Ultimately, distractions

One of the interesting things about the Epistle reading on the Sunday after the Nativity of the Lord is that, although the day is a festive commemoration of the Prophet David, Joseph the Betrothed and - pointedly - James the Brother of the Lord, the Apostle Paul insists on down-playing the role of Jerusalem and James in his own encounter with - and understanding of - the Gospel. He takes pains to insist that his own encounter with Christ and understanding of the Gospel is not mediated through the witness and teaching of the disciples-turned-apostles. He has not sat as a student at their feet, He has not made a pilgrimage to the Jerusalem to soak up its sanctity, to join in its fellowship, to receive its tradition. He does not mention his baptism or preaching in Damascus, but instead highlights the fact that he travelled to Arabia and Damascus for over three years after his conversion before returning to Jerusalem. And in Jerusalem he spent only a couple of weeks, and in those few days met only with James and not with any other apostles. In this text he mentions nothing at all about the teaching of the apostles, the fellowship of the Jerusalem believers and their worship, his own 'connection' with these eye-witnesses of Christ. Instead of gushing about this encounter, he writes about it as if it were a a mere formality, perhaps something that he has to mention simply to establish his bona fides without crediting any of it with too much importance for his proclamation of the Gospel.

So: here we are on a day which commemorates the Apostles James - and the Epistle actually tends to minimize the importance of James in the spiritual formation and message of Paul.

This reminds us that as wonderful as the Holy City and the Holy Land are, and as important as they may be, our faith is not ultimately tied to them. So too, authenticity of Orthodox faith - the Gospel itself - is not tied to this or that Apostle, this or that place, who we met, who was our teacher, the golden chain of the spiritual teaching we have received. These things are indeed wonderful and inspiring and powerful as well as comforting. But however proud we may be of our citizenship, our cultural tradition, our nations - and no matter how grateful and truly indebted we are to those who are our touchstones and authorities in the faith, even those who gave us spiritual birth and those who nurtured us - we have to distinguish between the message and the messengers, the one thing truly needful and those who have pointed us toward it. We need to be able to shed the enchantments - without repudiating anything save their totalitarian claims - to shed the enchantments which we substitute for the personal appropriation of the Gospel.

The Apostle Paul stands in a certain contrast to all those who appeal to the authority of holy places and holy teachers to justify their own claim and position in matters of faith. I think this an important reminder to us, as even now our own church life is coloured by urgent appeals of some to the past or elsewhere as sources of authentic church life, as well as appeals to the putative uniqueness of the American experience and its vocation as the destiny of our little flock.