) in which Paul begins, “Grace and peace to you.” Peter, Jude and the author of Revelation also begin their letters with greetings of peace. Paul starts most of his letters this way, usually adding “from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” While Christians share the greeting of “peace” with our Jewish kinfolk and our Muslim neighbors, we understand it in a way that they do not. Peace is a gift of God the Father given through the Lord Jesus Christ. The peace that we wish for another is rooted in the one who is himself our peace.

In fact, when we say “Peace be with you,” we are saying the very same words that the risen Jesus said when he greeted his disciples after the resurrection. Through the power of the Holy Spirit, Jesus once again speaks through us these words of blessing and comfort.

By using this ancient and biblical greeting in our worship, we are saying that we aren’t just any group of people who happen to be meeting together as friends. We are the church of Jesus Christ. Our unity – our peace – is not rooted in the fact that we happen to like playing golf together or our kids are on the same soccer team or even in our ordinary human friendships; we are together as brothers and sisters in worship because of and through Jesus Christ. When we gather as the church to worship, even our greeting reminds us of the basis of our union with each other in this place.

In fact, the greeting of peace moves us beyond ordinary human friendships. We give the same greeting of peace to those to whom we feel close, and to those we don’t. Before we come to the communion table, we even offer the greeting of peace to those who might be our enemies. Jesus said,

If you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother or sister has something against you, leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to them; then come and offer your gift. (Matthew 5:23-24)

When we greet each other in peace before we share communion, we are fulfilling Jesus’ command. We only offer our Eucharist – our offering of praise and thanksgiving – after we are reconciled to each other. The fellowship of the table is not only a sign of peace between God and his people, it is also a sign of peace among God’s people. To come to the table without reconciling oneself with one’s neighbor is a sham.

So sometimes “passing the peace” can be a little uncomfortable. It can remind us of how broken and incomplete our relationships with our brothers and sisters really are. We can and should offer peace to another, not based in our natural human emotions or affections, but in faith that Jesus has indeed established peace for us and among us. Faith drives us to live in that peace and claim that peace, even if we don’t feel it and even if in our sinfulness we sometimes fall short of it. To greet one another in peace is an act of faith, and it should compel us to make that peace more real among us.

Finally, the peace is not just a greeting we share before we come to the table, it is a priestly blessing that we offer each other. In the liturgy, the sharing of peace not only precedes the offering of the Eucharist, it concludes the prayers of the people. In pronouncing peace upon each other we are, in effect, praying for each other. We are asking God to give peace, in all its fullness, to our brothers and sisters in Christ. “Peace be with you” is a blessing that we pronounce in the name and power of Jesus Christ, risen from the dead. All of the baptized are members of a “royal priesthood,” called and empowered by the Holy Spirit to offer the blessings of the risen Christ to the world.

The peace of the Lord be with you.

Related:
Peace Be With You