"As Any Had Need" -- Acts 2:42-47 (4th Sunday in Easter)

Photo credit: Marlis Trio Akbar, used with permission via Unsplash

To listen to the sermon, you can click here.

I find this Scripture endlessly fascinating, and challenging beyond almost any other Scripture. It is right up there with “Love your enemy” – or “Take up your cross and follow me.”This Scripture is akin to, “You lack one thing. Sell everything you have, and give to the poor.”Ouch. You know, those Scriptures that carry so much truth, but leave us asking: Is that humanly possible?

In this morning’s Scripture, the first followers of Christ, in the days after Resurrection and Pentecost—they looked back and remembered how they had experienced aliveness in radical sharing.^[1] They are all together worshipping, learning, praying, eating their meals together. And they were in such solidarity – that what mattered most to them was human need. They lived out of a place of deep empathy. They sold what they had – and they distributed the proceeds to anyone who had need, when there was need, whatever the need.  No more private ownership or hoarding. Everything was held in common. No yours, no mine – just ours. They shared everything in relationships of mutuality, and they allocated goods according to real, human need.

And so, the question: Do you think this ever really happened?

[survey the congregation: Who thinks NO?  Who thinks YES? Who thinks, Maybe?]

Well, if you are in the “no” group – “no, this didn’t actually happen” – you are not alone. There are plenty of scholars who take that as a starting assumption: Yes, this is a snapshot of early Christian community, but it has been “touched up” and “colorized” – Photo-shopped.^[2]This is, they say, an idealized version of those early days, intended to draw even more people into the life we find in the Risen Christ.

I’ve preached this Scripture – or a nearly identical scripture in Acts, chapter 4 – pretty much every year. I looked back, and early on, I said that this snapshot was “a memory of who they hoped to be.”^[3] I still think that’s a nice turn of phrase, but it was maybe a little evasive. I think what I was getting at is that it’s not so much a memory of something that actually happened – but some memory of some experience, so good, so moving, so life-giving – that it became a hope. A taste of good that led them to say, This is who we long to be.

Over the years, I’ve moved in my thinking on this Scripture, as I’ve wrestled with the question, “Well, why not? Why rule out the possibility that this could have happened?” Maybe it happened for a moment – or two. Isn’t it possible? If it did happen, we know that it wasn’t for long. This lovely, powerful vision is Chapter 2 of Acts, and things go off the rails in Chapter 5 – as one scholar says, this moment was “not sustained, and never regained.”^[4]  

But, Resurrection and Pentecost were world-transforming experiences. Maybe in those first days, there was this clarity of sharing:

We are in this together. Christ is alive – God has poured God’s spirit into all flesh – your flesh as much as my flesh – our flesh together. They had, after all, lived life with Jesus who said, “The Spirit is upon me to bring Good News to the poor, freedom to the prisoner and all who are oppressed, and the forgiveness of every debt.” They had lived all this out with Jesus, and now, what they are saying in Acts chapter 2 – and we continued to live it out in the community of the Risen Christ – the Greek word for that quality of community is koinonia. Perhaps this actually did happen for a moment, and, in that moment, we glimpsed and we understood who we are meant to be... in Christ.

I’m still a work in process with my understanding of this Scripture. It is working me over time, and I think that’s a good thing. And right now, rather than coming up with more of an answer, I’m wondering this question: Why have I been – why are we – so quick to assume that this couldn’t have happened? Or that it feels more impossible or highly unlikely than it feels actually possible? Karoline Lewis puts it like this: Why are we so quick to consider this description of community as beyond our natural reach?^[5] 

After all, she points out – there is a lot here in Acts 2:42-47 that is totally within our reach.^[6] “They were all together and, day by day, they spent much time together.” We could spend more time together – quality time. “They broke bread together at home, sharing meals with glad and generous hearts.” We know what that’s like. We could do that. More of that. Devoting ourselves to prayer, praising God – we’re doing that right now – we could deepen our life of prayer and praise. Much of this koinonia quality-of-community is not out of our reach.

It’s just this radical sharing thing. They sold their possessions and their goods. They distributed the proceeds to all. They gave to anyone as anyone has need. Sitting in the United States in 2026, that is profoundly counter-cultural. And it was for them too. With some humility, we should name that it may be more uncomfortable and counter-cultural for Western and European-influenced cultures. There are plenty of cultures around the world not as addicted to ownership of personal property. In our worship class, someone pointed out that indigenous cultures often are far closer to economies of sharing and commonality. We see that in the work of Robin Wall Kimmerer, particularly her amazing book The Serviceberry.

But the dominant culture in the United States is anchored and driven by an economy based not on need, but on supply and demand, driven by the notion that when everyone acts in their self-interest, things work out.

What Luke describes here in  Acts 2:42-47 and then repeats in Acts 4 is radically different from that. It involves what one writer has called “a remarkable redistribution of resources.”^[7] What others have called “a cooperative commonwealth” or “a community of goods”  or “communitarianism” – a worldview that centers the common good and communal networks of care.^[8]

The communal economy described here is profoundly counter-cultural – for us – and it also would have been in their day. We’ve talked about what their world was like – Herod’s world – it was a world of layered power over – the Roman Empire – a puppet governor – corrupt and complicit religious leaders. Each level of power extracting all they can from the people. Most folks lived a bare subsistence living – just enough to live this day, and then the next. The quality of community we find in this Scripture – this koinonia – it resists and rejects those systems of hierarchy and replaces them with a community of “mutual aid” and sharing. It is a way of countering all that power-over. Living in community like this – it is an act of Resistance.^[9]

And to understand how radical... I want us to think of what it might look like if that was lived out today.

So on one end of the spectrum we have the economy that we inhabit now. The distribution of good is determined mostly by market forces – supply, demand, and prices. Each person’s share of the goods is determined by their ability to pay – not by need.

A system that distributes according to need might look something like this. “They held everything in common.” Imagine that we gather here one day – each of us bringing what we own – deeds, cash, retirement accounts – and we sign it all over – we pool it together. “They sold what they had, and gave the proceeds to all, as any had need.” We’d figure out a way to think about what our baseline need was – food, shelter, access to healthcare – and we’d make sure everyone had enough, but not too much. We’d need some group of folks to decide that – maybe the deacons. In the early church, deacons were the folks who thought about things like this.

Or, maybe we kept some sense of private ownership – folks have their own home. But the deacons would keep track of where all the empty rooms are. So when someone needed shelter – they could say – you can go stay with so and so; you can go and stay next door.

And it wouldn’t be just for us – not just for the people in this room and online. “Day by day” they added to their number. We’d welcome all who came our way. And we would share with them too. And there would be other communities doing this too.

That’s very different from what we know.

But notice this too: It would mean we wouldn’t have to worry about so many of those things that folks worry about. For those living paycheck to paycheck, we wouldn’t need to worry: where is my next meal coming from? Or, how will I pay the rent? None of us would have to worry: Will I have enough as I age? This type of community comes with the mutual promise: We will take care of each other. I will take care of you, and you, me. As the Acts 4 texts says: There was no needy person among them. They ate together with glad and generous hearts.

Let’s go stand back in what we know. The community of Acts 2 feels so very distant. But it is not entirely foreign to us. I want us to think of glimpses that we have seen and know:

The Community Fridge. What this community has done with the community fridge is we have set up a distribution center for food, on this property, that is accessible to anyone 24/7. The operating principle is posted on the door of the fridge: “Take what you need. Leave what you can.” The economic model of the community fridge is no-questions-asked sharing. And so folks go to the store, buy food as they can, come here and share it. And others come and access that food, as any has need. AND, as the project has emerged – it’s reached out beyond just us. Preschool families bring food. Neighbor families bring food. The pantry pals have partnered with organizations that go and get the excess from grocery stores and bring it here. That’s one glimpse, of a sharing economy. Distributing goods, according to need.

The Guest Room. About 4 years ago now, Peter Anderson saw a need and kept voicing a need. We have immigrant neighbors who need shelter. This church has property. The property wasn’t built up as shelter – so over a couple years – working with the MIC accompaniment network – partnering with the denomination – you built out a shelter. And what had been unused space – is now available for a family to live.

Those are glimpses of what a sharing economy can look like. Neither is the fullness of what’s described in Acts 2. But each is a glimpse – not only possible, but real and embodied. Each helps Acts 2 feel... well, not quite so far away.

So my question for us – my challenge for us is: What next? What is the next thing? What is the next step that will move us from here... closer to there...

·      Starting with what has already come to life: Maybe each of us could make bringing food to the fridge a regularized practice – something we do every Tuesday or Wednesday. We learn by living. Practice transforms us over time.

·      We are at a moment in the Guest Room project when we have some space to imagine what next.

·      But beyond those two projects – what next? Maybe we think of what it would mean to embody a little more of the words we say in our land acknowledgements? Or to think of learning we have done around reparation?

·      Is there a next thing in this congregation’s decades-long commitment to hunger action, to alleviating food scarcity?

·      As we live all this out, what might need to be given up, or sold, or shared?

This Acts 2 – koinonia quality of community – it may feel counter-cultural – but there’s also something winsome and beautiful here. They took care of each other. The abundance that they experienced with Jesus – 5,000 hungry people fed – they continue to experience in a community of sharing. They are tending to human need. They are eating in each other’s homes.

And they keep on doing it. Day after day. Everyone has enough. This life of sharing became a practice. I think that’s important. It becomes woven into the fabric of their life. The aliveness that they experience in the community of the Risen Christ – living life together, learning, serving, eating meals together, sharing with everyone as anyone had need – it keps on bringing even more life.

So I guess it’s only fair for me to share where I am on that question that I raised at the start. This snapshot in Acts 2:42-47 – Did it really happen? Here’s where I am today:

I believe that this snapshot, this memory, this image of community is grounded in an actual, real experience of aliveness that our siblings in Christ lived out and embodied in those first days of Resurrection. It has so much aliveness to it – that it has lived on down through the centuries – so that when we read it, and talk about it, and hope it – in this moment – it is alive with possibility right here, right now for the living of our days. Together, in the Risen Body of Christ, alive in the world.

© 2026 Scott Clark

^[1] For general background on this text and the Book of Acts, see Margaret Aymer, Commentary on Working Preacher at https://www.workingpreacher.org/commentaries/revised-common-lectionary/fourth-sunday-of-easter/commentary-on-acts-242-47-3 ; Justo L. González, Acts (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2001); Karoline M. Lewis, Commentary in Connections, Year A, vol. 2 (Louisville, KY; Westminster John Knox Press, 2019), pp.243-44; Ian A. McFarland, Commentary in Connections, Year A, vol. 2 (Louisville, KY; Westminster John Knox Press, 2019), pp.241-42; Robert W. Wall, “The Acts of the Apostles,” New Interpreters’ Bible Commentary, vol. x (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2002); Demetrius K. Williams, “The Acts of the Apostles” in True to Our Native Land: An African American New Testament Commentary (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2008); Jeremy L. Williams, Commentary on Working Preacher at https://www.workingpreacher.org/commentaries/revised-common-lectionary/fourth-sunday-of-easter/commentary-on-acts-242-47-7 .

^[2] See also Wall, p.71.

^[3] See also McFarland, p.241, this image is an “anticipation of the end [goal].”

^[4] See McFarland, p.242.

^[5] See Lewis, p.243.

^[6] See id.

^[7] See Jeremy Williams, supra.

^[8] See Williams, Wall, Aymer, supra.

^[9] See Jeremy L. Williams, supra.