Acts 2:44–45 (NRSV):
“All who believed were together and had all things in common; they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need.”
Reflection:
It’s easy to romanticize the early church. We talk about unity and shared life as if they were simple, warm realities. But Luke’s description isn’t sentimental; it’s concrete. People sold possessions. Resources were redistributed. Need wasn’t spiritualized or delayed; it was dealt with. Resurrection wasn’t just a belief about heaven; it disrupted earthly economics. The text doesn’t suggest that everyone felt comfortable. It shows that belief in the risen Christ changed what people thought belonged to them.
Notice the shifts in this passage: ownership remains, but control becomes looser. “All things in common” doesn’t mean sameness; it means responsibility. The well-being of one becomes everyone’s concern. This isn’t charity as a fleeting act of kindness. It’s structural generosity. It’s a reordering of power—especially economic power. Those with resources give up some security so others aren’t left vulnerable. The community refuses to accept inequality as inevitable.
This goes beyond nostalgia. We can admire the early church while shielding ourselves from its implications. But the text refuses to be abstract. If resurrection is real, then scarcity isn’t the final truth. And if scarcity isn’t ultimate, then hoarding becomes harder to justify. The question isn’t whether we occasionally give. The question is whether our structures—our budgets, our institutional decisions, our daily habits—reflect trust in shared abundance or commitment to private preservation.
Lent does not ask for performative generosity. It asks for reflection. Where does our instinct for self-protection quietly override communal responsibility? Where do we justify comfort as prudence? Structural generosity is unsettling because it challenges what we use to feel safe. The early church did not merely feel inspired; they surrendered something tangible. If belief does not extend to our relationship with power and possessions, it remains superficial.
Application:
Choose one specific decision this week — regarding money, time, or resources — and act on it in a way that shows shared responsibility over personal preservation. Not an intention. A decision.
Writing Prompt:
What type of security feels impossible to touch in your life? What would it mean to release your hold on it?
Prayer:
Spirit who disrupts false security,
reframe our instincts around your abundance.
Teach us to hold power lightly
and take responsibility seriously.
Amen.