[Index] [Previous] [Next]
2.3.6 - A History of Christianity in the Apostolic Age
Primitive Jewish Christianity
The Life of the Primitive Disciples - Choosing the Seven Administrators
In the beginning the disciples were very likely largely Galileans, but they soon won over to their faith many of the residents of Jerusalem, and as their circle widened, there entered not only Palestinian, but also Hellenistic Jews, who were largely represented in Jerusalem at this time, and even proselytes, who were also numerous in the city.
We first hear of such Hellenists and proselytes within the church in the sixth chapter of Acts. It is reported there that the Hellenists, or Grecian Jews, complained that in the daily distribution of alms their widows were neglected. [Wendt (in Meyer’s Commentary, 7th ed.) maintains that up to this time the distribution of alms had been in the hands not of the apostles, or at any rate not exclusively, but of private individuals, and that the change instituted duties hitherto performed by the apostles, but in bringing under official oversight and control a function which had been hitherto the business of no one in particular].
That this should have been the case is not surprising. Even when they were loyal or orthodox in their Judaism, the Hellenists were not always treated by their Palestinian brethren with the same measure of respect that was shown the Jew who had never made his home among the Gentiles.
It may well be that their traditional prejudice made itself felt even within the Christian circle, and had something to do with the cavalier treatment accorded the Hellenistic widows. It cannot be supposed that the difficulty was due to the fact that these Hellenists were less orthodox and less careful in their observance of the law then their brethren; for had that been the case, the division between the two classes in the church would have been more far-reaching and lasting than it was.
There is no reason, indeed, to suppose that the foreign Jews resident in Jerusalem were any less zealous for the traditions of the fathers and elders than the natives of the Holy Land. Their situation in Jerusalem was very different from the situation of those Hellenists who lived in Greek and Roman communities, and the influences that led the latter to allegorize and spiritualize the law were largely wanting in their case. It may safely be assumed that many of them would be particularly eager to atone for the bot upon their ancestry, or upon their own past, by uncommon zeal for the traditions of the fathers.
It is worthy of notice in this connection that the attack upon Stephen, which came a little later, and which was due to his supposed hostility to the Jewish law and temple, was instigated not by Palestinian but by foreign Jews. It is probable, then, that the reason for the neglect of the Hellenistic poor lay not in any differences of opinion or of practice, but solely in the traditional attitude of native Hebrews toward their foreign brethren.
It is to the credit of the apostles and the church in general that the neglect was no sooner discovered than steps were taken to correct it. The remedy proposed was simple but effective. It was the appointment of a board of committee, which should be responsible for the fair distribution of all the alms of the church.
The seven men thus appointed have been commonly called deacons since the second century, and it has been the custom to regard them as the first incumbents of that historic office. But they are not called deacons by Luke, or by any other New Testament writer, and there is no sign that there were ever deacons in the church of Jerusalem.
According to Epiphanius, the Ebioitic churches of Palestine in his time had only presbyters and archisynagogi [Epiphanius, Haer. III 18]. These Ebionites were the Jewish Christian reactionaries, who refused to advance with the Catholic church in its normal development. It is therefore significant that there were no deacons among them in the fourth century. But it is to be noticed, also, that the duties assigned to the Seven were not identical with the functions discharged by the regular deacons of whom we hear in the latter part of the first century. The former were put in charge of the alms giving of the Jerusalem church, while the latter acted simply as bishop’s assistants.
Used by permission of the publisher.
[Index] [Previous] [Next]