The Second Sunday of Easter is April 7, 2024.

This particular Sunday, which features the Gospel reading of the encounter between Thomas the Apostle and Jesus regarding His wounds, is traditionally known as Quasimodo Sunday, taken from the Latin Introit:

Quasi modo geniti infantes, rationabile, sine dolo lac concupiscite.

This translates to: ‘As newborn babes, desire the rational milk without guile’ and is intended for those baptised the week before.

You can read more about Quasimodo Sunday here. The Victor Hugo character got his nickname because he had been left abandoned as a child at Notre Dame Cathedral on that particular day.

Readings for Year B can be found here.

An exegesis for the Gospel, John 20:19-31, is also available.

The First Reading is as follows (emphases mine):

Acts 4:32-35

4:32 Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common.

4:33 With great power the apostles gave their testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was upon them all.

4:34 There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold.

4:35 They laid it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.

Commentary comes from Matthew Henry and John MacArthur.

These verses from Acts, which St Luke wrote, discuss the poor church in Jerusalem after the first Pentecost, at which time the Jews celebrated the Feast of Weeks, or Shavuot, along with Passover being one of the Three Pilgrimage Festivals, the third of which was the autumn Feast of Booths (Tabernacles), Sukkot. There were a many pilgrims present for Shavuot, meaning that there were Hellenist (Greek) Jews from distant lands, hence the foreign languages spoken at Pentecost. Having witnessed Pentecost, they remained in Jerusalem afterwards. As such, the new congregation was not solely made up of permanent residents of Jerusalem.

The group was so Spirit-filled that they were of one heart and soul; no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common (verse 32).

Matthew Henry explains:

Behold, how good and how pleasant it was to see how the multitude of those that believed were of one heart, and of one soul (v. 32), and there was no such thing as discord nor division among them. Observe here, 1. There were multitudes that believed; even in Jerusalem, where the malignant influence of the chief priests was most strong, there were three thousand converted on one day, and five thousand on another, and, besides these, there were added to the church daily; and no doubt they were all baptized, and made profession of the faith; for the same Spirit that endued the apostles with courage to preach the faith of Christ endued them with courage to confess it. Note, The increase of the church is the glory of it, and the multitude of those that believe, more than their quality. Now the church shines, and her light is come, when souls thus fly like a cloud into her bosom, and like doves to their windows, Isa 60 1, 8. 2. They were all of one heart, and of one soul. Though there were many, very many, of different ages, tempers, and conditions, in the world, who perhaps, before they believed, were perfect strangers to one another, yet, when they met in Christ, they were as intimately acquainted as if they had known one another many years. Perhaps they had been of different sects among the Jews, before their conversion, or had had discords upon civil accounts; but now these were all forgotten and laid aside, and they were unanimous in the faith of Christ, and, being all joined to the Lord, they were joined to one another in holy love. This was the blessed fruit of Christ’s dying precept to his disciples, to love one another, and his dying prayer for them, that they all might be one. We have reason to think they divided themselves into several congregations, or worshipping assemblies, according as their dwellings were, under their respective ministers; and yet this occasioned no jealousy or uneasiness; for they were all of one heart, and one soul, notwithstanding; and loved those of other congregations as truly as those of their own. Thus it was then, and we may not despair of seeing it so again, when the Spirit shall be poured out upon us from on high.

John MacArthur says:

The first and beautiful thing about it was that there was a real spiritual participation, not just that they all belonged to the same organization – not an organizational thing at all, but a real thing – they had one heart and one soul.

They felt what everybody felt unitedly. They thought unitedly, they were like one big brain, they were in the truest sense, the body. They had one heartbeat and one soul … And you notice that they don’t number them anymore; it’s getting too big to even number, so many are coming to Christ.

You say, “Well, what was it that was bringing them in?” It was this fantastic testimony of love and unity. Jesus had said, in John 13, “Here’s a new commandment I’m going to give you, love one another,” and He said, “by this shall all men know that you’re my disciples. They’ll be drawn to you if they see your love.” And they did, and they were. And in John, chapter 17:21, Jesus said, “If you’ll only be one, the world will know that God sent Me.” And they were one, and the world knew, and the world watched, and many believed.

And so, the church had grown to the place where they don’t even number it anymore, and as big as it was, over 20,000 people, they were one. You say, “It’s impossible.” No, it’s not. It’s not impossible. You say, “What made them one?” Two things: a preoccupation with each other, and a preoccupation with taking the gospel to the lost. They were so busy worrying about the needs of each other, they couldn’t have cared less about their own glory, and their own self-esteem, and their own satisfaction.

They were so busy running around making sure everybody else’s need got met that they couldn’t have cared less about themselves. Secondly, they were too busy winning the world to Jesus to bother with trivialities. They had two priorities that Jesus had given them, get together and reach the world. That’s all He ever said for them to do. Just be one and reach the world. And they were too busy doing that to get lost in anything else. And so, there was a kind of genuineness, and a kind of unity that has never existed since in the church.

Just as Henry laments the loss of this unity in his final sentence in his above analysis, so does MacArthur in our era. Yet, neither despairs, because, given the right mindset, this beautiful spiritual unity could happen again one day. MacArthur says:

One heart, one soul. Oh, how different it would be today; how different! You say, “Well, how do you get that unity?” And we’ve talked about it so many times, only just a review, quick. Unity comes from love, love comes from humility, humility comes from a correct evaluation of yourself, the right spiritual knowledge. If you really see who you are in relation to Jesus Christ, there’s only one thing you can be: humble. And if you’re really humble, there is only one thing you can do: really love.

And if you really love, there’s only one thing that comes out of it: unity. And they had it. And they were preoccupied with each other, and with winning the world. They were too busy winning the world to worry about their own needs and their own selves, and so consequently, everybody was caring for everybody else, and you didn’t have to care for yourself. What a beautiful kind of preoccupation; oh my, how rich and how sweet their fellowship must have been, and how ours could be, if we ever got to the place where we understood our two priorities.

Love and care for each other and reach the world, and let everything just drop.

With great power the Apostles gave the testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was upon them all (verse 33).

Of the Apostles’ testimony about the Resurrection, Henry says:

The doctrine they preached was, the resurrection of Christ: a matter of fact, which served not only for the confirmation of the truth of Christ’s holy religion, but being duly explained and illustrated, with the proper inferences from it, served for a summary of all the duties, privileges, and comforts of Christians. The resurrection of Christ, rightly understood and improved, will let us into the great mysteries of religion. By the great power wherewith the apostles attested the resurrection may be meant, 1. The great vigour, spirit, and courage, with which they published and avowed this doctrine; they did it not softly and diffidently, but with liveliness and resolution, as those that were themselves abundantly satisfied of the truth of it, and earnestly desired that others should be so too. Or, 2. The miracles which they wrought to confirm their doctrine. With works of great power, they gave witness to the resurrection of Christ, God himself, in them, bearing witness too.

At that point, Peter had already cured a lame man in his 40s (Acts 4:22).

It should also be noted that Jerusalem’s leaders were still against our Lord, now ascended to heaven, and preaching about Him, so active opposition met the Apostles and the congregation.

Nevertheless, preaching and conversions continued.

Henry has this to say about the grace that abounded:

The beauty of the Lord our God shone upon them, and all their performances: Great grace was upon them all, not only all the apostles, but all the believers, charis megale—grace that had something great in it (magnificent and very extraordinary) was upon them all. 1. Christ poured out abundance of grace upon them, such as qualified them for great services, by enduing them with great power; it came upon them from on high, from above. 2. There were evident fruits of this grace in all they said and did, such as put an honour upon them, and recommended them to the favour of God, as being in his sight of great price. 3. Some think it includes the favour they were in with the people. Every one saw a beauty and excellency in them, and respected them.

There was not a needy person among them, for as many that owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold (verse 34).

Henry explains that the believers had no interest in materialism, the love of things in this world:

These believers were so taken up with the hopes of an inheritance in the other world that this was as nothing to them. No man said that aught of the things which he possessed was his own, v. 32. They did not take away property, but they were indifferent to it. They did not call what they had their own, in a way of pride and vainglory, boasting of it, or trusting in it. They did not call it their own, because they had, in affection, forsaken all for Christ, and were continually expecting to be stripped of all for their adherence to him. They did not say that aught was their own; for we can call nothing our own but sin. What we have in the world is more God’s than our own; we have it from him, must use it for him, and are accountable for it to him. No man said that what he had was his own, idion—his peculiar; for he was ready to distribute, willing to communicate, and desired not to eat his morsel alone, but what he had to spare from himself and family his poor neighbours were welcome to. Those that had estates were not solicitous to lay up, but very willing to lay out, and would straiten themselves to help their brethren. No marvel that they were of one heart and soul, when they sat so loose to the wealth of this world …

Henry, citing Dr Lightfoot, an esteemed scholar of his day, also points out that the year of the first Pentecost was also a Jubilee year. As such, the sale of property fetched even more than it would have done normally:

Dr. Lightfoot computes that this was the year of jubilee in the Jewish nation, the fiftieth year (the twenty-eighth since they settled in Canaan fourteen hundred years ago), so that, what was sold that year being not to return till the next jubilee, lands then took a good price, and so the sale of those lands would raise the more money.

MacArthur has more:

It doesn’t say that Peter made an edict that all people admit that all they had was everybody’s.

It says this: “Neither said any of them that any of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.” They all said it. They all said, “Hey, whatever I have belongs to you if you need it.” You see, they had the right view of money, and they had the right view of possessions. You know what God’s view of it is? Whatever you have, in total, doesn’t belong to you. That’s principle number one. None of it. You say, “Wait a minute, I paid for it; 36 months I paid for it,” right? Let me tell you something. It’s not yours.

It isn’t yours. You say, “Whose is it?” It’s God’s, and it belongs to every other one who is His, if they need it …

They said, “Nothing that I have is mine; it all belongs to God, and consequently it all belongs to whoever’s His, who needs it.” Oh, that’s a terrific concept. So practical …

… you can always tell a man’s depth of love for Christ by what he sacrifices financially; that’s a measure of his life, because that’s where his Christianity gets right down to the real nitty gritty. You say, “That’s a pretty mundane concept.” I know, that’s just the point. That’s just the point. And you see, when we saw, in Acts 2, the church being born, you’ll remember that we saw there were a lot of pilgrims that came to Jerusalem, right?

And when they came to Jerusalem, they hadn’t any homes, and they hadn’t any support, and so they had a community of people who’d moved in on them who needed supply. Secondly, I’m sure they were some of those people who lost their jobs and certain things that they had for income. There were poor people all over the place in Jerusalem, and most of the believers were poor. And so, the rich were able to supply the needs of those that were poor, because they didn’t think that anything they owned belonged to them.

That’s a great concept. Whatever I have belongs to anybody who needs it, and at any moment when I know there’s a need, I should be able to liquidate everything I have to supply that need. And then you know what’ll happen? God will reap the harvest, and pour it back to me so much I won’t even be able to contain it. But I don’t do it for that reason. Look at verse 34, “Neither was there any among them that lacked.” You know, not one guy had anything that he needed? They just kept supplying – “for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold.”

Everybody went out and said, “Hey, I don’t need all that property over there. God’s going take care of me, and look over here. These folks, they have needs. I’ll just sell the land, and I’ll just bring it here, and you guys, let them meet their needs.” Now, that’s practical Christianity: practical. Now, that’s not communism; it doesn’t mean they sold the house they live in. It doesn’t mean that they gave up everything, and they all became poor and doled it out on an equal basis; not at all.

It means that when there were needs, they met the needs, and if it meant that they had to sell their property to do it, they did it. And don’t you think for a minute that God doesn’t want you to have any money. “God gives you all things richly to enjoy,” 1 Timothy 6 says, and the context there is money. He’s given you money ‘cause it’s a wonderful blessing. Now, if you love it, it’s going to mess you up, because the love of money is the root of all evil, right? Not money, and you can love it and have none of it, or you could have a whole lot of it, and not love it.

But it’s the love of it that’s the root of all evil. Jesus put it this way, and it couldn’t be more simple: “You cannot serve God and money.” Never met a man yet who had a goal in his mind to make money who was worth much to God. You can’t do it. But I never met a man who was really plugged in and Spirit-filled who didn’t have his money all out on the table for anybody who needed it. It’s always the way. Oh, what a wonderful attitude that early church had. Nobody really had any needs, because everybody was just pouring it in.

The well-off believers laid what they had at the Apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to each as any had needs (verse 35).

Henry praises this, as one would expect, but adds a warning about charitable disbursements:

Observe, The apostles would have it laid at their feet, in token of their holy contempt of the wealth of the world; they thought it fitter it should be laid at their feet than lodged in their hands or in their bosoms. Being laid there, it was not hoarded up, but distribution was made, by proper persons, unto every man according as he had need. Great care ought to be taken in the distribution of public charity, [1.] That it be given to such as have need; such as are not able to procure a competent maintenance of themselves, through age, infancy, sickness, or bodily disability, or incapacity of mind, want either of ingenuity or activity, cross providences, losses, oppressions, or a numerous charge. Those who upon any of these accounts, or any other, have real need, and have not relations of their own to help them—but, above all, those that are reduced to want for well doing, and for the testimony of a good conscience, ought to be taken care of, and provided for, and, with such a prudent application of what is given, as may be most for their benefit. [2.] That it be given to every man for whom it is intended, according as he has need, without partiality or respect of persons. It is a rule in dispensing charity, as well as in administering justice, ut parium par sit ratio—that those who are equally needy and equally deserving should be equally helped, and that the charity should be suited and adapted to the necessity, as the word is.

MacArthur points to the Offertory, when the collection plate is taken up to the altar for blessing and distribution. Catholics do not do that, which is fine, but Protestants — depending on the denomination — either see the offering blessed or see it blessed and placed on the altar for the remainder of the service.

MacArthur refers to this and adds another warning about charity:

… they brought it into a common store, gave it to the apostles, and the apostles dispensed it. That’s where we have the basis, or the initiation, really, of the kind of giving we do in the church, where the money is brought, it is placed into the hands of those who are the teaching pastors and elders, and they are responsible for distributing it as the needs arise. This is New Testament; this is biblical. And I think you need to be careful.

I think there are so many people who fall into the pattern of wanting to give their money only when they can determine its destiny, you know? They say, “Well, I want to buy that thing,” or “I want to give for that thing,” or “I want to give this over to this person,” or they want to pass their money out, only so that it goes where they think it ought to go. I don’t think that’s the truest kind of biblical giving. Also, I think that very often in that there’s the danger, then, of seeking a reward on a very superficial basis, the applause of men.

Whereas that secret kind of faithful giving, where you just bring it, and lay it there, and let it be distributed as God directs the man responsible, that’s the purest kind of giving. And I think that keeps you away from the danger of self-satisfaction or glory in the kind of giving you do, and that’s just a little footnote.

MacArthur concludes:

Money is not evil, as I said, but you can use it for God’s glory, or it can become a problem, and an inducer of evil. Well, the early church had it right, they had the right attitude toward money. You remember what Paul said, “Godliness with contentment is great gain.”

May all reading this enjoy a blessed Sunday.