It's surprising to find an entire chapter of Acts that's essentially a court transcript. Luke devotes this chapter and the next to detailing the case against Paul and Paul's defense. The inclusion of this testimony makes sense if you keep in mind one of the primary themes of Acts, that Christianity is a natural outgrowth of Judaism and poses no threat to the Roman Empire. You will see, as we arrive at the end of the book, that there is no mention of Paul's execution in Rome. The story ends with Paul in Rome teaching about the Way. There are many who think that the reason the latter sections of Acts were written was to lay out a case before the Roman authorities who were to decide Paul's fate. That would explain why Luke will go to such trouble to lay out the specific legal arguments used against Paul and Paul's rebuttal of those points.
Felix is not unknown in history. He was appointed by the Emperor Claudius to the governorship of Judea based in Caesarea in the year 52. Felix was recalled to Rome from his post in 59 by the Emperor Nero. The woman Drusilla mentioned in Acts was the daughter of King Agrippa, who we shall read more about tomorrow. She was Felix's third wife and had been the wife of another King in the region before Felix divorced his wife, persuaded her to divorce her husband and marry him instead. (The Wikipedia article linked above has the succession of wives somewhat confused apparently.) His time in Judea came to an end when he responded in a particularly heavy handed way to a conflict in Caesarea by its populace about whether or not the city was essentially Jewish or Greek. Daggers were beginning to be drawn between the factions, the Jews had won a street brawl and Felix sent in troops to aid the "Greek" faction. Thousands of Jews were killed and the wealthy had their homes where looted by the troops. The Jewish leaders appealed to Rome and Felix was recalled. There's no further mention of him in existing historical accounts.
Given all that, the reason Felix decided to hold Paul in prison for two years becomes somewhat more understandable. He was trying to keep the tensions between factions in the region from erupting into violence. By holding Paul, whom the Jewish leaders wanted dead, Felix was hoping both for personal financial gain or seeking a bargaining chip with which to curry favor if needed. Paul's long imprisonment had nothing really to do with anything Paul had done. He was a pawn being caught up in a game between the powers of the world.
Having people of faith being used as pawns in the political region is not unknown of in our own day is it? Much of the conflict in the Church here in the United States is initiated by people with completely separate agendas from those of the people trying to follow the Way. Churchgoer is pitted against churchgoer as political activists try to create voting factions that will move in a particular direction on one issue or another. As in Paul's day, if you aren't aware of the bigger political picture, you can find yourself getting caught up in the emotions of the argument and falling into the trap of conflict prepared for you.
During Holy Week we remember that what we read is happening to Paul happened also to Jesus. The city of Jerusalem was boiling over as the crowds gathered to celebrate Passover. Pilate was charged with keeping the peace in the city. He didn't know who Jesus was, and didn't care to discover where God was in that particular moment. He just wanted to do what was expedient to keep the violence from erupting. He was canny enough to see that the death of one could prevent the sort of riots that would cause him to be recalled to Rome in the way that Felix after Felix failed to prevent the violence.
How aware are you of when the Church is being used as a pawn in a game? How have you been complicit? How have you refused to participate?
I don't think the Church realistically has the option of completely withdrawing from the secular sphere, though that's certainly been attempted many times in our history.
No comments:
Post a Comment