John Chrysostom, 4th c.

Homilies on the Acts of the Apostles / 4

Homily XXIII on Acts x. 23, 24.

Homily XXIII.

“Then called he them in, and lodged them. And on the morrow Peter went away with them, and certain brethren from Joppa accompanied him. And the morrow after they entered into Cæsarea. And Cornelius waited for them, and had called together his kinsmen and near friends.”

“He” called them in, and lodged them.” Good, that first he gives the men friendly treatment, after the fatigue of their journey, and makes them at home with him; “and on the morrow,” sets out with them.” And certain accompany him: this too as Providence ordered it, that they should be witnesses afterwards when Peter would need to justify himself. “And Cornelius was waiting for them, and had called together his kinsmen and near friends.” This is the part of a friend, this the part of a devout man, that where such blessings are concerned, he takes care that his near friends shall be made partakers of all. Of course (his “near” friends), those in whom he had ever full confidence; fearing, with such an interest at stake, to entrust the matter to others. In my opinion, it was by Cornelius himself that both friends and kinsmen had been brought to a better mind. “And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him.” (Acts 10:25.) This, both to teach the others, and by way of giving thanks to God, and showing his own humility: thereby making it plain, that though he had been commanded, yet in himself he had great piety. What then did Peter? “But Peter took him up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man.” (Acts 10:26.) Do you mark how, before all else (the Apostles) teach them this lesson, not to think great things of them? “And as he talked with him, he went in, and found many that were come together. And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath showed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.” (Acts 10:27–28.) Observe, he straightway speaks of the mercy of God, and points out to them that it is a great grace that God has shown them. Observe also how while he utters great things, at the same time he speaks modestly. For he does not say, We, being men who do not deign to keep company with any (such), have come to you: but what says he? “Ye know”—God commanded this^[1]—“that it is against law to keep company with, or come unto, one of another nation.” Then he goes on to say, “And to me God has shown”—this he says, that none may account the thanks due to him—“that I should call no man”—that it may not look like obsequiousness to him, “no human being,” says he—“common or unclean.”^[2] (Acts 10:29.) “Wherefore also”—that they may not think the affair a breach of the law on his part, nor (Cornelius) suppose that because he was in a station of command therfore he had complied, but that they may ascribe all to God,—“wherefore also I came without gainsaying as soon as I was sent for:” (though) not only to keep company, but even to come unto (him) was not permitted. “I ask therefore, for what intent ye have sent for me.” Already Peter had heard the whole matter from the soldiers also, but he wishes them first to confess, and to make them amenable to the Faith. What then does Cornelius? He does not say, Why, did not the soldiers tell thee? but observe again, how humbly he speaks. For he says, “From the fourth day I was fasting until this hour; and at the ninth hour I prayed in my house, and, behold, a man stood before me in bright clothing, and said, Cornelius, thy prayer is heard, and thine alms are come up for a memorial before God. And at the ninth hour,” he says, “I was praying.” (Acts 10:30–31.) It seems to me, that this man had also fixed for himself set times of a life under stricter rule, and on certain days.^[3] For this is why he he says, “From the fourth day.”^[4] See how great a thing prayer is! When he advanced in piety, then the Angel appears to him. “From the fourth day:” i.e. of the week; not “four days ago.” For, “on the morrow Peter went away with them, and on the morrow after they entered into Cæsarea:” this is one day: and the day on which the persons sent came (to Joppa) one day: and on the third (the Angel) appeared: so that there are two days after that on which (Cornelius) had been praying. “And, behold, a man stood before me in bright clothing:” he does not say, an Angel, so unassuming is he: “and said, Cornelius, thy prayer is heard, and thine alms are had in remembrance in the sight of God. Send therefore to Joppa, and call hither Simon, whose surname is Peter: he is lodged in the house of one Simon a tanner by the seaside: who, when he cometh, shall speak unto thee. Immediately therefore I sent to thee; and thou hast well done that thou art come. Now therefore are we all here present before God, to hear all things that are commanded thee of God.” (Acts 10:31–33.) (b) See^[5] what faith, what piety! He knew that it was no word of man that Peter spake, when he said, “God hath shown me.” Then says the man, “We are present to hear all things that are commanded thee of the Lord. (a) Therefore it was that Peter asked, “For what intent have ye sent for me?” on purpose that he might so speak these very words. (d) “Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respector of persons: but in every nation he that feareth Him, and worketh righteousness, is acceptable to him.” (Acts 10:34–35.) That is, be he uncircumcised or circumcised. (c) This also Paul declaring, saith, “For there is no respect of persons with God.”^[6] (Rom. 2:11.) (e) What then? (it may be asked) is the man yonder in Persia acceptable to Him? If he be worthy, in this regard he is acceptable, that it should be granted him to be brought unto faith (τᾥ καταξιωθἥναι τῆς πίστεως). The Eunuch from Ethiopia He overlooked not. “What shall one say then of the religious men who have been overlooked?” It is not the case, that any (such) ever was overlooked. But what he says is to this effect, that God rejects no man.^[7] “In every nation, he that feareth God and worketh righteousness:” (by righteousness) he means, all virtue. Mark, how he subdues all elation of mind in him. That (the Jews) may not seem to be in the condition of persons cast off (he adds), “The word which He sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: He is Lord of all (Acts 10:36): this he says also for the sake of those present (of the Jews), that He may persuade them also: this is why he forces Cornelius to speak. “He,” saith he, “is Lord of all.” But observe at the very outset, “The word,” says he, “which He sent unto the children of Israel;” he gives them the preëminence. Then he adduces (these Gentiles) themselves as witnesses: “ye know,” says he, “the matter which came to pass throughout all Judea, beginning at Galilee”—then he confirms it from this also—“after the baptism which John preached” (Acts 10:37)—“even Jesus of Nazareth, how God anointed Him with the Holy Ghost and with power.” (Acts 10:38.) He does not mean, Ye know Jesus, for they did not know Him, but he speaks of the things done by Him:^[8] “Who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil: by this^[9] he shows that many cases of lost senses or paralyzed limbs are the devil’s work, and a wrench given to the body by him: as also Christ said. “For God was with Him.” Again, lowly terms. “And we are witnesses of all things which He did, both in the country of the Jews, and in Jerusalem” (Acts 10:39): both “we,” saith he, and ye. Then the Passion, and the reason why they do not believe: “Whom also they slew, and hanged on a tree. Him God raised up the third day, and showed Him openly; not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before of God, even to us, who did eat and drink with Him after He rose from the dead.” (Acts 10:40–41.) This is a proof of the Resurrection. “And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is He which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead.” (Acts 10:42.) This is great. Then he adduces the testimony from the Prophets: “To Him give all the prophets witness, that through His name, whosoever believeth in Him shall receive remission of sins.” (Acts 10:43.) This is a proof of that which was about to be: this is the reason why he here cites the Prophets.

But let us look over again what relates to Cornelius. (Recapitulation.) He sent, it says, to Joppa to fetch Peter. “He was waiting for him,” etc; see how fully he believed that Peter would certainly come: (b) “and^[10] fell down at his feet, and worshipped him.” (Acts 10:24–25.) (a) Mark how on every side it is shown how worthy he is! (So) the Eunuch there desired Philip to come up and sit in the chariot (Acts 8:31), although not knowing who he was, upon no other introduction (ἐπαγγελίας) than that given by the Prophet. But here Cornelius fell at his feet. (c) “Stand up, I myself also am a man.” (Acts 10:26.) Observe how free from adulation his speech is on all occasions, and how full of humility. “And conversing with him, he came in.” (a) (Acts 10:27.) Conversing about what? I suppose saying these words: “I myself also am a man.” (e) Do you mark (Peter’s) unassuming temper? He himself also shows that his coming is God’s doing: “Ye know that it is unlawful for a man that is a Jew,” etc. (Acts 10:28.) And why did he not speak of the linen sheet? Observe Peter’s freedom from all vainglory: but, that he is sent of God, this indeed he mentions; of the manner in which he was sent, he speaks not at present; when the need has arisen, seeing he had said, “Ye know that it is unlawful for a man that is a Jew to keep company with, or to come unto, one of another nation,” he simply adds, “but to me God hath shown,” etc. There is nothing of vainglory here. “All ye,” he says, “know.” He makes their knowledge stand surety for him. But Cornelius says, “We are present before God to hear all things that are commanded thee of the Lord” (Acts 10:33): not, Before man, but, “Before God.” This is the way one ought to attend to God’s servants. Do you see his awakened mind? do you see how worthy he was of all these things? “And Peter,” it says, “opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons.” (Acts 10:34.) This he said also by way of justifying himself with the Jews then present. For, being at the point to commit the Word to these (Gentiles), he first puts this by way of apology. What then? Was He “a respecter of persons” beforetime? God forbid! For beforetime likewise it was just the same: “Every one,” as he saith, “that feareth Him, and worketh righteousness, would be acceptable to Him.” As when Paul saith, “For when the Gentiles which have not the Law, do by nature the things of the Law.” (Rom. 2:14.) “That feareth God and worketh righteousness:” he assumes^[11] both doctrine and manner of life: is “accepted with Him;” for, if He did not overlook the Magi, nor the Ethiopian, nor the thief, nor the harlot, much more them that work righteousness, and are willing, shall He in anywise not overlook. “What say you then to this, that there are likely persons (ἐπιεικεἵς), men of mild disposition, and yet they will not believe?” (Above, p. 149, note 2.) Lo, you have yourself named the cause: they will not. But besides the likely person he here speaks of is not this sort of man, but the man “that worketh righteousness:” that is, the man who in all points is virtuous and irreproachable, when he has the fear of God as he ought to have it. But whether a person be such, God only knows. See how this man was acceptable: see how, as soon as he heard, he was persuaded. “Yes, and now too,” say you, “every one would be persuaded, be who he may.” But the signs that are now, are much greater than those, and more wonderful.—Then Peter commences his teaching, and reserves for the Jews the privilege of their birth. “The^[12] word,” he says, “which He sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace (Acts 10:36), not bringing judgment. He is sent to the Jews also: yet for all this He did not spare them. “Preaching peace through Jesus Christ. He is Lord of all.” First he discourses of His being Lord and in exceeding elevated terms, seeing he had to deal with a soul more than commonly elevated, and that took all in with ardor. Then he proves how He was Lord of all, from the things which He achieved “throughout all Judea. For ye know,” saith he, “the matter which came to pass throughout all Judea:” and, what is the wonderful part of it, “beginning at Galilee: after the baptism which John preached.” (Acts 10:37.) First he speaks of His success, and then again he says concerning Him, “Jesus of Nazareth.” Why, what a stumbling-block, this birthplace! “How^[13] God anointed Him with the Holy Ghost and with power.” (Acts 10:38.) Then again the proof—how does that appear?—from the good that He did. “Who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil:” and the greatness of the power shown when He overcomes the devil; and the cause, “Because God was with Him.” Therefore also the Jews spake thus: “We know that Thou art a teacher come from God: for none can do these miracles except God be with him.” (John 3:2.) Then, when he has shown that He was sent from God, he next speaks of this, that He was slain: that thou mayest not imagine^[14] aught absurd. Seest thou how far they are from hiding the Cross out of view, nay, that together with the other circumstances they put also the manner? “Whom also,” it says, “they slew by hanging on a tree. And gave Him,” it is added, “to be made manifest not to all the people, but to witnesses before ordained of God, even unto us:” and yet it was (Christ) Himself that elected them; but this also he refers to God. “To the before-ordained,” he says, “even to us, who did eat and drink with Him after that He was risen from the dead.” (Acts 10:39; Acts 10:41.) See whence he fetches his assurance of the resurrection. What is the reason that being risen he did no sign, but only ate and drank? Because the Resurrection itself was a great sign, and of this nothing was so much^[15] a sign as the eating and drinking. “To testify,” saith he—in a manner calculated to alarm—that they may not have it in their power to fall back upon the excuse of ignorance: and he does not say, “that He is the Son of God,” but, what would most alarm them, “that it is He which is ordained of God, to be the Judge of quick and dead.” (Acts 10:42.) “To him give all the Prophets witness,” etc. (Acts 10:43.) When by the terror he has agitated them, then he brings in the pardon, not spoken from himself but from the Prophets. And what is terrifying is from him, what is mild from the Prophets.

All ye that have received this forgiveness, all ye to whom it has been vouchsafed to attain unto faith, learn, I beseech you, the greatness of the Gift, and study not to be insolent to your Benefactor. For we obtained forgiveness, not that we should become worse, but to make us far better and more excellent. Let none say that God is the cause of our evil doings, in that He did not punish, nor take vengeance. If (as it is said) a ruler having taken a murderer, lets him go, say, is he (not)^[16] judged to be the cause of the murders afterwards committed? See then, how we expose God to the tongues of the wicked. For what do they not say, what leave unuttered? “(God) Himself,” say they, “allowed them; for he ought to have punished them as they deserved, not to honor them, nor crown them, nor admit them to the foremost privileges, but to punish and take vengeance upon them: but he that, instead of this, honors them, has made them to be such as they are.” Do not, I beseech and implore you, do not let any man utter such speech as far as we are concerned. Better to be buried ten thousand times over, than that God through us should be so spoken of! The Jews, we read, said to (Christ) Himself, “Thou that destroyest the Temple, and in three days buildest it up, come down from the Cross” (Matt. 27:40): and again, “If Thou be the Son of God:” but the reproaches here are more grievous than those, that^[17] through us He should be called a teacher of wickedness! Let us cause the very opposite to be said, by having our conversation worthy of Him that calleth us, and (worthily) approaching to the baptism of adoption. For great indeed is the might of baptism (φωτίσματου): it makes them quite other men than they were, that partake of the gift; it does not let the men be men (and nothing more). Make thou the Gentile (τὸν ῞Ελληνα), to believe that great is the might of the Spirit, that it has new-moulded, that it has fashioned thee anew. Why waitest thou for the last gasp, like a runaway slave, like a malefactor, as though it were not thy duty to live unto God? Why dost thou stand affected to Him, as if thou hadst in Him a ruthless, cruel Master? What can be more heartless (ψυχρότερον), what more miserable, than those who make that the time to receive baptism? God made thee a friend, and vouchsafed thee all His good things, that thou mayest act the part of a friend. Suppose you had done some man the greatest of wrongs, had insulted him, and brought upon him disgraces without end, suppose you had fallen into the hands of the person wronged, and he, in return for all this, had honored you, made you partaker of all that he had, and in the assembly of his friends, of those in whose presence he was insulted, had crowned you, and declared that he would hold you as his own begotten son, and then straightway had died: say, would you not have bewailed him? would you not have deemed his death a calamity? would you not have said, Would that he were alive, that I might have it in my power to make the fit return, that I might requite him, that I might show myself not base to my benefactor? So then, where it is but man, this is how you would act; and where it is God, are you eager to be gone, that you may not requite your benefactor for so great gifts? Nay rather, choose the time for coming to Him so that you shall have it in your power to requite Him like for like. True,^[18] say you, but I cannot keep (the gift). Has God commanded impossibilities? Hence it is that all is clean reversed, hence that, all the world over, every thing is marred—because nobody makes it his mark to live after God. Thus those who are yet Catechumens, because they make this their object, (how they may defer baptism to the last,) give themselves no concern about leading an upright life: and those who have been baptized (φωτισθεντες), whether it be because they received it as children, or whether it be that having received it in sickness, and afterwards recovered (ἀνενεγκόντες), they had no hearty desire to live on (to the glory of God), so it is, that neither do these make an earnest business of it: nay, even such as received it in health, have little enough to show of any good impression, and warmly affected for the time, these also presently let the fire go out. Why do you flee? why do you tremble? what is it you are afraid of? You do not mean to say that you are not permitted to follow your business? I do not part you from your wife! No, it is from fornication that I bar you. I do not debar you from the enjoyment of your wealth? No, but from covetousness and rapacity. I do not oblige you to empty out all your coffers? No, but to give some small matter according to your means to them that lack, your superfluities to their need, and not even this unrewarded. We do not urge you to fast? We do but forbid you to besot yourselves with drunkenness and gormandizing. The things we would retrench are but the very things which bring you disgrace; things which even here, on this side of hell-fire, you yourselves confess to be things to be shunned and hated. We do not forbid you to be glad and to rejoice? Nay, only rejoice not with a disgraceful and unbecoming merriment. What is it you dread, why are you afraid, why do you tremble? Where marriage is, where enjoyment of wealth, where food in moderation, what matter of sin is there in these things? And yet, they that are without enjoin the opposites to these, and are obeyed. For they demand not according to thy means, but they say, Thou must give thus much: and if thou allege poverty, they will^[19] make no account of that. Not so Christ: Give, saith He, of what thou hast, and I inscribe thee in the first rank. Again those say, If thou wilt distinguish thyself, forsake father, mother, kindred, friends, and keep close attendance on the Palace, laboring, toiling, slaving, distracted, suffering miseries without number. Not so Christ; but keep thou, saith He, at home with thy wife, with thy children, and as for thy daily occupations reform and regulate them on the plan of leading a peaceable life, free from cares and from perils. True, say you, but the other promises wealth. Aye, but Christ a kingdom, and more, He promises wealth also with it. For, “Seek ye,” saith He, “the kingdom of Heaven, and all these things shall be added unto you” (Matt. 6:33): throwing in,^[20] by way of additional boon, what the other holds out as the main thing: and the Psalmist says, he has “never seen the righteous forsaken, nor his seed begging their bread.” (Ps. 37:25.) Let us set about practising virtue, let us make a beginning; let us only lay hold on it, and you shall see what the good will be. For surely in these (worldly) objects you do not succeed so without labor, that you should be so faint-hearted for these (higher) objects—that^[21] you should say, Those are to be had without labor, these only with toil. Nay,—what need to tell you what is the true state of the case?—those are had only with greater labor. Let us not recoil from the Divine Mysteries, I beseech you. Look not at this, that one who was baptized before thee, has turned out ill, and has fallen from his hope: since among soldiers also we see some not doing their duty by the service, while we see others distinguishing themselves, and we do not look only at the idle ones, but we emulate these, the men who are successful. But besides, consider how many, after their baptism, have of men become angels!

Fear the uncertainty of the future. “As a thief in the night,” so death comes: and not merely as a thief, but while we sleep it sets upon us, and carries us off while we are idling. To this end has God made the future uncertain, that we may spend our time in the practice of virtue, because of the uncertainty of expectation. But He is merciful, say you. How long shall we hear this senseless, ridiculous talk? I affirm not only that God is merciful, but that nothing can be more merciful than He, and that He orders all things concerning us for our good. How many all their life do you see afflicted with the worst form of leprosy! (ἐν ἐλέφαντι διάγοντας, “Elephantiasis,”) how many blind from their earliest youth even to old age! others who have lost their eyesight, others in poverty, others in bonds, others again in the mines, others entombed (καταχωσθέντας) together, others (slaughtered) in wars! These things say you, do not look like mercy. Say, could He not have prevented these things had He wished, yet He permits them? True, say you. Say, those who are blind from their infancy, why are they so? I will not tell you, until you promise me to receive baptism, and, being baptized, to live aright. It is not right to give you the solution of these questions. The preaching is not meant just for amusement. For even if I solve this, on the back of this follows another question: of such questions there is a bottomless deep. Therefore^[22] do not get into a habit of looking to have them solved for you: else we shall never stop questioning. For look, if I solve this, I do but lead the way to question upon question, numberless as the snowflakes. So that this is what we learn, rather to raise questions, not to solve the questions that are raised. For even if we do solve them, we have not solved them altogether, but (only) as far as man’s reasoning goes. The proper solution of such questions is faith: the knowing that God does all things justly and mercifully and for the best: that to comprehend the reason of them is impossible. This is the one solution, and another better than this exists not. For say, what is the use of having a question solved? This, that one needs no longer to make a question of the thing which is solved. And if thou get thyself to believe this, that all things are ordered by the Providence of God, Who, for reasons known to Himself, permits some things and actively works others, thou art rid of the need of questioning, and hast gotten the gain of the solution. But let us come back to our subject. Do you not see such numbers of men suffering chastisements? God (say you) permits these things to be. Make the right use of the health of the body, in order to the health of the soul. But you will say, What is the use to me of labors and toil, when it is in my power to get quit of all (my sins) without labor? In the first place, this is not certain. It may happen, that a person not only does not get quit of his sins without labor, but that he departs hence with all his sins upon him. However, even if this were certain, still your argument is not to be tolerated. He has drawn thee to the contests: the golden arms lie there. When you ought to take them, and to handle them, you wish to be ingloriously saved, and to do no good work! Say, if war broke out, and the Emperor were here, and you saw some charging into the midst of the phalanxes of the enemy, hewing them down, dealing wounds by thousands, others thrusting (with the sword’s point), others bounding (now here, now there), others dashing on horseback, and these praised by the Emperor, admired, applauded, crowned: others on the contrary thinking themselves well off if they take no harm, and keeping in the hindmost ranks, and sitting idly there; then after the close of the war, the former sort summoned, honored with the greatest gifts, their names proclaimed by the heralds: while of the latter, not even the name becomes known, and their reward of the good obtained is only that they are safe: which sort would you wish to belong to? Why, if you were made of stone, if you were more stupid even than senseless and lifeless things, would you not ten thousand times rather belong to the former? Yea, I beseech and implore you. For if need were to fall fighting, ought you not eagerly to choose this? See you not how it is with them that have fallen in the wars, how illustrious they are, how glorious? And yet they die a death, after which there is no getting honor from the emperor. But in that other war, there is nothing of the kind, but thou shalt in any wise be presented with thy scars. Which scars, even without persecutions, may it be granted all us to have to exhibit, through Jesus Christ our Lord, with Whom to the Father and the Holy Ghost together be glory, dominion, honor, now and ever, and world without end. Amen.

Homily XXIV on Acts x. 44, 46.

Homily XXIV.

Acts 10:44; Acts 10:46

“While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God.”

Observe God’s providential management. He does not suffer the speech to be finished, nor the baptism to take place upon a command of Peter, but, when He has made it evident how admirable their state of mind is, and a beginning is made of the work of teaching, and they have believed that assuredly baptism is the remission of sins, then forthwith comes the Spirit upon them. Now this is done by God’s so disposing it as to provide for Peter a mighty ground of justification.^[23] And it is not simply that the Spirit came upon them, but, “they spake with tongues:” which was the thing that astonished those who had come together. They altogether disliked the matter, wherefore it is that the whole is of God; and as for Peter, it may almost be said, that he is present only to be taught^[24] (with them) the lesson, that they must take the Gentiles in hand, and that they themselves are the persons by whom this must be done. For whereas after all these great events, still both in Cæsarea and in Jerusalem a questioning is made about it, how would it have been if these (tokens) had not gone step by step with the progress of the affair? Therefore it is that this is carried to a sort of excess.^[25] Peter seizes his advantage, and see the plea he makes of it. “Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?” (Acts 10:47.) Mark the issue to which he brings it; how he has been travailing to bring this forth. So (entirely) was he of this mind! “Can any one, he asks, “forbid water?” It is the language, we may almost say, of one triumphantly pressing his advantage (ἐπεμβαίνοντος) against such as would forbid, such as should say that this ought not to be. The whole thing, he says, is complete, the most essential part of the business, the baptism with which we were baptized. “And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.” (Acts 10:48.) After he has cleared himself, then, and not before, he commands them to be baptized: teaching them by the facts themselves. Such was the dislike the Jews had to it! Therefore it is that he first clears himself, although the very facts cry aloud, and then gives the command. “Then prayed they him”—well might they do so—“to tarry certain days:” and with a good courage thenceforth he does tarry.

“And the Apostles and brethren that were in Judea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God. And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him, saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them.” (Acts 11:1–3.) After such great things, “they of the circumcision contended:” not the Apostles; God forbid! It means, they took no small offence.^[26] And see what they allege. They do not say, Why didst thou preach? but, Why didst thou eat with them? But Peter, not stopping to notice this frigid objection—for frigid indeed it is—takes his stand (ἵσταται) on that great argument, If they had the Spirit Itself given them, how could one refuse to give them the baptism? But how came it that in the case of the Samaritans this did not happen, but, on the contrary, neither before their baptism nor after it was there any controversy, and there they did not take it amiss, nay, as soon as they heard of it, sent the Apostles for this very purpose? (Acts 8:14.) True, but neither in the present case is this the thing they complain of; for they knew that it was of Divine Grace: what they say is, Why didst thou eat with them? Besides, the difference^[27] is not so great for Samaritans as it is for Gentiles. Moreover, it is so managed (as part of the Divine plan) that he is accused in this way: on purpose that they may learn: for Peter, without some cause given, would not have related the vision. But observe his freedom from all elation and vainglory. For it says, “But Peter rehearsed the matter from the beginning, and expounded it by order unto them, saying, I was in the city of Joppa, praying:” he does not say why, nor on what occasion: “and in a trance I saw a vision, a certain vessel descend, as it had been a great sheet, let down from heaven by four corners; and it came even to me (Acts 11:4–5): upon the which when I had fastened mine eyes, I considered, and saw fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. And I heard a voice saying unto me, Arise, Peter; slay and eat.” (Acts 11:6–7.) As much as to say, This of itself was enough to have persuaded me—my having seen the linen sheet: but moreover a Voice was added. “But I said, Not so, Lord: for nothing common or unclean hath at any time entered into my mouth.” (Acts 11:8.) Do you mark? “I did my part,” says he: “I said, that I have never eaten aught common or unclean:” with reference to this that they said, “Thou wentest in, and didst eat with them.” But this he does not say to Cornelius: for there was no need to mention it to him. “But the voice answered me again from heaven, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common. And this was done three times: and all were drawn up again into heaven.” (Acts 11:9–10.) The essential points were those^[28] (that ensued at Cæsarea); but by these he prepares the way for them. Observe how he justifies himself (by reasons), and forbears to use his authority as teacher. For the more mildly he expresses himself, the more tractable he makes them. “At no time,” says he, “has aught common or unclean entered into my mouth.—And, behold—this too was part of his defence—three men stood at the house in which I was, sent to me from Cæsarea. And the Spirit bade me go with them, nothing doubting.” (Acts 10:11–12.) Do you mark that it is to the Spirit the enacting of laws belongs! “And these also accompanied me”—nothing can be more lowly, when he alleges the brethren for witnesses!—“these six men, and we entered into the man’s house: and he showed us how he had seen an angel in his house, which stood and said unto him, Send men to Joppa, and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter; who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved.” (Acts 11:13–14.) And he does not mention the words spoken by the Angel to Cornelius, “Thy prayers and thine alms are come up for a memorial before God, that he may not disgust them; but what says he? “He shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved:” with good reason this is added.^[29] Also he says nothing of the man’s fitness (ἐπιεικές). “The Spirit,” he might say, “having sent (me), God having commanded, on the one part having summoned (me) through the Angel, on the other urging (me) on, and solving my doubt about the things, what was I to do?” He says none of these things, however: but makes his strong point of what happened last, which even in itself was an incontrovertible argument. “And as I began to speak,” etc. (Acts 11:15.) Then why did not this happen alone? Of superabundance (ἐκ περιουσίας) this is wrought by God, that it might be shown that the beginning too was not from the Apostle. But had he set out of his own motion, without any of these things having taken place, they would have been very much hurt: so^[30] that from the beginning he disposes their minds in his favor**: saying to them, “Who have received the Holy Ghost even as we.” And not content with this, he reminds them also of the words of the Lord: “Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.” (Acts 11:16.) He means, that no new thing has happened, but just what the Lord foretold. “But^[31] there was no need to baptize?” (Comp. p. 158.) But the baptism was completed already. And he does not say, I ordered them to be baptized: but what says he? “Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as He did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?” (Acts 11:17.) He shows that he had himself done nothing: for the very thing which we have obtained, he says, that same did those men receive. That he may more effectually stop their mouths, therefore he says, “The like gift.” Do you perceive how he does not allow them to have less: when they believed, says he, the same gift did God give unto them, as He did to us who believed on the Lord, and Himself cleanses them. And he does not say, To you, but to us. Why do you feel aggrieved, when we^[32] call them partakers (with us?) “When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.” (Acts 11:18.) Do you mark that it all came of Peter’s discourse, by his admirably skilful way of relating the facts? They glorified God that He had given repentance to themselves (καὶ αὐτοῖς) also: they were humbled by these words. Hence was the door of faith opened thenceforth to the Gentiles. But, if you please, let us look over again what has been said.

“While Peter yet spake,” etc. (Recapitulation.) He does not say that Peter was astonished, but, “They of the circumcision:” since he knew what was in preparation. And yet they ought to have marvelled at this, how they themselves had believed. When they heard that they had believed, they were not astonished, but when God gave them the Spirit. Then^[33] “answered Peter and said,” etc. (Acts 10:47.) And therefore it is that he says, “God hath shown that I should not call common or unclean any human being.” (Acts 10:28.) He knew this from the first, and plans his discourse beforehand (with a view to it). Gentiles? What Gentiles henceforth? They were no longer Gentiles, the Truth being come. It is nothing wonderful, he says, if before the act of baptism they received the Spirit: in our own case this same happened. Peter shows that not as the rest either were they baptized, but in a much better way. This is the reason why the thing takes place in this manner, that they may have nothing to say, but even in this way may account them equal with themselves. “And they besought him,” it says, “to tarry certain days.” (Acts 10:48.) “And the Apostles and brethren, etc. And they of the circumcision contended with him.” (Acts 11:1–2.) Do you remark how they were not kindly disposed towards him? Saying “Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them.” (Acts 11:3.) Do you note what zeal they had for the Law? Not Peter’s authority abashed them, not the signs which had taken place, not the success achieved, what a thing it was, the Gentiles having “received the word:” but they contended about those petty things. For if none of those (signs) had taken place, was not the success (itself) enough?^[34] But not so does Peter frame his defence: for he was wise, or rather it was not his wisdom, but the Spirit that spake the words. And by the matter of his defence, he shows that in no one point was he the author, but in every point God, and upon Him he casts the whole. “The trance,” he says—“it was He that caused me to fall into it, for “I was in Joppa,” etc.: the vessel—it was He that showed it; I objected: again, He spake, and even then I did not hear: the Spirit commanded me to go, and even then though I went, I did not run: I told that God had sent me, and after these things, even then I did not baptize, but again God did the whole. God baptized them, not I.” And he does not say, Was it not right then to add the water? but, implying that nothing was lacking, “What was I, that I should withstand God?” What a defence is here! For he does not say, Then knowing these things, hold your peace; but what? He stands their attack, and to their impeachment he pleads—“What was I, to be able to hinder God?” It was not possible for me to hinder—a forcible plea indeed, and such as might well put them to shame. Whence being at last afraid, “they held their peace and glorified God.”

In like manner ought we also to glorify God for the good things which befall our neighbors, only^[35] not in the way that the rest of the newly-baptized are insulted, when they see others receiving baptism, and immediately departing this life. It, is right to glorify God, even though all be saved: and as for thee, if thou be willing, thou hast received a greater gift (than they): I do not mean in respect of the baptism, for the gift there is the same for him as for thee, but in regard that thou hast received a set time for winning distinction. The other put on the robe, and was not suffered to exhibit himself therewith in the procession, whereas to thee, God hath given full opportunity to use thine arms for the right purpose, thereby to make proof of them. The other goes his way, having only the reward of his faith: thou standest in the course, both able to obtain an abundant recompense for thy works, and to show thyself as much more glorious than he, as the sun is than the smallest star, as the general, nay rather as the Emperor himself, than the lowest soldier. Then blame thyself, or rather not blame, but correct: for it is not enough to blame thyself; it is in thy power to contend afresh. Hast thou been thrown? hast thou taken grievous hurt? Stand up, recover thyself: thou art still in the course, the meeting (θέατρον) is not yet broken up. Do you not see how many that have been thrown in the wrestling have afterwards resumed the combat? Only do not willingly come by thy fall. Dost thou count him a happy man for departing this life? Much rather count thyself happy. Was he released of his sins? But thou, if thou wilt, shalt not only wash away thy sins, but shalt also have achievements (of good works), which in his case is not possible. It is in our power to recover ourselves. Great are the medicinal virtues (φάρμακα) of repentance: let none despair of himself. That man truly deserves to be despaired of, who despairs of himself; that man has no more salvation, nor any hopes. It is not the having fallen into a depth of evils, it is the lying there when fallen, that is dreadful, it is not the having come into such a condition, it is the making light of it that is impious. The very thing that ought to make thee earnest, say, is it this that makes thee reckless? Having received so many wounds, hast thou fallen back? Of the soul, there can be no incurable wound; for the body, there are many such, but none for the soul: and yet for those we cease not in our endeavors to cure them, while for these we are supine. Seest thou not the thief (on the cross), in how short a time he achieved (his salvation)? Seest thou not the Martyrs, in how short a time they accomplished the whole work? “But martyrdom is not to be had nowadays.” True, but there are contests to be had, as I have often told you, if we had the mind. “For they that wish,” says the Apostle, “to live godly in Christ Jesus, shall suffer persecution.” (2 Tim. 3:12.) They that live godly are always undergoing persecution, if not from men, at any rate from evil spirits, which is a more grievous persecution. Yes, and it is in consequence, first and foremost, of ease and comfort, that those who are not vigilant undergo this. Or thinkest thou it is a trifling persecution to be living at ease? This is more grievous than all, this is worse than persecution. For, like a running flux, ease makes the soul languid (χαυνοἵ): and as summer and winter, so persecution and ease. But to show you that this is the worse persecution, listen: it induces sleep in the soul, an excessive yawning and drowsiness, it stirs up the passions on every side, it arms pride, it arms pleasure, it arms anger, envy, vainglory, jealousy. But in time of persecution none of these is able to make a disturbance; but fear, entering in, and plying the lash vigorously, as one does to a barking dog, will not let any of these passions so much as attempt to give tongue. Who shall be able in time of persecution to indulge in vainglory? Who to live in pleasure? Not one: but there is much trembling and fear, making a great calm, composing the harbor into stillness, filling the soul with awe. I have heard from our fathers (for in our own time God grant it may not happen, since we are bidden not to ask for temptation), that in the persecution of old time one might see men that were indeed Christian. None of them cared for money, none for wife, none for children, nor home, nor country: the one great concern with all was to save their lives (or, souls). There were they hiding, some in tombs and sepulchres, some in deserts: yes tender and dainty women too, fighting all the while with constant hunger.

Then think whether any longing for sumptuous and dainty living at all came into the mind of a woman, while in hiding beside a coffin (παρὰ λάρνακι), and waiting for her maid-servant to bring her meal, and trembling lest she should be taken, and lying in her terror as in a furnace: was she even aware that there ever was such a thing as dainty living, that such things as dress and ornaments exist at all (ὅτι κόσμος ὅλως ἐστίν)? Seest thou that now is the persecution, with our passions, like wild beasts, setting upon us on every side? Now is the trying persecution, both in this regard, and especially if it is not even thought to be persecution at all. For this (persecution) has also this evil in it, that being war, it is thought to be peace, so that we do not even arm ourselves against it, so that we do not even rise: no one fears, no one trembles. But if ye do not believe me, ask the heathen, the persecutors, at what time was the conduct of the Christians more strict, at what time were they all more proved? Few indeed had they then become in number, but rich in virtue. For say, what profit is it, that there should be hay in plenty, when there might be precious stones? The amount consists not in the sum of numbers, but in the proved worth. Elias was one: yet the whole world was not worth so much as he. And yet the world consists of myriads: but they are no myriads, when they do not even come up to that one. “Better^[36] is one that doeth the will of God, than ten thousand who are transgressors:” for the ten thousands have not yet reached to the one. “Desire not a multitude of unprofitable children.” (Sir. 16:1.) Such bring more blasphemy against God, than if they were not Christians. What need have I of a multitude? It is (only) more food for the fire. This one might see even in the body, that better is moderate food with health, than a (fatted) calf with damage. This is more food than the other: this is food, but that is disease. This too one may see in war: that better are ten expert and brave men, than ten thousand of no experience. These latter, besides that they do no work, hinder also those that do work. The same too one may see to be the case in a ship, viz. that better are two experienced mariners, than ever so great a number of unskilful ones: for these will sink the ship. These things I say, not as looking with an evil eye upon your numbers, but wishing that all of you should be approved men, and not trust in your numbers. Many more in number are they who go down into hell: but greater than it is the Kingdom, however few it contain. As the sand of the sea was the multitude of the people (Israel) yet one man saved them. Moses was but one, and yet he availed more than they all: Joshua was one and he was enabled to do more than the six hundred thousand. Let us not make this our study merely, that (the people) may be many, but rather, that they may be excellent; when this shall have been effected, then will that other follow also. No one wishes at the outset to make a spacious house, but he first makes it strong and sure, then spacious: no one lays the foundations so that he may be laughed at. Let us first aim at this, and then at the other. Where this is, that also will be easy: but where this is not, the other, though it be, is to no profit. For if there be those who are able to shine in the Church, there will soon be also numbers: but where these are not, the numbers will never be good for anything. How many, suppose you, may there be in our city who are likely to be saved (τοὺς σωζομένους)? It is disagreeable, what I am going to say, but I will say it nevertheless. Among all these myriads, there are not to be found one hundred likely to be saved: nay, even as to these, I question it. For think, what wickedness there is in the young, what supineness in the aged! None^[37] makes it his duty to look after his own boy, none is moved by anything to be seen in his elder, to be emulous of imitating such an one. The patterns are defaced, and therefore it is that neither do the young become admirable in conduct. Tell not me, “We are a goodly multitude:” this is the speech of men who talk without thought or feeling (ψυχρὥν.) In the concerns of men indeed, this might be said with some show of reason: but where God is concerned, (to say this with regard to Him) as having need of us,^[38] can never be allowed. Nay, let me tell you, even in the former case, this is a senseless speech (ψυχρόν). Listen. A person that has a great number of domestics, if they be a corrupt set what a wretched time will he have of it! For him who has none, the hardship, it seems, amounts to this, that he is not waited on: but where a person has bad servants, the evil is, that he is ruining himself withal, and the damage is greater (the more there are of them.) For it is far worse than having to be one’s own servant, to have to fight with others, and take up a (continual) warfare. These things I say, that none may admire the Church because of its numbers, but that we may study to make the multitude proof-worthy; that each may be earnest for his own share of the duty—not for his friends only, nor his kindred as I am always saying, nor for his neighbors, but that he may attract the strangers also. For example, Prayer is going on; there they lie (on bended knees), all the young, stupidly unconcerned (ψυχροὶ), (yes,) and old too:^[39] filthy nuisances rather than young men; giggling, laughing outright, talking—for I have heard even this going on—and jeering one another as they lie along on their knees: and there stand you, young man or elder: rebuke them, if you see them (behaving thus): if any will not refrain, chide him more severely: call the deacon, threaten, do what is in your power to do: and if he dare do anything to you, assuredly you shall have all to help you. For who is so irrational, as, when he sees you chiding for such conduct, and them chidden not to take your part? Depart, having received your reward from the Prayer.—In a master’s house, we count those his best-disposed servants, who cannot bear to see any part of his furniture in disorder. Answer me; if at home you should see the silver plate lie tossed out of doors, though it is not your business, you will pick it up and bring it into the house: if you see a garment flung out of its place, though you have not the care of it, though you be at enmity with him whose business it is, yet, out of good-will to the master, will you not put it right? So in the present case. These are part of the furniture: if you see them lying about in disorder, put them to rights: apply to me, I do not refuse the trouble: inform me, make the offender known to me: it is not possible for me to see all: excuse me (in this). See, what wickedness overspreads the whole world! Said I without reason that we are (no better than) so much hay (disorderly as) a troubled sea? I am not talking of those (young people), that they behave thus; (what I complain of, is) that such a sleepy indifference possesses those who come in here, that they do not even correct this misbehavior.

Again I see others stand talking while Prayer is going on; while the more consistent^[40] of them (do this) not only during the Prayer, but even when the Priest is giving the Benediction. O, horror! When shall there be salvation? when shall it be possible for us to propitiate God?—Soldiers^[41] go to their diversion, and you shall see them, all keeping time in the dance, and nothing done negligently, but, just as in embroidery and painting, from the well-ordered arrangement in each individual part of the composition, there results at once an exceeding harmony and good keeping, so it is here: we have one shield, one head, all of us (in common): and if but some casual point be deranged by negligence, the whole is deranged and is spoilt, and the good order of the many is defeated by the disorder of the one part. And, fearful indeed to think of, here you come, not to a diversion, not to act in a dance, and yet you stand disorderly. Know you not that you are standing in company with angels? with them you chant, with them sing hymns, and do you stand laughing? Is it not wonderful that a thunderbolt is not launched not only at those (who behave thus), but at us? For such behavior might well be visited with the thunderbolt. The Emperor is present, is reviewing the army: and do you, even with His eyes upon you, stand laughing, and endure to see another laughing? How long are we to go on chiding, how long complaining? Ought not such to be treated as very pests and nuisances; as abandoned, worthless reprobates, fraught with innumerable mischiefs, to be driven away from the Church? When will these forebear laughing, who laugh in the hour of the dread Mystery (ἑν ὣρᾳ φρίκης)? when refrain from their trifling, who talk at the instant of the Benediction? Have they no sense of shame before those who are present? have they no fear of God? Are our own idle thoughts not enough for us, is it not enough that in our prayers we rove hither and thither, but laughter also must needs intrude, and bursts of merriment? Is it a theatrical amusement, what is done here? Aye, but, methinks, it is the theatres that do this: to the theatres we owe it that the most of you so refuse to be curbed by us, and to be reformed. What we build up here, is thrown down there: and not only so, but the hearers themselves cannot help being filled with other filthinesses besides: so that the case is just the same as if one should want to clean out a place with a fountain above it discharging mire; for however much you may clean out, more runs in. So it is here. For when we clean people out, as they come here from the theatres with their filthiness, thither they go again, and take in a larger stock of filthiness, as if they lived for the purpose of only giving us trouble, and then come back to us, laden with ordure, in their manners, in their movements, in their words, in their laughter, in their idleness. Then once more we begin shovelling it out afresh, as if we had to do this only on purpose that, having sent them away clean, we may again see them clogging themselves with filth. Therefore I solemnly protest to you, the sound members, that this will be to you judgment and condemnation, and I give you over to God from this time forth, if any having seen a person behaving disorderly, if any having seen any person talking, especially in that part (of the Service), shall not inform against him, not bring him round (to a better behavior). To do this is better than prayer. Leave thy prayer and rebuke him, that thou mayst both do him good, and thyself get profit, and so we may be enabled all to be saved and to attain unto the Kingdom of Heaven, through the grace and loving-kindness of our Lord Jesus Christ, with Whom to the Father and the Holy Ghost together be glory, dominion, honor, now and ever, and world without end. Amen.

Homily XXV on Acts xi. 19.

Homily XXV.

Acts 11:19

“Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that rose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only.”

The persecution turned out to be no slight benefit as “to them that love God all things work together for good.” (Rom. 8:28.) If they had made it their express study how best to establish the Church, they would have done no other thing than this—they dispersed the teachers.^[42] Mark in what quarters the preaching was extended. “They travelled,” it says, “as far as Phenice and Cyprus and Antioch; to none however did they preach the word but to Jews only.” Dost thou mark with what wise purposes of Providence so much was done in the case of Cornelius? This serves both to justify Christ, and to impeach the Jews. When Stephen was slain, when Paul was twice in danger, when the Apostles were scourged, then the Gentiles received the word, then the Samaritans. Which Paul also declares: “To you it was necessary that the Word of God should first be spoken; but since ye thrust it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy, lo, we turn unto the Gentiles.” (Acts 13:46.) Accordingly they went about, preaching to Gentiles also. “But some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, who, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Greeks, preaching the Lord Jesus:” (Acts 11:20.) for it is likely both that they could now speak Greek, and that there were such men in Antioch.^[43] “And the hand of the Lord,” it says, “was with them,” that is, they wrought miracles; “and a great number believed, and turned unto the Lord.” (Acts 11:21.) Do you mark why now also there was heed of miracles (namely) that they might believe? “Then tidings of these things came unto the ears of the church which was in Jerusalem: and they sent forth Barnabas, that he should go as far as Antioch.” (Acts 11:22.) What may be the reason that, when such a city received the word, they did not come themselves? Because of the Jews. But they send Barnabas. However, it is no small part of the providential management even so that Paul comes to be there. It is both natural, and it is wisely ordered, that they are averse to him, and (so) that Voice of the Gospel, that Trumpet of heaven, is not shut up in Jerusalem. Do you mark how on all occasions, Christ turns their ill dispositions to needful account and for the benefit of the Church? Of their hatred to the man, He availed Himself for the building up of the Church. But observe this holy man—Barnabas, I mean—how he looked not to his own interests, but hasted to Tarsus. “Who, when he came, and had seen the grace of God, was glad, and exhorted them all, that with purpose of heart, they would cleave unto the Lord. For he was a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost, and of faith: and much people was added unto the Lord.” (Acts 11:23–24.) He was a very kind man, and single-hearted, and considerate (συγγνωμονικός). “Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus, for to seek Saul.” (Acts 11:25.) He came to the athletic wrestler, the general (fit to lead armies), the champion of single combat, the lion—I am at a loss for words, say what I will—the hunting-dog, killer of lions, bull of strength, lamp of brightness, mouth sufficing for a world. “And when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch.” (Acts 11:26.) Verily this is the reason why it was there they were appointed to be called Christians, because Paul there spent so long time! “And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the Church, and taught much people. And the disciples were first called Christians at Antioch.”^[44] No small matter of praise to that city! This is enough to make it a match for all, that for so long a time it had the benefit of that mouth, it first, and before all others: wherefore also it was there in the first place that men were accounted worthy of that name. Do you observe the benefit resulting (to that city) from Paul, to what a height that name, like a standard (σημεἵον), exalted it? Where three thousand, where five thousand, believed, where so great a multitude, nothing of the sort took place, but they were called “they^[45] of the way:” here they were called Christians. “And in these days came prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch.” (Acts 11:27.) It was need that the fruit of alms should also be planted there. And see how of necessity (ἀναγκαίως) (it comes about that) none of the men of note becomes their teacher. They got for their teachers, men of Cyprus, and Cyrene, and Paul—though he indeed surpassed (the Apostles) themselves—since Paul also had for teachers Ananias and Barnabas. But^[46] here of necessity (this was the case). “And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and signified by the spirit that there would be great dearth throughout the world, which also came to pass in the days of Claudius Cæsar.” (Acts 11:28.) “By the Spirit,” it says: for, that they may not imagine that this was the reason why the famine came, (namely) because Christianity was come in, because the demons were departed, the Holy Ghost foretells it: this, however, was nothing wonderful, for in fact Christ predicted it. Not this was the reason, else this must have been the case from the beginning: but it was because of the evils done to the Apostles—and God had borne long with them; but, when they pressed upon them, a great famine ensues, betokening to the Jews the coming woes. “If it was because of them, in any wise it ought to have stopped (there), when it did exist. What harm had the Gentiles done, that they should have their share in the evils? They ought rather to have been marked as approved (εὐδοκιμἥσαι), because they were doing their part, were slaying, punishing, taking vengeance, persecuting on every side. And mark also at what time the famine comes: precisely when the Gentiles were thenceforth added to the Church. But if, as you say, it was because of the evils (done by the Jews), these ought to have been exempted.” How so? Christ, forestalling this objection, said, “Ye shall have tribulation.” (John 16:33.) (It is) just as if you should say, They ought not to have been scourged either. “Then the disciples, every man according to his ability, determined to send relief unto the brethren which dwelt in Judea.” (Acts 11:29.) Mark how the famine becomes to them the means of salvation, an occasion of alms-giving, a harbinger of many blessing. And (so it might have been) to you, one may say, if you were so minded, but ye would not. But it is predicted, that they might be prepared beforehand for almsgiving. “Unto the brethren which dwelt in Judæa;” for they were enduring great hardships, but before this, they were not suffering from famine. “Which also they did, and sent it to the elders by the hands of Barnabas and Saul.” (Acts 11:30.) Do you mark them, that no sooner do they believe than they bring forth fruit, not only for their own but for those afar off? And Barnabas is sent and Saul, to minister (the same.) Of this occasion (᾽Ενταὕθα) he says (to the Galatians), “And James, Cephas, and John gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, only” (they would) “that we should remember the poor.” (Gal. 2:9.) James was yet living.^[47]

“Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution,” etc. (Recapitulation.) Do you mark how even in the tribulation instead of falling to lamentations and tears, as we do, they give themselves up to a great and good work? “Travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch,” and there with more security preached the word. “And some of them, which were men of Cyprus and Cyrene,” etc. (Acts 11:20.) And they did not say, “(What), we, Cyrenians and Cyprians, to attack this splendid and great city!” but trusting in the grace of God, they applied themselves to the work of teaching, nor did these (Gentiles) themselves think scorn to learn anything of them. Mark how by small means all is brought about: mark the preaching how it spreads: mark those in Jerusalem, having like care for all, holding the whole world as one house. “They heard that Samaria had received the word, and” (Acts 8:14) to Samaria they send the Apostles: they heard what had befallen at Antioch, and to Antioch they send Barnabas: they also send again, and (these) prophets. For the distance was great, and it was not meet the Apostles at present should separate from thence, that they might not be thought to be fugitives, and to have fled from their own people. But then, almost precisely, is the time of their parting from Jerusalem, when the state (of the Jews) was shown to be past remedy, when the war was close at hand, and they must needs perish: when the sentence was made absolute. For, until Paul went to Rome, the Apostles were there (at Jerusalem). But they depart, not because afraid of the war—how should it be so?—seeing those they went to, were those that should bring the war: and moreover the war breaks out only after the Apostles were dead. For of them (the Apostles) says, “The wrath is come upon them unto the end.” (1 Thess. 2:16.) The more insignificant the persons, the more illustrious the grace, working great results by small means.—“And^[48] he exhorted them to cleave unto the Lord, for he was a good man.” (Acts 11:23–24.) By “good man,” I take it, he means one that is kind, (χρηστὸν) sincere, exceedingly desirous of the salvation of his neighbors—“for he was a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and of faith. To^[49] cleave unto the Lord with purpose of heart” (this is said): with encomium and praise. “And much people was added unto the Lord:” for like rich land this city received the word, and brought forth much fruit. “Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus,” etc. (Acts 11:25.) But why did he take him off from Tarsus and bring him here? Not without good reason; for here were both good hopes, and a greater city, and a great body of people. See how grace works all, not^[50] Paul: by small means the affair was taking its commencement. When it is become difficult the Apostles take it up. Why did they not before this seen Barnabas? Because they had enough to do (ἠσχόληντο) with Jerusalem. Again they justified themselves^[51] to the Jews, that the Gentiles were receiving (προσελάμβανε) the word, even without enjoying so great attention. There is about to be a questioning: therefore the affair of Cornelius forestalled it. Then indeed they say, “That we to the Gentiles, and they to the Circumcision.” (Gal. 2:9.) Observe, henceforth the very stress of the famine introduces the fellowship on the part of the Gentiles, namely, from the alms. For they receive the offerings sent from them.

“Now^[52] they which were scattered abroad,” etc. (Acts 11:19) and not as we who pass our time in lamentations and tears, in our calamities; but with more fearlessness they passed their time, as having got to a distance from those hindering them, and as being among men not afraid of the Jews: which also helped. And they came to Cyprus, where they had the sea between them, and greater freedom from anxiety: so^[53] they made no account of the fear of men, but (still) they gave the precedence to the regard of the Law: “they spake to Jews only. But there were in Antioch certain men of Cyprus and Cyrene:” these, of all others, least cared for the Jews: “who spake unto the Greeks, preaching the Lord Jesus.” (Acts 11:20.) Probably it was because of their not knowing Hebrew, that they called them Greeks. And “when” Barnabas, it says, “came and had seen the grace of God,”—not the diligence of men—“he exhorted them to cleave unto the Lord” (Acts 11:23): and by this he converted more. “And much people was added unto the Lord.” Why do they not write to Paul, but send Barnabas? They did not yet know the virtue of the man: but it is providentially ordered that Barnabas should come. As there was a multitude, and none to hinder, well might the faith grow, and above all because they had no trials to undergo. Paul also preaches, and is no longer compelled to flee. And it is well ordered, that not they speak of the famine, but the prophets. The men of Antioch also did not take it amiss that they sent not the Apostles, but were content with their teachers: so fervent were they all for the word. They did not wait for the famine to come, but before this they sent: “according as each had the ability.” And observe, among the Apostles, others are put in charge with this trust, but here Paul and Barnabas. For this was no small order (οἰκονομία) of Providence. Besides, it was the beginning, and it was not fit they should be offended.

“As each had the ability, they sent.” But now, none does this, although there is a famine more grievous than that. For the cases are not alike, for (all) to bear the calamity in common, and, while all (the rest) abound, for the poorer to be famishing. And the expression shows that the givers also were poor, for, it says, “as each of them had the means.” A twofold famine, even as the abundance is twofold: a severe famine, a famine not of hearing the word of the Lord, but of being nourished by alms.^[54] Then, both the poor in Judea enjoyed the benefit, and so did those in Antioch who gave their money; yea, these more than those: but now, both we and the poor are famishing: they being in lack of necessary sustenance, and we in luxurious living,^[55] lacking the mercy of God. But this is a food, than which nothing can be more necessary. This is not a food, from which one has to undergo the evils of repletion: not a food, of which the most part ends in the draught. (ἀφεδρὥνα.) Nothing more beauteous, nothing more healthful, than a soul nurtured by this food: it is set high above all disease, all pestilence, all indigestion and distemper: none shall be able to overcome it, (ἑλεἵν) but just as, if one’s body were made of adamant, no iron, nor anything else, would have power to hurt it, even so when the soul is firmly compact by almsgiving, nothing at all shall be able to overcome it. For say, what shall spoil this? Shall poverty? It cannot be, for it is laid up in the royal treasuries. But shall robber and housebreaker? Nay, those are walls which none shall be able to break through. But shall the worm? Nay, this treasure is set far above the reach of this mischief also. But shall envy and the evil eye? Nay, neither by these can it be overcome. But shall false accusations and plottings of evil? No, neither shall this be, for safe as in an asylum is this treasure. But it were a shame should I make it appear as if the advantages which belong to almsgiving were only these (the absence of these evils), and not (the presence of) their opposites. For in truth it is not merely that it is secure from ill-will; it also gets abundant blessing from those whom it benefits. For as the cruel and unmerciful not only have for enemies those whom they have injured, but those also who are not themselves hurt, partake the grief and join in the accusation: so those that have done great good have not only those who are benefited, but those also who are not themselves affected, to speak their praises. Again (that), it is secure from the attacks of the evil-disposed, and robbers, and housebreakers—what, is this all the good, or is it this—that besides the not suffering diminution, it grows also and increases into multitude? What more shameful than Nebuchadnezzar, what more foul, what more iniquitous? The man was impious; after tokens and signs without number he refused to come to his senses (ανενεγκεἵν), but cast the servants of God into a furnace: and (yet) after these doings, he worshipped. What then said the Prophet? “Wherefore,” saith he, “O king let my counsel be acceptable unto thee, ransom (λύτρωσαι) thy sins by alms, and thine iniquities by mercies to the poor: peradventure there shall be pardon for thy transgressions.” (Dan. 3:27.) In so speaking, he said it not doubting, nay, with entire confidence, but wishing to put him in greater fear, and to make a stronger necessity of doing these things. For if he had spoken it as a thing unquestionable, the king would have been more supine: just as it is with us, we then most urge some person (whom we wish to persuade), when^[56] they say to us, “Exhort such an one,” and do not add, “he will be sure to hear,” but only, “peradventure he will hear:” for by leaving it doubtful, the fear is made greater, and urges him the more. This is the reason why the Prophet did not make the thing certain to him. What sayest thou? For so great impieties shall there be pardon? Yes. There is no sin, which alms cannot cleanse, none, which alms cannot quench: all sin is beneath this: it is a medicine adapted for every wound. What worse than a publican? The very matter (ὑπόθεσις) (of his occupation) is altogether one of injustice: and yet Zaccheus washed away all these (sins). Mark how even Christ shows this, by the care taken to have a purse, and to bear the contributions put into it. And Paul also says, “Only that we remember the poor” (Gal. 2:10): and everywhere the Scripture has much discourse concerning this matter. “The ransom,” it saith, “of a man’s soul is his own wealth” (Prov. 13:8): and with reason: for, saith (Christ), “if thou wouldest be perfect, sell what thou hast, and give to the poor, and come, follow Me.” (Matt. 19:21.) This may well be part of perfection. But alms may be done not only by money, but by acts. For example: one may kindly stand (προστἥναι) by a person (to succor and defend him), one may reach to him a helping hand: the service rendered (προστασία) by acts has often done more good even than money. Let us set to work all the different kinds of almsgiving. Can you do alms by money? Be not slack. Can you by good offices? Say not, Because I have no money, this is nothing. This is a very great point: look upon it as if you had given gold. Can you do it by kind attentions (θεραπείας)? Do this also. For instance, if you be a physician, (give) your skill: for this also is a great matter. Can you by counsel? This (service) is much greater than all: this (alms) is better than all, or it is also more, by how much the gain it has is greater. For in so doing you put away not starvation, but a grievous death. (Acts 3:6; Acts 6:4.) With such alms the Apostles above measure abounded: therefore it was that the distribution of money they put into the hands of those after them, themselves exhibiting the (mercy) shown by words. Or is it, think you, a small alms, to a lost, castaway soul, a soul in uttermost jeopardy, possessed by a burning fever (πυρώσεως), to be able to rid it of its disease? For example, do you see one possessed by love of money? Pity the man. Is he in danger of suffocation? Quench his fire. “What if he will not be persuaded?” Do your part, and be not remiss. Have you seen him in bonds?—for wealth is indeed bonds. (Matt. 25:35 ff.) Go to him, visit him, console him, try to release him of his bonds. If he refuse, he shall bear the blame himself. Have you seen him naked, and a stranger?—for he is indeed naked, and a stranger to heaven. Bring him to your own inn, clothe him with the garment of virtue, give him the city which is in heaven. “What if I myself be naked?” say you. Clothe also yourself first: if you know that you are naked, assuredly you know that you need to be clothed; if you know what sort of nakedness this is.^[57] What numbers of women now wear silken apparel but are indeed naked of the garments of virtue! Let their husbands clothe these women. “But they will not admit those garments; they choose to have these.” Then do this also first: induce them to have a longing for those garments: show them that they are naked: speak to them of judgment to come: answer me,^[58] what is the clothing we shall need there? But if ye will bear with me, I also will show you this nakedness. He that is naked, when it is cold, shrinks and shudders, and stands there cowering, and with his arms folded: but in summer heat, not so. If then I shall prove to you that your rich men, and rich women, the more they put on, the more naked they are, do not take it amiss. How then, I ask you, when we raise the subject of hell-fire, and of the torments there? Do not these shrink and shudder more than those naked ones? Do they not bitterly groan and condemn themselves? What? when they come to this or that man, and say to him, Pray for me, do they not speak the same words as those (naked wretches)?

Now indeed, after all that we can say, the nakedness is not yet apparent: but it will be plain enough there. How, and in what way? When these silken garments and precious stones shall have perished, and it shall be only by the garments of virtue and of vice that all men are shown, when the poor shall be clad with exceeding glory, but the rich, naked and in disgraceful sort, shall be haled away to their punishments. What more naked (Edd. “more dainty”) than that rich man who arrayed himself in purple? What poorer than Lazarus? Then which of them uttered the words of beggars? which of them was in abundance? Say, if one should deck his house with abundance of tapestry hangings, and himself sit naked within, what were the benefit? So it is in the case of these women. Truly, the house of the soul, the body I mean, they hang round with plenty of garments: but the mistress of the house sits naked within. Lend me the eyes of the soul, and I will show you the soul’s nakedness. For what is the garment of the soul? Virtue, of course. And what its nakedness? Vice. For just as, if one were to strip any decent person, that person would be ashamed, and would shrink and cower out of sight; just so the soul, if we wish to see it, the soul which has not these garments, blushes for shame. How many women, think you, at this moment feel ashamed, and would fain sink to the very depth, as if seeking some sort of curtain, or screen, that they may not hear these words? But those who have no evil conscience, are exhilarated, rejoice, find delight, and gayly deck themselves (ἐγκαλλωπίζονται) with the things said. Hear concerning that blessed Thekla,^[59] how, that she might see Paul, she gave even her gold: and thou wilt not give even a farthing that thou mayest see Christ: thou admirest what she did, but dost not emulate her. Hearest thou not that “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy?” (Matt. 5:7.) What is the gain of your costly garments? how long shall we continue agape for this attire? Let us put on the glory of Christ: let us array ourselves with that beauty, that both here we may be praised, and there attain unto the eternal good things, by the grace and mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ, with Whom, to the Father and the Holy Ghost together, be glory, dominion, honor, now and ever, world without end. Amen.

Homily XXVI on Acts xii. 1, 2.

Homily XXVI.

Acts 12:1–2

“Now at that time Herod the King stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the Church. And he killed James the brother of John with the sword. And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. Then were the days of unleavened bread.”

“At that time,” of course meaning the time immediately following: for^[60] this is the custom of Scripture. And he well says that Herod “the king” (did this): this was not he of Christ’s time. Lo, a different sort of trial—and mark what I said in the beginning, how things are blended, how rest and trouble alternate in the whole texture of the history—not now the Jews, nor the Sanhedrim, but the king. Greater the power, the warfare more severe, the more it was done to obtain favor with the Jews. “And,” it says, “he slew James the brother of John with the sword:” (taking him) at random and without selection. But, should any raise a question, why God permitted this, we shall say, that it was for the sake of these (Jews) themselves: thereby, first, convincing them, that even when slain (the Apostles) prevail, just as it was in the case of Stephen: secondly, giving them opportunity, after satiating their rage, to recover from their madness; thirdly, showing them that it was by His permission this was done. “And when he saw,” it says, “that it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to seize Peter also. O excessive wickedness! On whose behalf was it, that he gratified them by doing murders thus without plan or reason? “And it was the day of unleavened bread.” Again, the idle preciseness of the Jews: to kill indeed they forbade not, but^[61] at such a time they did such things! “Whom having arrested, he put in ward, having delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers.” (Acts 12:4.) This was done both of rage, and of fear. “He slew,” it says, “James the brother of John with the sword.” Do you mark their courage? For, that none may say that without danger or fear of danger they brave death, as being sure of God’s delivering them, therefore he permits some to be put to death, and chief men too, Stephen and James, thereby convincing their slayers themselves, that not even these things make them fall away, and hinder them. “Peter therefore was kept in prison: but prayer was made without ceasing of the Church unto God for him.” (Acts 12:5.) For the contest was now for life and death: both the slaying of the one made them fearful, and the casting of the other into prison. “And when Herod would have brought him forth, the same night Peter was sleeping between two soldiers, bound with two chains; and the keepers before the door kept the prison. And, behold, the angel of the Lord came upon him, and a light shined in the prison: and he smote Peter on the side, and raised him up, saying, Arise up quickly. And his chains fell off from his hands.” (Acts 12:6–7.) In that night He delivered him. “And a light shined in the prison,” that^[62] he might not deem it fancy: and none saw the light, but he only. For if, notwithstanding this was done, he thought it a fancy, because of its unexpectedness; if this had not been, much more would he have thought this: so^[63] prepared was he for death. For his having waited there many days and not being saved caused this. Why then, say you, did He not suffer him to fall into the hands of Herod,^[64] and then deliver him? Because that would have brought people into astonishment, whereas this was credible:^[65] and they would not even have been thought human beings. But in the case of Stephen, what did He not do? Did He not show them his face as it had been the face of an angel? But what in short did He leave undone here also? “And the angel said to him, Gird thyself, and bind on thy sandals.” (Acts 12:8.) Here again it shows, that it was not done of craft: for one that is in haste and wishes to break out (of prison), is not so particular as to take his sandals, and gird himself. “And he did so. And he said unto him, Put on thy cloak, and follow me. And he went out, and followed him; and wist not that it was true which was done by the Angel; but thought he saw a vision. When they were past the first and the second ward, they came unto the iron gate that leadeth unto the city; which opened to them of its own accord.” (Acts 25:9–10.) Behold, a second miracle. “And they went out, and passed on through one street; and forthwith the angel departed from him. And when Peter was come to himself, he said, Now I know of a surety, that the Lord hath sent His Angel, and hath delivered me out of the hand of Herod, and from all the expectation of the people of the Jews.” (Acts 12:10–11.) When the angel departed, then Peter understood: “Now I perceive,” says he, not then. But why is this so, and why is Peter not sensible of the things taking place, although he had already experienced a like deliverance when all were released? (Acts 5:18.) (The Lord) would have the pleasure come to him all at once, and that he should first be at liberty, and then be sensible of what had happened. The circumstance also of the chains having fallen off from his hands, is a strong argument of his not having fled.^[66] “And when he had considered the thing, he came to the house of Mary the mother of John, whose surname was Mark; where many were gathered together praying.” (Acts 12:12.) Observe how Peter does not immediately withdraw, but first brings the good tidings to his friends. “And as Peter knocked at the door of the gate, a damsel came to hearken, named Rhoda. And when she knew Peter’s voice, she opened not the gate for gladness,”—Mark even the servant-girls, how full of piety they are,—“but ran in, and told how Peter stood before the gate.” (Acts 12:13–15.) But they, though it was so, shook their heads (incredulously): “And they said unto her, Thou art mad. But she constantly affirmed that it was even so. And they said, It is his angel. “But Peter continued knocking: and when they had opened the door, and saw him, they were astonished. But he, beckoning unto them with the hand to hold their peace, declared unto them how the Lord had brought him out of the prison. And he said, Go show these things unto James, and to the brethren. And he departed, and went into another place.” (Acts 12:16–17.) But let us review the order of the narrative.

(Recapitulation.) “At that time,” it says, “Herod the king stretched forth his hands to afflict certain of the Church.” (Acts 12:1.) Like a wild beast, he attacked all indiscriminately and without consideration. This is what Christ said: “My cup indeed ye shall drink, and with the baptism wherewith I am baptized, shall ye be baptized.” (Mark 10:39.) (b) “And^[67] he killed James the brother of John.” (Acts 12:2.) For there was also another James, the brother of the Lord: therefore to distinguish him, he says, “The brother of John.”^[68] Do you mark that the sum of affairs rested in these three, especially Peter and James? (a) And how was it he did not kill Peter immediately? It mentions the reason: “it was the day of unleavened bread:” and he wished rather to make a display (ἐκπομπεὕσαι) with the killing of him. “And when he saw it pleased the Jews.” (Acts 12:3.) For their own part, they now in consequence of Gamaliel’s advice, abstained from bloodshedding: and besides, did not even invent accusations; but by means of others they compassed the same results. (c) This (counsel of Gamaliel’s) above all was their condemnation: for the preaching was shown to be no longer a thing of men. “He proceeded further to kill Peter also.” (Acts 5:8; Acts 12:3.) In very deed was that fulfilled, “We are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.” (Ps. 44:13.) “Seeing,” it says, “it was a pleasing thing to the Jews.” (Rom. 8:36.) A pleasing thing, bloodshed, and unrighteous bloodshed, wickedness, impiety!^[69] He ministered to their senseless (ἀτόποις) lusts: for, whereas he ought to have done the contrary, to check their rage, he made them more eager, as if he were an executioner, and not a physician to their diseased minds. (And this) though he had numberless warnings in the case of both his grandfather and his father Herod, how the former in consequence of his putting the children to death suffered the greatest calamities, and the latter by slaying John raised up against himself a grievous war. But^[70] as they thought * * He feared lest Peter, in consequence of the slaying of James, should withdraw; and wishing to have him in safe keeping, he put him in prison: “and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers” (Acts 12:4): the stricter the custody, the more wondrous the display. “Peter therefore was kept in prison.” (Acts 12:5.) But this was all the better for Peter, who was thereby made more approved, and evinced his own manly courage. And it says, “there was earnest prayer making.” It was the prayer of (filial) affection: it was for a father they asked, a father mild. “There was,” it says, “earnest prayer.” Hear how they were affected to their teachers. No factions, no perturbation:^[71] but they betook them to prayer, to that alliance which is indeed invincible, to this they betook them for refuge. They did not say, “What? I, poor insignificant creature that I am, to pray for him!” for, as they acted of love, they did not give these things a thought. And observe, it was during the feast, that (their enemies) brought these trials upon them, that their worth might be the more approved. “And when Herod,” etc. (Acts 12:6.) See Peter sleeping, and not in distress or fear! That same night, after which he was to be brought forth, he slept, having cast all upon God. “Between two soldiers, bound with two chains.” (comp. 1 Pet. 5:7.) Mark, how strict the ward! “And says, Arise.” (Acts 12:7.) The guards were asleep with him, and therefore perceived nothing of what was happening. “And a light shined.” What was the light for? In order that Peter might see as well as hear, and not imagine it to be all fancy. And the command, “Arise quickly,^[72]” that he may not be remiss. He also smote him; so deeply did he sleep. (a) “Rise,” says he, “quickly:” this is not to hurry him (θορυβοὕντος) but to persuade him not to delay. (c) “And” immediately “his chains fell off from his hands.” (b) How? answer me: where are the heretics?—let them answer. “And the Angel said unto him,” etc. (Acts 12:8) by this also convincing him that it is no fancy: to this end he bids him gird himself and put on his shoes, that he may shake off his sleep, and know that it is real. (a) (e) “And he wist not that it was true that was done by the Angel, but thought he saw a vision” (Acts 12:9): (e) well he might, by reason of the excessive greatness (ὑπερβολὴν) of the things taking place. Do you mark what a thing it is for a miracle to be excessive (ὑπερβολὴ σημείου)? how it amazes (ἐκπλήττει) the beholder? how it will not let the thing be believed?^[73] For if Peter “thought he saw a vision,” though he had girded himself and put on his shoes, what would have been the case with another? “And,” it says, “when they had passed the first and the second ward, they came to the iron gate, which opened unto them of its own accord” (Acts 12:10): and yet the things that had happened within (the prison) were more marvellous: but this was now more after the manner of man. “And having gone out, they went along one street and immediately (all ‘until’) the Angel departed from him.” (Acts 12:11.) When there was no hindrance, then the Angel departed. For Peter would not have gone along (προἥλθεν), there being so many hindrances. “And when he came to himself:” for in very truth, it was indeed an amazement (ἔκπληξις). “Now,” saith he, “I know”—now, not then, when I was in the prison,—“that the Lord hath sent His Angel, and hath delivered me out of the hand of Herod and from all the expectation of the people of the Jews. And when he had considered” (Acts 12:12), it says: viz. where he was, or, that he must not without more ado depart but requite his Benefactor: “he came to the house of Mary the mother of John.” Who is this John? Probably^[74] he that was always with them: for this is why he adds his distinctive name (τὸ παράσημον), “whose surname was Mark.” But observe, “praying” in the night, how much they got by it: what a good thing affliction is; how wakeful it made them! Do you see how great the gain resulting from the death of Stephen? do you see how great the benefit accruing from this imprisonment? For it is not by taking vengeance upon those who wronged them that God shows the greatness of the Gospel: but in the wrong-doers themselves,^[75] without any harm happening to those, he shows what a mighty thing the afflictions in themselves are, that we may not seek in any wise deliverance from them, nor the avenging of our wrongs. And mark how the very servant-girls were henceforth upon an equality with them. “For joy,” it says, “she opened not.” (Acts 12:13–14.) This too is well done, that they likewise may not be amazed by seeing him at once, and that they may be incredulous, and their minds may be exercised. “But ran in,” etc. just as we are wont to do, she was eager to be herself the bringer of the good tidings, for good news it was indeed. “And they said unto her, Thou art mad: but she constantly affirmed that it was even so: then said they, It is his Angel.” (Acts 12:15.) This is a truth, that each man has an Angel.^[76] And what would the Angel?^[77] It was from the time (of night) that they surmised this. But when he “continued knocking, and when they had opened, and saw him, they were astonished. But he beckoning to them with his hand” (Acts 12:16–17), made them keep quiet, to hear all that had happened to him. He was now an object of more affectionate desire to the disciples, not only in consequence of his being saved, but by his sudden coming in upon them and straightway departing. Now, both his friends learn all clearly; and the aliens also learn, if they had a mind, but they had not. The same thing happened in the case of Christ. “Tell these things,” he says, “to James, and to the brethren.” How free from all vainglory! Nor did he say, Make known these things to people everywhere, but, “to the brethren. And he withdrew to another place:” for he did not tempt God, nor fling himself into temptation: since, when they were commanded to do this, then they did it. “Go,” it was said, “speak in the temple to the people.” (Acts 5:20.) But this the Angel said not (here); on the contrary, by silently removing him and bringing him out by night, he gave him free permission to withdraw—and this too is done, that we may learn that many things are providentially brought about after the manner of men—so that he should not again fall into peril.—For that they may not say, “It was his Angel,”^[78] after he was gone, they say this first, and then they see himself overthrowing their notion of the matter. Had it been the Angel, he would have knocked at the door, would not have retired to another place. And^[79] what followed in the day, make them sure.

“So Peter was kept in the prison,” etc. (Acts 12:5.) They, being at large, were at prayer: he, bound, was in sleep. “And he wist not that it was true.” (Acts 12:9.) If he thought it was true that was happening, he would have been astonished, he would not have remembered^[80] (all the circumstances): but now, seeming to be in a dream, he was free from perturbation. “When,” it says, “they were past the first and the second ward”—see also how strong the guard was—“they came unto the iron gate.” (Acts 12:10.) “Now know I that the Lord hath sent His Angel.” (Acts 12:11.) Why is not this effected by themselves?^[81] (I answer,) By this also the Lord honors them, that by the ministry of His Angels he rescues them. Then why was it not so in the case of Paul? There with good reason, because the jailer was to be converted, whereas here, it was only that the Apostle should be released. (Acts 16:25.) And God disposes all things in divers ways. And there too, it is beautiful, that Paul sings hymns, while here Peter was asleep. “And when he had considered, he came to the house of Mary,” etc. (Acts 12:12.) Then let us not hide God’s marvels, but for our own good let us study to display these abroad for the edifying of the others. For as he deserves to be admired for choosing to be put into bonds, so is he worthy of more admiration, that he withdrew not until he had reported all to his friends. “And he said, Tell James and the brethren.” (Acts 12:17.) That they may rejoice: that they may not be anxious. Through these^[82] those learn, not those through him: such thought had he for the humbler part!—

Truly, nothing better than affliction not above measure (συμμέτρου). What think you must have been their state of mind—how full of delight! Where now are those women, who sleep the whole night through? Where are those men, who do not even turn themselves in their bed? Seest thou the watchful soul? With women, and children, and maid-servants, they sang hymns to God, made purer than the sky by affliction. But now, if we see a little danger, we fall back. Nothing ever was more splendid than that Church. Let us imitate these, let us emulate them. Not for this was the night made, that we should sleep all through it and be idle. To this bear witness the artisans, the carriers, and the merchants (to this), the Church of God rising up in the midst of the night. Rise thou up also, and behold the quire of the stars, the deep silence, the profound repose: contemplate with awe the order (οἰκονομίαν) of thy Master’s household. Then is thy soul purer: it is lighter, and subtler, and soaring disengaged: the darkness itself, the profound silence, are sufficient to lead thee to compunction. And if also thou look to the heavens studded with its stars, as with ten thousand eyes,^[83] if thou bethink thee that all those multitudes who in the daytime are shouting, laughing, frisking, leaping, wronging, grasping, threatening, inflicting wrongs without number, lie all one as dead, thou wilt condemn all the self-willedness of man. Sleep hath invaded and defeated (ἡλεγξεν) nature: it is the image of death, the image of the end of all things. If^[84] thou (look out of window and) lean over into the street, thou wilt not hear even a sound: if thou look into the house, thou wilt see all lying as it were in a tomb. All this is enough to arouse the soul, and lead it to reflect on the end of all things.

Here indeed my discourse is for both men and women. Bend thy knees, send forth groans, beseech thy Master to be merciful: He is more moved by prayers in the night, when thou makest the time for rest a time for mourning. Remember what words that king uttered: “I have been weary with my groaning: every night will I wash my bed, I will water my couch with my tears.” (Ps. 6:6.) However delicate a liver thou mayest be, thou art not more delicate than he: however rich thou mayest be, thou art not richer than David. And again the same Psalmist saith, “At midnight I rose to give thanks unto Thee for the judgments of Thy righteousness.” (Ps. 19:62.) No vainglory then intrudes upon thee: how can it, when all are sleeping, and not looking at thee? Then neither sloth nor drowsiness invades thee: how can they, when thy soul is aroused by such great things? After such vigils come sweet slumbers and wondrous revelations. Do this, thou also the man, not the woman only. Let the house be a Church, consisting of men and women. For think not because thou art the only man, or because she is the only woman there, that this is any hindrance. “For where two,” He saith, “are gathered together in My Name, there am I in the midst of them.” (Matt. 18:20.) Where Christ is in the midst, there is a great multitude. Where Christ is, there needs must Angels be, needs must Archangels also and the other Powers be there. Then ye are not alone, seeing ye have Him Who is Lord of all. Hear again the prophet also saying, “Better is one that doeth the will of the Lord, than ten thousand transgressors.” (comp. Sir. 16:3.) Nothing more weak than a multitude of unrighteous men, nothing more strong than one man who lives according to the law of God. If thou hast children wake up them also, and let thy house altogether become a Church through the night: but if they be tender, and cannot endure the watching, let them stay for the first or second prayer, and then send them to rest: only stir up thyself, establish thyself in the habit. Nothing is better than that storehouse which receives such prayers as these. Hear the Prophet speaking: “If I remembered Thee upon my bed, I thought upon Thee in the dawn of the morning.” (Ps. 63:7.) But you will say: I have labored much during the day, and I cannot. Mere pretext this and subterfuge. For however much thou hast labored, thou wilt not toil like the smith, who lets fall such a heavy hammer from a great height upon the (metal flying off in) sparks, and takes in the smoke with his whole body: and yet at this work he spends the greater part of the night. Ye know also how the women, if there is need for us to go into the country, or to go forth unto a vigil, watch through the whole night. Then have thou also a spiritual forge, to fashion there not pots or cauldrons, but thine own soul, which is far better than either coppersmith or goldsmith can fashion. Thy soul, waxen old in sins, cast thou into the smelting-furnace of confession: let fall the hammer from on high: that is, the condemnation of thy words (τὥν ῥημάτων τὴν κατάγνωσιν): light up the fire of the Spirit. Thou hast a far mightier craft (than theirs). Thou art beating into shape not vessels of gold, but the soul, which is more precious than all gold, even as the smith hammers out his vessel. For it is no material vessel that thou art working at, but thou art freeing thy soul from all imaginations belonging to this life. Let a lamp be by thy side, not that one which we burn, but that which the prophet had, when he said, “Thy law is a lamp unto my feet.” (Ps. 19:105.) Bring thy soul to a red heat, by prayer: when thou seest it hot enough, draw it out, and mould it into what shape thou wilt. Believe me, not fire so effectual to burn off rust, as night prayer to remove the rust of our sins. Let the night-watchers, if no one else, shame us. They, by man’s law, go their rounds in the cold, shouting loudly, and walking through lanes (στενωπὥν) and alleys, oftentimes drenched with rain and (all) congealed with cold, for thee and for thy safety, and the protection of thy property. There is he taking such care for thy property, while thou takest none even for thy soul. And yet I do not make thee go thy rounds in the open air like him, nor shout loudly and rend thy sides: but in thy closet itself, or in thy bedchamber, bend thy knees, and entreat thy Lord. Why did Christ Himself pass a whole night on the mountain? Was it not, that He might be an ensample to us? Then is it that the plants respire, in the night, I mean: and then also does the soul take in the dew even more than they. What the sun has parched by day becomes cool again at night. More refreshing than all dew, the tears of the night descend upon our lusts and upon all heat and fever of the soul, and do not let it be affected in any such way. But if it do not enjoy the benefit of that dew, it will be burnt up in the daytime. But God forbid (it should be so^[85])! Rather, may we all, being refreshed, and enjoying the mercy of God, be freed from the burden of our sins, through the grace and mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ, with Whom to the Father together with the Holy Spirit be glory, might, honor, now and ever, world without end. Amen.

Homily XXVII on Acts xii. 18, 19.

Homily XXVII.

Acts 12:18–19

“Now as soon as it was day, there was no small stir among the soldiers, what was become of Peter. And when Herod had sought for him, and found him not, he examined the keepers, and commanded that they should be put to death. And he went down from Judea to Cæsarea, and there abode.”

Some persons, it is likely, are at a loss how to explain it, that God should quietly look on while (His) champions^[86] are put to death, and now again the soldiers on account of Peter: and yet it was possible for Him after (delivering) Peter to rescue them also. But it was not yet the time of judgment, so as to render to each according to his deserts. And besides, it was not Peter that put them into his hands. For the thing that most annoyed him was the being mocked; just as in the case of his grandfather when he was deceived by the wise men, that was what made him (feel) cut to the heart—the being (eluded and) made ridiculous.^[87] “And having put them to the question,” it says, “he ordered them to be led away to execution.” (Matt. 2:16.) And yet he had heard from them—for he had put them to the question—both that the chains had been left, and that he had taken his sandals, and that until that night he was with them. “Having put them to the question:” but what did they conceal?^[88] Why then did they not themselves also flee? “He ordered them to be led away to execution:” and yet he ought to have marvelled, ought to have been astonished at this. The consequence is, by the death of these men (the thing), is made manifest to all: both his wickedness is exposed to view, and (it is made clear that) the wonder (is) of God. “And he went down from Judea to Cæsarea, and there abode: and Herod was highly displeased with them of Tyre and Sidon: but they came with one accord to him, and, having made Blastus the king’s chamberlain their friend, desired peace; because their country was nourished by the king’s country. And upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them. And the people gave a shout, saying, ‘It is the voice of a god, and not of a man,’ And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost.” (Acts 12:20–23.) * * But see how (the writer) here does not hide these things.^[89] Why does he mention this history? Say, what has it to do with the Gospel, that Herod is incensed with the Tyrians and Sidonians? It is not a small matter, even this, how immediately justice seized him; although not because of Peter, but because of his arrogant speaking. And yet, it may be said, if those shouted, what is that to him? Because he accepted the acclamation, because he accounted himself to be worthy of the adoration. Through him those most receive a lesson, who so thoughtlessly flattered him (al. οἱ κολακεύοντες). Observe again, while both parties deserve punishment, this man is punished. For this is not the time of judgment, but He punishes him that had most to answer for, leaving the others to profit by this man’s fate.^[90] “And the word of God,” it says, “grew,” i.e. in consequence of this, “and multiplied.” (Acts 12:24.) Do you mark God’s providential management? “But Barnabas and Saul returned from Jerusalem, when they had fulfilled their ministry, and took with them John, whose surname was Mark.” (Acts 12:25.) “Now there were in the Church that was at Antioch, certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaën, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul.”^[91] (Acts 13:1.) He still mentions Barnabas first: for Paul was not yet famous, he had not yet wrought any sign. “As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate Me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away.” (Acts 13:2–3.) What means, “Ministering?” Preaching. “Separate for Me,” it says, “Barnabas and Saul.” What means, “Separate for Me?” For the work, for the Apostleship. See again by what persons he is ordained (γυμνοτέρα. Cat. σεμνοτέρα, “more awful.”) By Lucius the Cyrenean and Manaën, or rather, by the Spirit. The less the persons, the more palpable the grace. He is ordained henceforth to Apostleship, so as to preach with authority. How then does he himself say, “Not from men, nor by man?”^[92] (Gal. 1:1.) Because it was not man that called or brought him over: this is why he says, “Not from men. Neither by man,” that is, that he was not sent by this (man), but by the Spirit. Wherefore also (the writer) thus proceeds: “So they, being sent forth by the Holy Ghost, departed unto Seleucia; and from thence they sailed to Cyprus.” (Acts 13:4.) But let us look over again what has been said.

(Recapitulation.) “And when it was day,” etc. (Acts 12:18.) For^[93] if the Angel had brought out the soldiers also, along with Peter, it would have been thought a case of flight. Then why, you may ask, was it not otherwise managed? Why, where is the harm? Now, if we see that they who have suffered unjustly, take no harm, we shall not raise these questions. For why do you not say the same of James? Why did not (God) rescue him? “There was no small stir among the soldiers.” So (clearly) had they perceived nothing (of what had happened). Lo, I take up the plea in their defence. The chains were there, and the keepers within, and the prison shut, nowhere a wall broken through, all told the same tale: the man had been carried off:^[94] why dost thou condemn them? Had they wished to let him off, they would have done it before, or would have gone out with him. “But he gave them money?” (Acts 3:6.) And how should he, who had not to give even to a poor man, have the means to give to these? And then neither had the chains been broken, nor were they loosed. He ought to have seen, that the thing was of God, and no work of man. “And he went down from Judea to Cæsarea, and there abode. And Herod was highly displeased with them of Tyre and Sidon,” etc. (Acts 12:19.) He is now going to mention (a matter of) history: this is the reason why he adds the names, that it may be shown how he keeps to the truth in all things. “And,” it says, “having made Blastus the king’s chamberlain their friend, they desired peace; because their country was nourished by the king’s country.” (Acts 12:20–21.) For probably there was a famine. “And on a set day,” etc. (Joseph. Ant. xix.) Josephus also says this, that he fell into a lingering disease. Now the generality were not aware of this,^[95] but the Apostle sets it down: yet at the same time their ignorance was an advantage, in regard that they imputed what befell (Agrippa) to his putting James and the soldiers to death. Observe, when he slew the Apostle, he did nothing of this sort but when (he slew) these; in fact he knew not what to say about it:^[96] as being at a loss, then, and feeling ashamed, “he went down from Judea to Cæsarea.” I suppose it was also to bring those (men of Tyre and Sidon) to apologize, that he withdrew (from Jerusalem): for with those he was incensed, while paying such court to these. See how vainglorious the man is: meaning to confer the boon upon them, he makes an harangue. But Josephus says, that he was also arrayed in a splendid robe made of silver. Observe both what flatterers those were, and what a high spirit was shown by the Apostles: the man whom the whole nation so courted, the same they held in contempt. (Acts 12:24.) But observe again a great refreshing granted to them, and the numberless benefits accruing from the vengeance inflicted upon him. But if this man, because it was said to him, “It is the voice of God and not of a man (Acts 12:22) although he said nothing himself, suffered such things: much more should Christ, had He not Himself been God (have suffered) for saying always as He did, “These words of mine are not Mine” (John 14:10; John 18:36) and, “Angels minister to Me,” and such like. But that man ended His life by a shameful and miserable death, and thenceforth no more is seen of him. And observe him also, easily talked over even by Blastus, like a poor creature, soon incensed and again pacified, and on all occasions a slave of the populace, with nothing free and independent about him. But mark also the authority of the Holy Ghost: “As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate Me Barnabas and Saul.” (Acts 13:2.) What being would have dared, if not of the same authority, to say this? “Separate,” etc. But this is done, that they may not keep together among themselves. The Spirit saw that they had greater power, and were able to be sufficient for many. And how did He speak to them? Probably by prophets: therefore the writer premises, that there were prophets also. And they were fasting and ministering: that thou mayest learn that there was need of great sobriety. In Antioch he is ordained, where he preaches. Why did He not say, Separate for the Lord, but, “For me?” It shows that He is of one authority and power. “And when they had fasted,” etc. Seest thou what a great thing fasting is? “So they being sent forth by the Holy Ghost:” it shows that the Spirit did all.

A great, yes a great good is fasting: it is circumscribed by no limits. When need was to ordain, then they fast: and to them while fasting, the Spirit spake. Thus much only do I enjoin: (I say) not fast, but abstain from luxury. Let us seek meats to nourish, not things to ruin us; seek meats for food, not occasions of diseases, of diseases both of soul and body: seek food which hath comfort, not luxury which is full of discomfort: the one is luxury, the other mischief; the one is pleasure, the other pain; the one is agreeable to nature, the other contrary to nature. For say, if one should give thee hemlock juice to drink, would it not be against nature? if one should give thee logs and stones, wouldest thou not reject them? Of course, for they are against nature. Well, and so is luxury. For just as in a city, under an invasion of enemies when there has been siege and tumult, great is the uproar, so is it in the soul, under invasion of wine and luxury. “Who hath woe? who hath tumults? who hath discomforts and babblings? Are they not they that tarry long at the wine? Whose are bloodshot eyes?” (Prov. 23:29–30.) But yet, say what we will, we shall not bring off those who give themselves up to luxury, unless^[97] we bring into conflict therewith a different affection. And first, let us address ourselves to the women. Nothing uglier than a woman given to luxury, nothing uglier than a woman given to drink. The bloom of her complexion is faded: the calm and mild expression of the eyes is rendered turbid, as when a cloud intercepts the rays of the sunshine. It is a vulgar, (ἀνελεύθερον) slave-like, thoroughly low-lived habit. How disgusting is a woman when from her breath you catch sour whiffs of fetid wine: a woman belching, giving out a fume (χυμὸν) of decomposing meats; herself weighed down, unable to keep upright; her face flushed with an unnatural red; yawning incessantly, and everything swimming in a mist before her eyes! But not such, she that abstains from luxurious living: no (this abstinence makes her look) a more beautiful, well-bred (σωφρονεστέρα) woman. For even to the body, the composure of the soul imparts a beauty of its own. Do not imagine that the impression of beauty results only from the bodily features. Give me a handsome girl, but turbulent (τεταραγμένην), loquacious, railing, given to drink, extravagant, (and tell me) if she is not worse-looking than any ugly woman? But if she were bashful, if she would hold her peace, if she learnt to blush, if to speak modestly (συμμέτρως), if to find time for fastings; her beauty would be twice as great, her freshness would be heightened, her look more engaging, fraught with modesty and good breeding (σωφροσύνης καὶ κοσμιότητος). Now then, shall we speak of men? What can be uglier than a man in drink? He is an object of ridicule to his servants, of ridicule to his enemies, of pity to his friends; deserving condemnation without end: a wild beast rather than a human being; for to devour much food is proper to panther, and lion, and bear. No wonder (that they do so), for those creatures have not a reasonable soul. And yet even they, if they be gorged with food more than they need, and beyond the measure appointed them by nature, get their whole body ruined by it: how much more we? Therefore hath God contracted our stomach into a small compass; therefore hath He marked out a small measure of sustenance, that He may instruct us to attend to the soul.

Let us consider our very make, and we shall see there is in us but one little part that has this operation—for our mouth and tongue are meant for singing hymns, our throat for voice—therefore the very necessity of nature has tied us down, that we may not, even involuntarily, get into much trouble (πραγματείαν) (in this way). Since, if indeed luxurious living had not its pains, nor sickness and infirmities, it might be tolerated: but as the case is, He hath stinted thee by restrictions of nature, that even if thou wish to exceed, thou mayest not be able to do so. Is not pleasure thine object, beloved? This thou shalt find from moderation. Is not health? This too thou shalt so gain. Is not easiness of mind? This too. Is not freedom? is not vigor and good habit of body, is not sobriety and alertness of mind? (All these thou shalt find); so entirely are all good things there, while in the other are the contraries to these, discomfort, distemper, disease, embarrassment—waste of substance (ἀνελευθερία). Then how comes it, you will ask, that we all run eagerly after this? It comes of disease. For say, what is it that makes the sick man hanker after the thing that does him harm? Is not this very hankering a part of his disease? Why is it that the lame man does not walk upright? This very thing, does it come of his being lazy, and not choosing to go to the physician? For there are some things, in which the pleasure they bring with them is temporary, but lasting the punishment: others just the contrary, in which the endurance is for a time, the pleasure perpetual. He, therefore, that has so little solidity and strength of purpose as not to slight present sweets for future, is soon overcome. Say, how came Esau to be overcome? how came he to prefer the present pleasure to the future honor? Through want of solidity and firmness of character. (Gen. 25:33.) And this fault itself, say you, whence comes it? Of our ownselves: and it is plain from this consideration. When we have the mind, we do rouse ourselves, and become capable of endurance. Certain it is, if at any time necessity comes upon us, nay, often only from a spirit of emulation, we get to see clearly what is useful for us. When therefore thou art about to indulge in luxury, consider how brief the pleasure, consider the loss—for loss it is indeed to spend so much money to one’s own hurt—the diseases, the infirmities: and despise luxury. How many shall I enumerate who have suffered evils from indulgence? Noah was drunken, and was exposed in his nakedness, and see what evils came of this. (Gen. 9:20.) Esau through greediness abandoned his birthright, and was set upon fratricide. The people of Israel “sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play.” (Exod. 32:6.) Therefore saith the Scripture, “When thou hast eaten and drunken, remember the Lord thy God.” (Deut. 6:12.) For they fell over a precipice, in failing into luxury. “The widow,” he saith, “that liveth in pleasure, is dead while she liveth” (1 Tim. 5:6): and again, “The beloved waxed sleek, grew thick, and kicked” (Deut. 32:15): and again the Apostle, “Make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof.” (Rom. 13:14.) I am not enacting as a law that there shall be fasting, for indeed there is no one who would listen; but I am doing away with daintiness, I am cutting off luxury for the sake of your own profit: for like a winter torrent, luxury overthrows all: there is nothing to stop its course: it casts out from a kingdom: what is the gain of it (τί τὸ πλέον)? Would you enjoy a (real) luxury? Give to the poor; invite Christ, so that even after the table is removed, you may still have this luxury to enjoy. For now, indeed, you have it not, and no wonder: but then you will have it. Would you taste a (real) luxury? Nourish your soul, give to her of that food to which she is used: do not kill her by starvation.—It is the time for war, the time for contest: and do you sit enjoying yourself? Do you not see even those who wield sceptres, how they live frugally while abroad on their campaigns? “We wrestle not against flesh and blood” (Eph. 6:12); and are you fattening yourself when about to wrestle? The adversary stands grinding his teeth, and are you giving a loose to jollity, and devoting yourself to the table? I know that I speak these things in vain, yet not (in vain) for all. “He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.” (Luke 8:8.) Christ is pining through hunger, and are you frittering yourself away (διασπᾅς) with gluttony? Two inconsistencies (Δύο ἀμετρίαι). For what evil does not luxury cause? It is contrary to itself: so that I know not how it gets its name: but just as that is called glory, which is (really) infamy, and that riches, which in truth is poverty, so the name of luxury is given to that which in reality is nauseousness. Do we intend ourselves for the shambles, that we so fatten ourselves? Why cater for the worm that it may have a sumptuous larder? Why make more of their humors (ἰχὥρας)? Why store up in yourself sources of sweat and rank smelling? Why make yourself useless for everything? Do you wish your eye to be strong? Get your body well strung? For in musical strings, that which is coarse and not refined, is not fit to produce musical tones, but that which has been well scraped, stretches well, and vibrates with full harmony. Why do you bury the soul alive? why make the wall about it thicker? Why increase the reek and the cloud, with fumes like a mist steaming up from all sides? If none other, let the wrestlers teach you, that the more spare the body, the stronger it is: and (then) also the soul is more vigorous. In fact, it is like charioteer and horse. But there you see, just as in the case of men giving themselves to luxury, and making themselves plump, so the plump horses are unwieldy, and give the driver much ado. One may think one’s self (ἀγαπητὸν) well off, even with a horse obedient to the rein and well-limbed, to be able to carry off the prize: but when the driver is forced to drag the horse along, and when the horse falls, though he goad him ever so much, he cannot make him get up, be he ever so skilful himself, he will be deprived of the victory. Then let us not endure to see our soul wronged because of the body, but let us make the soul herself more clear-sighted, let us make her wing light, her bonds looser: let us feed her with discourse, with frugality, (feeding) the body only so much that it may be healthy, that it may be vigorous, that it may rejoice and not be in pain: that having in this sort well ordered our concerns, we may be enabled to lay hold upon the highest virtue, and to attain unto the eternal good things by the grace and loving-kindness of our Lord Jesus Christ, with Whom, to the Father and Holy Ghost together, be glory, dominion, honor, now and ever, world without end. Amen.

Homily XXVIII on Acts xiii. 4, 5.

Homily XXVIII.

Acts 13:4–5

“So they, being sent forth by the Holy Ghost, departed unto Seleucia; and from thence they sailed to Cyprus. And when they were at Salamis, they preached the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews: and they had also John to their minister.”

As soon as they were ordained they went forth, and hasted to Cyprus, that being a place where was no ill-design hatching against them, and where moreover the Word had been sown already. In Antioch there were (teachers) enough, and Phœnice too was near to Palestine; but Cyprus not so. However, you are not to make a question of the why and wherefore, when it is the Spirit that directs their movements: for they were not only ordained by the Spirit, but sent forth by Him likewise. “And when they were come to Salamis, they preached the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews.” Do you mark how they make a point of preaching the word to them first, not to make them more contentious?^[98] The persons mentioned before “spake to none but to Jews only” (Acts 11:19), and so here they betook them to the synagogues. “And when they had gone through the isle unto Paphos, they found a certain sorcerer, a false prophet, a Jew, whose name was Bar-jesus: which was with the deputy of the country, Sergius Paulus, a prudent man; who called for Barnabas and Saul, and desired to hear the word of God. But Elymas the sorcerer (for so is his name by interpretation) withstood them, seeking to turn away the deputy from the faith.” (Acts 13:6–8.) Again a Jew sorcerer, as was Simon. And observe this man, how, while they preached to the others, he did not take it much amiss, but only when they approached the proconsul. And then in respect of the proconsul the wonder is, that although prepossessed by the man’s sorcery, he was nevertheless willing to hear the Apostles. So it was with the Samaritans: and from the competition (συγκρίσεως) the victory appears, the sorcery being worsted. Everywhere, vainglory and love of power are a (fruitful) source of evils! “But Saul, who is also Paul,”—(Acts 13:9) here his name is changed at the same time that he is ordained, as it was in Peter’s case,^[99]—“filled with the Holy Ghost, looked upon him, and said, O full of all guile and all villany, thou child of the devil:” (Acts 13:10) and observe, this is not abuse, but accusation: for so ought forward, impudent people to be rebuked “thou enemy of all righteousness;” here he lays bare what was in the thoughts of the man, while under pretext of saving he was ruining the proconsul: “wilt thou not cease,” he says, “to pervert the ways of the Lord?” (He says it) both confidently (αξιοπίστως), It is not with us thou art warring, nor art thou fighting (with us), but “the ways of the Lord” thou art perverting, and with praise (of these, he adds) “the right” ways. “And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thee, and thou shalt be blind.” (Acts 13:11.) It was the sign by which he was himself converted, and by this he would fain convert this man. As also that expression, “for a season,” puts it not as an act of punishing, but as meant for his conversion: had it been for punishment, he would have made him lastingly blind, but now it is not so, but “for a season” (and this), that he may gain the proconsul. For, as he was prepossessed by the sorcery, it was well to teach him a lesson by this infliction (and the sorcerer also), in the same way as the magicians (in Egypt) were taught by the boils.^[100] (Exod. 9:11.) “And immediately there fell on him a mist and a darkness: and he went about seeking some to lead him by the hand. Then the deputy, when he saw what was done, believed, being astonished at the doctrine of the Lord.” (Acts 13:12.) But observe, how they do not linger there, as (they might have been tempted to do) now that the proconsul was a believer, nor are enervated by being courted and honored, but immediately keep on with their work, and set out for the country on the opposite coast. “Now when Paul and his company loosed from Paphos, they came to Perga in Pamphylia; and John departing from them returned to Jerusalem. But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and sat down.” (Acts 13:13–14.) And here again they entered the synagogues, in the character of Jews, that they might not be treated as enemies, and be driven away: and in this way they carried the whole matter successfully. “And after the reading of the Law and the Prophets, the rulers of the synagogue sent unto them, saying, Ye men and brethren, if ye have any word of exhortation for the people, say on.” (Acts 13:15.) From this point, we learn the history of Paul’s doings, as in what was said above we have learned not a little about Peter. But let us review what has been said.

(Recapitulation.) “And when they were come to Salamis,” the metropolis of Cyprus, “they preached the word of God.” (Acts 13:5.) They had spent a year in Antioch: it behooved that they should go hither also (to Cyprus) and not sit permanently where they were (the converts in Cyprus): needed greater teachers. See too how they remain no time in Seleucia, knowing that (the people there) might have reaped much benefit from the neighboring city (of Antioch): but they hasten on to the more pressing duties. When they came to the metropolis of the island, they were earnest to disabuse (διορθωσαι) the proconsul. But that it is no flattery that (the writer) says, “he was with the proconsul, a prudent man” (Acts 13:7), you may learn from the facts; for he needed not many discourses, and himself wished to hear them. And^[101] he mentions also the names. * * * Observe, how he said nothing to the sorcerer, until he gave him an occasion: but they only “preached the word of the Lord.” Since (though Elymas) saw the rest attending to them, he looked only to this one object, that the proconsul might not be won over. Why did not (Paul) perform some other miracle? Because there was none equal to this, the taking the enemy captive. And observe, he first impeaches, and then punishes, him. He shows how justly the man deserved to suffer, by his saying, “O full of all deceit” (Acts 13:10): (“full of all,”) he says: nothing wanting to the full measure: and he well says, of all “deceit,” for the man was playing the part of a hypocrite.—“Child of the devil,” because he was doing his work: “enemy of all righteousness,” since this (which they preached) was the whole of righteousness (though at the same time): I suppose in these words he reproves his manner of life. His words were not prompted by anger, and to show this, the writer premises, “filled with the Holy Ghost,” that is, with His operation. “And now behold the hand of the Lord is upon thee.” (Acts 13:11.) It was not vengeance then, but healing: for it is as though he said: “It is not I that do it, but the hand of God.” Mark how unassuming! No “light,”^[102] as in the case of Paul, “shone round about him.” (Acts 9:3.) “Thou shalt be blind,” he says, “not seeing the sun for a season,” that he may give him opportunity for repentance: for we nowhere find them wishing to be made conspicuous by the more stern (exercise of their authority), even though it was against enemies that this was put forth: in respect of those of their own body (they used severity), and with good reason, but in dealing with those without, not so; that (the obedience of faith) might not seem to be matter of compulsion and fear. It is a proof of his blindness, his “seeking some to lead him by the hand.” (Acts 5:1–11. ff.) And^[103] the proconsul sees the blindness inflicted, “and when he saw what was done, he believed:” and both alone believed not merely this, but, “being astonished at the doctrine of the Lord” (Acts 13:12): he saw that these things were not mere words, nor trickery. Mark how he loved to receive instruction from his teachers, though he was in a station of so high authority. And (Paul) said not to the sorcerer, “Wilt thou not cease to pervert” the proconsul?^[104] What may be the reason of John’s going back from them? For “John,” it says, “departing from them returned to Jerusalem” (Acts 13:13): (he does it) because they are undertaking a still longer journey: and yet he was their attendant, and as for the danger, they incurred it (not he).—Again, when they were come to Perga, they hastily passed by the other cities, for they were in haste to the metropolis, Antioch. And observe how concise the historian is. “They sat down in the synagogue,” he says, and, “on the sabbath day” (Acts 13:14–15): that they might prepare the way beforehand for the Word. And they do not speak first, but when invited: since as strangers, they called upon them to do so. Had they not waited, there would have been no discourse. Here for the first time we have Paul preaching. And observe his prudence: where the word was already sown, he passes on: but where there was none (to preach), he makes a stay: as he himself writes: “Yea, so have I strived to preach the Gospel, not where Christ was named.” (Rom. 15:20.) Great courage this also. Truly, from the very outset, a wonderful man! crucified, ready for all encounters (παρατεταγμένος), he knew how great grace he had obtained, and he brought to it zeal equivalent. He was not angry with John: for this was not for him:^[105] but he kept to the work, he quailed not, he was unappalled, when shut up in the midst of a host. Observe how wisely it is ordered that Paul should not preach at Jerusalem: the very hearing that he is become a believer, this of itself is enough for them; for him to preach, they never would have endured, such was their hatred of him: so he departs far away, where he was not known. But^[106] it is well done, that “they entered the synagogue on the sabbath day” when all were collected together. “And after the reading of the Law and the Prophets, the rulers of the synagogue sent unto them, saying, Ye men and brethren, if ye have any word or exhortation for the people, say on.” (Acts 13:15.) Behold how they do this without grudging, but no longer after this. If ye did wish this (really), there was more need to exhort.

He first convicted the sorcerer (and showed), what he was; and that he was such, the sign showed: “thou shalt be blind, not seeing the sun” this was a sign of the blindness of his soul: “for a season” (Acts 13:11): he says, to bring him to repentance. But, oh that love of rule! oh, that lust of vainglory! how it does overturn and ruin everything; makes people stand up against their own, against each other’s salvation; renders them blind indeed, and dark, insomuch that they have even to seek for some to lead them by the hand! Oh that they did even this, oh that they did seek were it but some to lead them by the hand! But no, they no longer endure this, they take the whole matter into their own hands. (This vice) will let no man see: like a mist and thick darkness it spreads itself over them, not letting any see through it. What pleas shall we have to offer, we who for one evil affection, overcome another evil affection (supra p. 176), but not for the fear of God! For example, many who are both lewd and covetous, have for their niggardliness put a bridle upon their lust, while other such, on the contrary, have for pleasure’s sake, despised riches. Again, those who are both the one and the other, have by the lust of vainglory overcome both, lavishing their money unsparingly, and practising temperance to no (good) purpose; others again, who are exceedingly vainglorious, have despised that evil affection, submitting to many vile disgraces for the sake of their amours, or for the sake of their money: others again, that they may satiate their anger, have chosen to suffer losses without end, and care for none of them, provided only they may work their own will. And yet, what passion can do with us, the fear of God is impotent to effect! Why speak I of passion? What shame before men can do with us, the fear of God has not the strength to effect! Many are the things we do right and wrong, from a feeling of shame before men; but God we fear not. How many have been shamed by regard to the opinions of men into flinging away money! How many have mistakenly made it a point of honor to give themselves up to the service of their friends (only), to their hurt! How many from respect for their friendships have been shamed into numberless wrong acts! Since then both passion and regard for the opinion of men are able to put us upon doing wrong things and right, it is idle to say, “we cannot:” we can, if we have the mind: and we ought to have the mind. Why canst not thou overcome the love of glory, when others do overcome it, having the same soul as thou, and the same body; bearing the same form, and living the same life? Think of God, think of the glory that is from above: weigh against that the things present, and thou wilt quickly recoil from this worldly glory. If at all events thou covet glory, covet that which is glory, indeed. What kind of glory is it, when it begets infamy? What kind of glory, when it compels one to desire the honor of those who are inferior, and stands in need of that? Real honor is the gaining the esteem of those who are greater than one’s self. If at all events thou art enamoured of glory, be thou rather enamoured of that which comes from God. If enamoured of that glory thou despisest this world’s glory, thou shalt see how ignoble this is: but so long as thou seest not that glory, neither wilt thou be able to see this, how foul it is, how ridiculous. For as those who are under the spell of some wicked, hideously ugly woman, so long as they are in love with her, cannot see her ill-favoredness, because their passion spreads a darkness over their judgment: so is it here also: so long as we are possessed with the passion, we cannot perceive what a thing it is. How then might we be rid of it? Think of those who (for the sake of glory) have spent countless sums, and now are none the better for it:^[107] think of the dead, what glory they got, and (now) this glory is nowhere abiding, but all perished and come to naught: bethink thee how it is only a name, and has nothing real in it. For say, what is glory? give me some definition. “The being admired by all,” you will say. With justice, or also not with justice? For if it be not with justice, this is not admiration, but crimination (κατηγορία), and flattery, and misrepresentation (διαβολή). But if you say, With justice, why that is impossible: for in the populace there are no right judgments; those that minister to their lusts, those are the persons they admire. And if you would (see the proof of this), mark those who give away their substance to the harlots, to the charioteers, to the dancers. But you will say, we do not mean these, but those who are just and upright, and able to do great and noble good acts. Would that they wished it, and they soon would do good: but as things are, they do nothing of the kind. Who, I ask you, now praises the just and upright man? Nay, it is just the contrary. Could anything be more preposterous than for a just man, when doing any such good act, to seek glory of the many—as if an artist of consummate skill, employed upon an Emperor’s portrait, should wish to have the praises of the ignorant! Moreover, a man who looks for honor from men, will soon enough desist from the acts which virtue enjoins. If he will needs be gaping for their praises, he will do just what they wish, not what himself wishes. What then would I advise you? You must look only to God, to the praise that is from Him, perform all things which are pleasing to Him, and go after the good things (that are with Him), not be gaping for anything that is of man: for this mars both fasting and prayer and alms-giving, and makes all our good deeds void. Which that it be not our case, let us flee this passion. To one thing alone let us look, to the praise which is from God, to the being accepted of Him, to the commendation from our common Master; that, having passed through our present life virtuously, we may obtain the promised blessings together with them that love Him, through the grace and mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ, with whom to the Father, together with the Holy Ghost, be glory, might, honor, now and ever, world without end. Amen.

Homily XXIX on Acts xiii. 16, 17.

Homily XXIX.

Acts 13:16–17

“Then Paul stood up, and beckoning with his hand said, Men of Israel, and ye that fear God, give audience. The God of this people of Israel chose our fathers, and exalted the people when they dwelt as strangers in the land of Egypt, and with an high arm brought He them out of it.”

Behold Barnabas giving place to Paul—how should it be otherwise?—to him whom he brought from Tarsus; just as we find John on all occasions giving way to Peter: and yet Barnabas was more looked up to than Paul: true, but they had an eye only to the common advantage. “Then Paul stood up,” it says;—this^[108] was a custom of the Jews—“and beckoned with his hand.” And see how he prepares the way beforehand for his discourse: having first praised them, and showed his great regard for them in the words, “ye that fear God,” he so begins his discourse. And he says not, Ye proselytes, since it was a term of disadvantage.^[109] “The God of this people chose our fathers: and the people”—See, he calls God Himself their God peculiarly, Who is the common God of men; and shows how great from the first were His benefits, just as Stephen does. This they do to teach them, that now also God has acted after the same custom, in sending His own Son; (Luke 20:13): as (Christ) Himself (does) in the parable of the vineyard—“And the people,” he says, “He exalted when it sojourned in the land of Egypt”—and yet the contrary was the case:^[110] true, but they increased in numbers; moreover, the miracles were wrought on their account: “and with an high arm brought He them out of it.” Of these things (the wonders) which were done in Egypt, the prophets are continually making mention. And observe, how he passes over the times of their calamities, and nowhere brings forward their faults, but only God’s kindness, leaving those for themselves to think over. “And about the time of forty years suffered He their manners in the wilderness.” (Acts 13:18.) Then the settlement. “And when he had destroyed seven nations in the land of Canaan, He divided their land to them by lot.” (Acts 13:19.) And the time was long; four hundred and fifty years. “And after that He gave unto them judges about the space of four hundred and fifty years, until Samuel the prophet.”^[111] (Acts 13:20.) Here he shows that God varied His dispensations towards them (at divers times). “And afterward they desired a king:” and (still) not a word of their ingratitude, but throughout he speaks of the kindness of God. “And God gave unto them Saul the son of Cis, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, by the space of forty years.” (Acts 13:21.) “And when he had removed him, He raised up unto them David to be their king: to whom also He gave testimony, and said, I have found David the son of Jesse, a man after Mine own heart, which shall fulfil all My will. Of this man’s seed hath God according to His promise raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus.” (Acts 13:22–23.) This was no small thing that Christ should be from David. Then John bears witness to this: “When John had first preached before His coming the baptism of repentance to all the people of Israel. And as John fulfilled his course, he said, Whom think ye that I am? I am not He. But, behold, there cometh one after me, whose shoes of His feet I am not worthy to loose.” (Acts 13; Acts 24; Acts 25.) And John too not merely bears witness (to the fact), but (does it in such sort that) when men were bringing the glory to him, he declines it: for it is one thing (not to affect) an honor which nobody thinks of offering; and another, to reject it when all men are ready to give it, and not only to reject it, but to do so with such humility. “Men and brethren, children of the stock of Abraham, and whosoever among you feareth God, to you is the word of this salvation sent. For they that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they knew Him not, nor yet the voices of the prophets which are read every sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning Him. And though they found no cause of death in Him, yet desired they Pilate that He should be slain.” (Acts 13:26–28.) On all occasions we find them making a great point of showing this, that the blessing is peculiarly theirs, that they may not flee (from Christ), as thinking they had nothing to do with Him, because they had crucified Him. “Because they knew Him not,” he says: so that the sin was one of ignorance. See how he gently makes an apology even on behalf of those (crucifiers). And not only this: but he adds also, that thus it must needs be. And^[112] how so? “By condemning Him, they fulfilled the voices of the prophets.” Then again from the Scriptures. “And when they had fulfilled all that was written of Him, they took Him down from the tree, and laid Him in a sepulchre. But God raised Him from the dead. And He was seen many days of them which came up with Him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are His witnesses unto the people—”(Acts 13:29–31) that He rose again. “And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that He hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second Psalm, Thou art My Son, this day have I begotten Thee. And as concerning that He raised Him up from the dead, now no more to return to corruption, He said on this wise, I will give you the sure mercies of David. Wherefore he saith also in another Psalm, Thou shalt not suffer Thine Holy One to see corruption. For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption: but He, Whom God raised again, saw no corruption. Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this Man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: and by Him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.” (Acts 13:32–39.) Observe^[113] how Paul here is more vehement in his discourse: we nowhere find Peter saying this. Then too he adds the terrifying words: “Beware therefore, lest that come upon you, which is spoken of in the prophets; Behold, ye despisers, and wonder, and perish: for I work a work in your days, a work which ye shall in no wise believe, though a man declare it unto you.” (Acts 13:40–41.)

(a) Observe^[114] how he twines (the thread of) his discourse (alternately) from things present, from the prophets. Thus, “from^[115] (this man’s) seed according to the promise”—(Acts 13:23): (c) the name of David was dear to them; well then, is it not (a thing to be desired) that a son of his, he says, should be their king?—(b) then he adduces John: then again the prophets, where he says, “By condemning they fulfilled,” and again, “All that was written:” then the Apostles as witnesses of the Resurrection: then David bearing witness. For neither the Old Testament proofs seemed so cogent when taken by themselves as they are in this way, nor yet the latter testimonies apart from the former: wherefore he makes them mutually confirm each other. “Men and brethren,” etc. (Acts 13:26.) For since they were possessed by fear, as having slain Him, and conscience made them aliens (the Apostles), discourse not with them as unto Christicides, neither as putting into their hands a good which was not theirs, but one peculiarly their own. (d) “For they that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers:” as much as to say, not ye, but they:^[116] and again, apologizing even for those, “Because they knew Him not, and the voices of the Prophets which are read every sabbath day, in condemning Him, they fulfilled them.” A great charge it is against them that they continually hearing heeded not. But no marvel: for what was said above concerning Egypt and the wilderness, was enough to show their ingratitude. And observe how this Apostle also, as one moved by the Spirit Himself,^[117] continually preaches the Passion, the Burial. (g) “Having taken Him down from the tree.” Observe, what a great point they make of this. He speaks of the manner of His death. Moreover they bring Pilate (conspicuously) forward, that (the fact of) the Passion may be proved by the mention of the tribunal (by which he was condemned), but at the same time, for the greater impeachment of those (His crucifiers), seeing they delivered Him up to an alien. And he does not say, They made a complaint (against Him), (ἐνέτυχον, al. ἐντυγχάνει) but, “They desired, though having found no cause of death” (in Him), “that He should be slain. (e) Who appeared,” he says, “for many days to them that came up with Him from Galilee to Jerusalem.” (Rom. 11:2.) Instead of^[118]** he says, “Who are His witnesses unto the people,” to wit, “The men which came up with Him from Galilee to Jerusalem.” Then he produces David and Esaias bearing witness. “The faithful (mercies),” the abiding (mercies), those which never perish. (h) Paul loved them exceedingly. And observe, he does not enlarge on the ingratitude of the fathers, but puts before them what they must fear. For Stephen indeed with good reason does this, seeing he was about to be put to death, not teaching them; and showing them, that the Law is even now on the point of being abolished: (Acts 7.) but not so Paul; he does but threaten and put them in fear. (f) And he does not dwell long on these,^[119] as taking it for granted that the word is of course believed; nor enlarge upon the greatness of their punishment, and assail that which they affectionately love, by showing the Law about to be cast out: but dwells upon that which is for their good (telling them), that great shall be the blessings for them being obedient, and great the evils being disobedient.

But let us look over again what has been said. “Ye men of Israel,” etc. (Acts 13:16–21.) The Promise then, he says, the fathers received; ye, the reality. (j) And observe, he nowhere mentions right deeds of theirs, but (only) benefits on God’s part: “He chose: Exalted: Suffered their manners:” these are no matters of praise to them: “They asked, He gave.” But David he does praise (and him) only, because from him the Christ was to come. “I have found David, the son of Jesse, a man after Mine own heart, which shall fulfil all My will.” (Acts 13:22.) (i) Observe also; it is with praise (that he says of him), “David after that he had served the will of God:” just as Peter—seeing it was then the beginning of the Gospel—making mention of him, said, “Let it be permitted me to speak freely of the patriarch David.” (Acts 2:29.) Also, he does not say, Died, but, “was added to his fathers. (k) Of this man’s seed,” etc. “When John,” he says, “had first preached before His entry”—by entry he means the Incarnation—“the baptism of repentance to all the people of Israel.” (Acts 13:23–25.) Thus also John, writing his Gospel, continually has recourse to him: for his name was much thought of in all parts of the world. And observe, he does not say it “Of this man’s seed,” etc. from himself, but brings John’s testimony.

“Men and brethren, children of the stock of Abraham”—he also calls them after their father—“unto you was the word of this salvation sent.” (Acts 13:26.) Here the expression, “Unto you,” does not mean, Unto (you) Jews, but it gives them a right to sever themselves from those who dared that murder. And what he adds, shows this plainly. “For,” he says, “they that dwell at Jerusalem, because they know Him not.” (Acts 13:27.) And how, you will say, could they be ignorant, with John to tell them? What marvel, seeing they were so, with the prophets continually crying aloud to them? Then follows another charge: “And having found no cause of death in Him:” in which ignorance had nothing to do. For let us put the case, that they did not hold Him to be the Christ: why did they also kill Him? And “they desired of Pilate, he says, that He should be slain.” (Acts 13:28.) “And when they had fulfilled all that was written of Him.” (Acts 13:29.) Observe what a point he makes of showing that the (whole) thing was a (Divine) Dispensation. See,^[120] by saying what did they persuade men? (By telling them) that He was crucified? Why, what could be less persuasive than this? That He was buried—by them to whom it was promised that He should be salvation? that He who was buried forgives sins, yea, more than the Law (has power to do)? And (observe), he does not say, From which ye would not but, “from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses.” (Acts 13:39.) “Every one,” he says: be who he may. For those (ordinances) are of no use, unless there be some benefit (accruing therefrom.) This is why he brings in forgiveness later: and shows it to be greater, when, the thing being (otherwise) impossible, yet this is effected. “Who are His witnesses,” he says, “unto the people”—the people that slew Him. Who would never have been so, were they not strengthened by a Divine Power: for they would never have borne such witness to blood-thirsty men, to the very persons that killed Him. But, “He hath raised up Jesus again: This day,” he says, “I have begotten thee.”^[121] (Acts 13:33.) Aye, upon this the rest follows of course. Why did he not allege some text by which they would be persuaded that forgiveness of sins is by Him? Because the great point with them was to show, in the first place, that He was risen: this being acknowledged, the other was unquestionable. “Through this man,” nay more, by Him, “is remission of sins.” (Acts 13:38.) And besides, he wished to bring them to a longing desire of this great thing. Well then, His death was not dereliction, but fulfilling of Prophecy.—For the rest, he puts them in mind of historical facts, wherein they through ignorance suffered evils without number. And this he hints in the conclusion, saying, “Look, ye despisers, and behold.” And observe how, this being harsh, he cuts it short. Let not that, he says, come upon you, which was spoken for the others, that “I work a work which ye shall in no wise believe, though one declare it unto you.” (Acts 13:41.) Marvel not that it seems incredible: this very thing was foretold from the first—(that it would not be believed). “Behold, ye despisers,” as regards those who disbelieve in the Resurrection.

This too might with reason be said to us:^[122] “Behold ye despisers.” For the Church indeed is in very evil case, although ye think her affairs to be in peace. For the mischief of it is, that while we labor under so many evils, we do not even know that we have any. “What sayest thou? We are in possession of our Churches, our Church property, and all the rest, the services are held, the congregation comes to Church every day.”^[123] True, but one is not to judge of the state of a Church from these things. From what then? Whether there be piety, whether we return home with profit each day, whether reaping some fruit, be it much or little, whether we do it not merely of routine and for the formal acquittance of a duty (ἀφοσιούμενοι). Who has become a better man by attending (daily) service for a whole month? That is the point: otherwise the very thing which seems to bespeak a flourishing condition (of the Church,) does in fact bespeak an ill condition, when all this is done, and nothing comes of it. Would to God (that were all), that nothing comes of it: but indeed, as things are, it turns out even for the worse. What fruit do ye get from your services? Surely if you were getting any profit by them, ye ought to have been long leading the life of true wisdom (τἥς φιλοσοφίας), with so many Prophets twice in every week discoursing to you, so many Apostles, and Evangelists, all setting forth the doctrines of salvation, and placing before you with much exactness that which can form the character aright. The soldier by going to his drill, becomes more perfect in his tactics: the wrestler by frequenting the gymnastic ground becomes more skilful in wrestling: the physician by attending on his teacher becomes more accurate, and knows more, and learns more: and thou—what hast thou gained? I speak not to those who have been members of the Church only a year, but to those who from their earliest age have been attending the services. Think you that to be religious is to be constant in Church-going (παραβάλλειν τᾕ συνάξει)? This is nothing, unless we reap some fruit for ourselves: if (from the gathering together in Church) we do not gather (συνάγωμεν) something for ourselves, it were better to remain at home. For our forefathers built the Churches for us, not just to bring us together from our private houses and show us one to another: since this could have been done also in a market-place, and in baths, and in a public procession:—but to bring together learners and teachers, and make the one better by means of the other. With us it has all become mere customary routine, and formal discharge of a duty: a thing we are used to; that is all. Easter comes, and then great the stir, great the hubbub, and crowding of—I had rather not call them human beings, for their behavior is not commonly human. Easter goes, the tumult abates, but then the quiet which succeeds is again fruitless of good. “Vigils, and holy hymn-singing.”—And what is got by these? Nay, it is all the worse. Many do so merely out of vanity. Think how sick at heart it must make me, to see it all like (so much water) poured into a cask with holes in it! But ye will assuredly say to me, We know the Scriptures. And what of that? If ye exemplify the Scriptures by your works, that is the gain, that the profit. The Church is a dyer’s vat: if time after time perpetually ye go hence without receiving any dye, what is the use of coming here continually? Why, the mischief is all the greater. Who (of you) has added ought to the customary practices he received from his fathers? For example: such an one has a custom of observing the memorial of his mother, or his wife, or his child: this he does whether he be told or whether he be not told by us, drawn to it by force of habit and conscience. Does this displease thee, you ask? God forbid: on the contrary, I am glad of it with all my heart: only, I would wish that he had gained some fruit also from our discoursing, and that the effect which habit has, were also the effect as regards us^[124] (your teachers)—the superinducing of another habit. Else why do I weary myself in vain, and talk uselessly, if ye are to remain in the same state, if the Church services work no good in you? Nay, you will say, we pray. And what of that? “Not every one that saith unto Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the Kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of My Father which is in heaven.” (Matt. 7:21.) Many a time have I determined to hold my peace, seeing no benefit accruing to you from my words; or perhaps there does accrue some, but I, through insatiableness and strong desire, am affected in the same way as those that are mad after riches. For just as they, however much they may get, think they have nothing; so I, because I ardently desire your salvation, until I see you to have made good progress, think nothing done, because of my exceeding eager desire that you should arrive at the very summit. I would that this were the case, and that my eagerness were in fault, not your sloth: but I fear I conjecture but too rightly. For ye must needs be persuaded, that if any benefit had arisen in all this length of time, we ought ere now to have done speaking. In such case, there were no need to you of words, since both in those already spoken there had been enough said for you,^[125] and you would be yourselves able to correct others. But the fact, that there is still a necessity of our discoursing to you, only shows, that matters with you are not in a state of high perfection. Then what would we have to be brought about? for one must not merely find fault. I beseech and entreat you not to think it enough to have invaded^[126] the Church, but that ye also withdraw hence, having taken somewhat, some medicine, for the curing of your own maladies: and, if not from us, at any rate from the Scriptures, ye have the remedies suitable for each. For instance, is any passionate? Let him attend to the Scripture-readings, and he will of a surety find such either in history or exhortation. In exhortation, when it is said, “The sway of his fury is his destruction” (Sir. 1:22); and, “A passionate man is not seemly” (Prov. 11:25); and such like: and again, “A man full of words shall not prosper” (Ps. 40:11); and Christ again, “He that is angry with his brother without a cause” (Matt. 5:22); and again the Prophet, “Be ye angry, and sin not” (Ps. 4:4); and, “Cursed be their anger, for it was fierce.” (Gen. 49:7.) And in histories, as when thou hearest of Pharaoh filled with much wrath, and the Assyrian. Again, is any one taken captive by love of money? let him hear, that “There is not a more wicked thing than a covetous man: for this man setteth even his own soul for sale” (Sir. 9:9); and how Christ saith, “Ye cannot serve God and mammon” (Matt. 6:24); and the Apostle, that “the love of money is a root of all evils” (1 Tim. 6:10); and the Prophet, “If riches flow in, set not your heart upon them” (Ps. 62:10); and many other like sayings. And from the histories thou hearest of Gehazi, Judas, the chief scribes, and that “gifts blind the eyes of the wise.” (Exod. 23:8 and Deut. 16:19.) Is another proud? Let him hear that “God resisteth the proud” (Jas. 4:6); and, “Pride is the beginning of sin” (Sir. 10:14) and, “Every one that hath a high heart, is impure before the Lord.” (Prov. 16:5.) And in the histories, the devil, and all the rest. In a word, since it is impossible to recount all, let each choose out from the Divine Scriptures the remedies for his own hurts.

So wash out, if not the whole at once, a part at any rate, part today, and part tomorrow, and then the whole. And with regard to repentance too, and confession, and almsgiving, and justice also, and temperance, and all other things, thou wilt find many examples. “For all these things,” says the Apostle, “were written for our admonition.” (1 Cor. 10:11.) If then Scripture in all its discoursing is for our admonition, let us attend to it as we ought. Why do we deceive ourselves in vain? I fear it may be said of us also, that “our days have fallen short in vanity, and our years with haste.” (Ps. 77:33.) Who from hearing us has given up the theatres? Who has given up his covetousness? Who has become more ready for almsgiving? I would wish to know this, not for the sake of vainglory, but that I may be inspirited to more zeal, seeing the fruit of my labors to be clearly evident. But as things now are, how shall I put my hand to the work, when I see that for all the rain of doctrine pouring down upon you shower after shower, still our crops remain at the same measure, and the plants have waxed none the higher? Anon the time of threshing is at hand (and) He with the fan. I fear me, lest it be all stubble: I fear, lest we be all cast into the furnace. The summer is past, the winter is come: we sit, both young and old, taken captive by our own evil passions. Tell not me, I do not commit fornication: for what art thou the better, if though thou be no fornicator thou art covetous? It matters not to the sparrow caught in the snare that he is not held tight in every part, but only by the foot: he is a lost bird for all that; in the snare he is, and it profits him not that he has his wings free, so long as his foot is held tight. Just so, thou art caught, not by fornication, but by love of money: but caught thou art nevertheless; and the point is, not how thou art caught, but that thou art caught. Let not the young man say, I am no money-lover: well, but perchance thou art a fornicator: and then again what art thou the better? For the fact is, it is not possible for all the passions to set upon us at one and the same time of life: they are divided and marked off, and that, through the mercy of God, that they may not by assailing us all at once become insuperable, and so our wrestling with them be made more difficult. What wretched inertness it shows, not to be able to conquer our passions even when taken one by one, but to be defeated at each several period of our life, and to take credit to ourselves for those which (let us alone) not in consequence of our own hearty endeavors, but merely because, by reason of the time of life, they are dormant? Look at the chariot-drivers, do you not see how exceedingly careful and strict they are with themselves in their training-practice, their labors, their diet, and all the rest, that they may not be thrown down from their chariots, and dragged along (by the reins)?—See what a thing art is. Often even a strong man cannot master a single horse: but a mere boy who has learnt the art shall often take the pair in hand, and with ease lead them and drive them where he will. Nay, in India it is said that a huge monster of an elephant shall yield to a stripling of fifteen, who manages him with the utmost ease. To what purpose have I said all this? To show that, if by dint of study and practice we can throttle into submission (ἄγχομεν) even elephants and wild horses, much more the passions within us. Whence is it that throughout life we continually fail (in every encounter)? We have never practised this art: never in a time of leisure when there is no contest, talked over with ourselves what shall be useful for us. We are never to be seen in our place on the chariot, until the time for the contest is actually come. Hence the ridiculous figure we make there. Have I not often said, Let us practise ourselves upon those of our own family before the time of trial? With our servants (παἵδας) at home we are often exasperated, let us there quell our anger, that in our intercourse with our friends we may come to have it easily under control. And so, in the case of all the other passions, if we practised ourselves beforehand, we should not make a ridiculous figure in the contests themselves. But now we have our implements and our exercises and our trainings for other things, for arts and feats of the palæstra, but for virtue nothing of the sort. The husbandman would not venture to meddle with a vine, unless he had first been practised in the culture of it: nor the pilot to sit by the helm, unless he had first practised himself well at it: but we, in all respects unpractised, wish for the first prizes! It were good to be silent, good to have no communication with any man in act or word, until we were able to charm (κατεπᾴδειν) the wild beast that is within us. The wild beast, I say: for indeed is it not worse than the attack of any wild beast, when wrath and lust make war upon us? Beware of invading the market-place (Μὴ ἐμβάλῃς εἰς ἀγοράν) with these beasts, until thou have got the muzzle well upon their mouths, until thou have tamed and made them tractable. Those who lead about their tame lions in the market-place, do you not see what a gain they make of it, what admiration they get, because in the irrational beast they have succeeded in producing such tameness—but, should the lion suddenly take a savage fit, how he scares all the people out of the market-place, and then both the man that leads him about is himself in danger, and if there be loss of life to others, it is his doing? Well then do thou also first tame thy lion, and so lead him about, not for the purpose of receiving money, but that thou mayest acquire a gain, to which there is none equal. For there is nothing equal to gentleness, which both to those that possess it, and to those who are its objects, is exceeding useful. This then let us follow after, that having kept in the way of virtue, and with all diligence finished our course therein, we may be enabled to attain unto the good things eternal, through the grace and mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ, with Whom to the Father and the Holy Ghost together be glory, might, honor, now and ever, world without end. Amen.

Homily XXX on Acts xiii. 42.

Homily XXX.

Acts 13:42

“And as they were going out (text rec. ‘from the syn. of the Jews,’) they besought (the Gentiles) that these words might be spoken unto them on the following sabbath.”

Do you mark Paul’s wisdom? He not only gained admiration at the time, but put into them a longing desire for a second hearing, while in what he said he dropped some seeds (εἰπών τινα σπέρματα) as it were, and forbore to solve (the questions raised), or to follow out the subject to its conclusion, his plan being to interest them and engage their good-will to himself,^[127] and not make (people) listless and indifferent by casting all at once into the minds of those (who first heard him). He told them the fact, that “through this Man is remission of sins announced unto you,” but the how, he did not declare. “And when the congregation was broken up, many of the Jews and worshipping proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas”—after this point he puts Paul first^[128]—“who, speaking unto them, persuaded them to continue in the grace of God.” (Acts 13:43.) Do you observe the eagerness, how great it is? They “followed” them, it says. Why did they not baptize them immediately? It was not the proper time: there was need to persuade them in order to their steadfast abiding therein. “And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God.” (Acts 13:44.) “But when the Jews saw the multitudes, they were filled with envy, and contradicted the things spoken by Paul, contradicting and blaspheming.” (Acts 13:45.) See malice wounded in wounding others: this made the Apostles more conspicuous—the contradiction which those offered. In the first instance then they of their own accord besought them to speak (and now they opposed them): “contradicting,” it says, “and blaspheming.” O recklessness! “Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.” (Acts 13:46.) Do you mark how by their contentious behavior they the more extended the preaching, and (how the Apostles here) gave themselves the more to the Gentiles, having (by this very thing) pleaded their justification, and made themselves clear of all blame with their own people (at Jerusalem)? (c) See^[129] how by their “envy” they bring about great things, other (than they looked for): they brought it about that the Apostles spake out boldly, and came to the Gentiles! For this is why he says, “And speaking out boldly, Paul and Barnabas said.” They were to go out to the Gentiles: but observe the boldness coming with measure:^[130] for if Peter pleaded in his justification, much more these needed a plea, none having called them there. (Acts 11:4.) But by saying “To you first,” he showed that to those also it was their duty (to preach), and in saying “Necessary,” he showed that it was necessary to be preached to them also. “But since ye turn away from it”—he does not say, “Woe unto you,” and “Ye are punished,” but “We turn unto the Gentiles.” With great gentleness is the boldness fraught! (a) Also he does not say, “Ye are unworthy,” but “Have judged yourselves unworthy. Lo, we turn unto the Gentiles. For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have sent thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.” (Acts 13:47.) For that the Gentiles might not be hurt at hearing this, as^[131] if the case were so that, had the Jews been in earnest, they themselves would not have obtained the blessings, therefore he brings in the prophecy, saying, “A light of the Gentiles,” and, “for salvation unto the ends of the earth. And hearing” (this) “the Gentiles” (Acts 13:48)—this, while it was more cheering to them, seeing the case was this, that whereas those were of right to hear first, they themselves enjoy the blessing, was at the same time more stinging to those—“and the Gentiles,” it says, “hearing” (this) “were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and believed, as many as were ordained unto eternal life”: i.e., set apart for God.^[132] Observe how he shows the speediness of the benefit: “And the word of the Lord was borne through all the region,” (Acts 13:49) διεφέρετο,^[133] instead of διεκομίζετο, “was carried or conveyed through (it).” (d) “But the Jews stirred up the devout and honorable women, and the chief men of the city, and raised persecution against Paul and Barnabas, and expelled them out of their coasts.” (Acts 13:50.) “The devout women,” (b)^[134] instead of the proselyte-women. They did not stop at “envy,” but added deeds also. (e) Do you see what they effected by their opposing the preaching? to what dishonor they brought these (“honorable women”)? “But they shook off the dust of their feet against them, and came unto Iconium.” (Acts 13:51.) Here now they used that terrible sign which Christ enjoined, “If any receive you not, shake off the dust from your feet” (Matt. 10:14; Mark 6:11); but these did it upon no light ground, but because they were driven away by them. This was no hurt to the disciples; on the contrary, they the more continued in the word: “And the disciples were filled with joy, and with the Holy Ghost” (Acts 13:52) for the suffering of the teacher does not check his boldness, but makes the disciple more courageous.

“And it came to pass in Iconium, that they went both together into the synagogue of the Jews.” (Acts 14:1.) Again they entered into the synagogues. See how far they were from becoming more timid! Having said, “We turn unto the Gentiles,” nevertheless^[135] (by going into the synagogues) they superabundantly fortify their own justification (with their Jewish brethren). “So that,” it says, “a great multitude both of Jews and Greeks believed.” For it is likely they discoursed as to Greeks also. “But the unbelieving Jews stirred up the Gentiles, and made their minds evil affected against the brethren.” (Acts 14:2.) Together (with themselves) now they took to stirring up the Gentiles too, as not being themselves sufficient. Then why did the Apostles not go forth thence? Why, they were not driven away, only attacked. “Long time therefore abode they speaking boldly in the Lord, which gave testimony unto the word of His grace, and granted signs and wonders to be done by their hands.” (Acts 14:3.) This caused their boldness; or rather, of their boldness indeed their own hearty good-will was the cause—therefore it is that for a long while they work no signs—while the conversion of the hearers was (the effect) of the signs,^[136] though their boldness also contributed somewhat. “But the multitude of the city was divided: and part held with the Jews, and part with the Apostles.” (Acts 14:4.) No small matter this dividing. And this was what the Lord said, “I am not come to bring peace, but a sword.” (Matt. 10:34.) “And when there was an assault made both of the Gentiles, and also of the Jews with their rulers, to use them despitefully, and to stone them, they were ware of it, and fled unto Lystra and Derbe, cities of Lycaonia, and unto the region that lieth round about: and there they preached the Gospel.” (Acts 14:5–7.) Again, as if they purposely wished to extend the preaching after it was increased, they once more sent them out. See on all occasions the persecutions working great good, and defeating the persecutors, and making the persecuted illustrious. For having come to Lystra, he works a great miracle, by raising the lame man.^[137] “And there sat a certain man at Lystra, impotent in his feet, being a cripple from his mother’s womb, who never had walked: the same heard Paul speak: who steadfastly beholding him, and perceiving that he had faith to be healed, said with a loud voice”—why with a loud voice? that the multitude should believe—“Stand upright on thy feet.” (Acts 14:8–9.) But observe, he gave heed, it says, to the things spoken by Paul.^[138] Do you mark the elevation of the man’s mind (φιλοσοφίαν)? He was nothing defeated (παρεβλάβη) by his lameness for earnestness of hearing. “Who fixing his eyes upon him, and perceiving,” it says, “that he had faith to be made whole.” He was already predisposed in purpose of mind.^[139] And yet in the case of the others, it was the reverse: for first receiving healing in their bodies, they were then taken in hand for cure of their souls, but this man not so. It seems to me, that Paul saw into his soul. “And he leaped,” it says, “and walked.” (Acts 14:10.) It was a proof of his perfect cure, the leaping. “And when the people saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voices, saying in the speech of Lycaonia, The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men. And they called Barnabas, Jupiter; and Paul, Mercurius, because he was the chief speaker. Then the priest of Jupiter, which was before their city, brought oxen and garlands unto the gates, and would have done sacrifice with the people.” (Acts 14:11–13.) But this purpose was not yet manifest, for they spake in their own tongue, saying, “The gods in the likeness of men are come down to us:” therefore the Apostle said nothing to them as yet. But when they saw the garlands, then they went out, and rent their garments, “Which when the Apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes, and ran in among the people, crying out, and saying, Sirs, why do ye these things? We also are men of like passions with you.” (Acts 14:14–15.) See how on all occasions they are clean from the lust of glory, not only not coveting, but even repudiating it when offered: just as Peter also said, “Why gaze ye on us, as though by our own power or holiness we had made him to walk” (Acts 3:12)? so these also say the same. And Joseph also said of the dreams, “Is not their interpretation of God?” (Gen. 60:8.) And Daniel in like manner, “And to me also, not through the wisdom that is in me was it revealed.” (Dan. 2:30.) And Paul everywhere says this, as when he says, “And for these things who is sufficient? Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think (aught) as of ourselves, but our sufficiency is of God.” (2 Cor. 2:16; 2 Cor. 3:5.) But let us look over again what has been said.

(Recapitulation.) “And when they were gone out,” etc. (Acts 13:42). Not merely were the multitudes drawn to them, but how? they besought to have the same words spoken to them again, and by their actions they showed their earnestness. “Now when the congregation,” etc. (Acts 13:43.) See the Apostles on all occasions exhorting, not merely accepting men, nor courting them, but, “speaking unto them,” it says, “they persuaded them to continue in the grace of God. But when the Jews,” etc. (Acts 13:45.) Why did they not contradict before this? Do you observe who on all occasions they were moved by passion? And they not only contradicted, but blasphemed also. For indeed malice stops at nothing. But see what boldness of speech! “It was necessary,” he says, “that the word should have been spoken first to you, but since ye put it from you,”—(Acts 13:46) it^[140] is not put as affronting (though) it is in fact what they did in the case of the prophets: “Talk not to us,” said they, “with talk”—(Isa. 30:10): “but since ye put it from you”—it, he saith, not us: for the affront on your part is not to us. For that none may take it as an expression of their piety (that he says,) “Ye judge not yourselves worthy,” therefore he first says, “Ye put it from you,” and then, “We turn unto the Gentiles.” The expression is full of gentleness. He does not say, We abandon you, but so that it is possible—he would say—that we may also turn hither again: and this too is not the consequence of the affront from you, “for so hath (the Lord) commanded us.”—(Acts 13:47.) “Then why have ye not done this?”^[141] It was indeed needful that the Gentiles should hear, and this not before you: it is your own doing, the “before you.” “For so hath the Lord commanded us: I have set thee for a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation,” i.e. for knowledge which is unto salvation, and not merely of the Gentiles, but of all men, “unto the ends of the earth—As many as were ordained unto eternal life” (Acts 13:48.): this is also a proof, that their having received these Gentiles was agreeable with the mind of God. But “ordained,” not in regard of necessity: “whom He foreknew,” saith the Apostle, “He did predestinate.” (Rom. 8:29.) “And the word of the Lord,” etc. (Acts 13:49.) No longer in the city (only) were (their doctrines) disseminated, but also in the (whole) region. For when they of the Gentiles had heard it, they also after a little while came over. “But the Jews stirred up the devout women, and raised persecution”—observe even of what is done by the women, they are the authors—“and cast them,” it says, “out of their coasts” (Acts 13:50), not from the city merely. Then, what is more terrible, “they shook off the dust of their feet against them, and came unto Iconium. But the disciples, it says, were filled with joy, and with the Holy Ghost.” (Acts 13:51–52.) The teachers were suffering persecution, and the disciples rejoiced.

“And so spake, that a great multitude,” etc. (Acts 14:1.) Do you mark the nature of the Gospel, the great virtue it has? “Made their minds evil-affected,” it says, “against the brethren:” (Acts 14:2.) i.e. slandered the Apostles, raised numberless accusations against them: (these people, being simple,^[142] they “made evil-affected,” disposed them to act a malignant part. And see how on all occasions he refers all to God. “Long time,” he says, “abode they speaking boldly in the Lord, which gave testimony unto the word of His grace.” (Acts 14:3.) Think not this (expression, “Gave testimony,”) hath aught derogatory^[143] (to the Lord’s Divine Majesty): “Who witnessed,” it is said, “before Pontius Pilate.” (1 Tim. 6:13.) Then the boldness—“and granted signs and wonders to be done by their hands.” Here he speaks it as concerning their own nation. “And the multitude of the city,” etc. (Acts 14:4–5.) Accordingly they did not wait for it, but saw the intention of attacking them,^[144] and fled, on no occasion kindling their wrath,^[145] “to the cities of Lycaonia, Lystra, and Derbe, and the adjacent region.” (Acts 14:6.) They went away into the country, not into the cities only.—Observe both the simplicity of the Gentiles, and the malignity of the Jews. By their actions they showed that they were worthy to hear: they so honored them from the miracles only. The one sort honored them as gods, the other persecuted them as pestilent fellows: and (those) not only did not take offence at the preaching, but what say they? “The gods, in the likeness of men, are come down to us;” but the Jews were offended. “And they called Barnabas, Jupiter; and Paul, Mercurius.” (Acts 14:11–12.) I suppose Barnabas was a man of dignified appearance also. Here was a new sort of trial, from immoderate zeal, and no small one: but hence also is shown the virtue of the Apostles, (and) how on all occasions they ascribe all to God.

Let us imitate them: let us think nothing our own, seeing even faith itself is not our own, but more God’s (than ours).^[146] “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and this,” saith he, “not of ourselves; it is the gift of God.” (Eph. 2:8.) Then let us not think great things of ourselves, nor be puffed up, being as we are, men, dust and ashes, smoke and shadow. For say, Why dost thou think great things of thyself? Hast thou given alms, and lavished thy substance? And what of that? Think, what if God had chosen not to make thee rich? think of them that are impoverished, or rather, think how many have given (not their substance only, but) their bodies moreover, and after their numberless sacrifices, have^[147] felt still that they were miserable creatures! Thou gavest for thyself, Christ (not for Himself, but) for thee: thou didst but pay a debt, Christ owed thee not.—See the uncertainty of the future, and “be not high-minded, but fear” (Rom. 11:20); do not lessen thy virtue by boastfulness. Wouldest thou do something truly great? Never let a surmise of thy attainments as great enter thy mind. But thou art a virgin? So were those in (the Gospel) virgins, but they got no benefit from their virginity, because of their cruelty and inhumanity.^[148] (Matt. 25:12.) Nothing like humility: this is mother, and root, and nurse, and foundation, and bond of all good things: without this we are abominable, and execrable, and polluted. For say—let there be some man raising the dead, and healing the lame, and cleansing the lepers, but with^[149] proud self-complacency: than this there can be nothing more execrable, nothing more impious, nothing more detestable. Account nothing to be of thyself. Hast thou utterance and grace of teaching? Do not for this account thyself to have aught more than other men. For this cause especially thou oughtest to be humbled, because thou hast been vouchsafed more abundant gifts. For he to whom more was forgiven, will love more (Luke 7:47): if so,^[150] then oughtest thou to be humbled also, for that God having passed by others, took notice of thee. Fear thou because of this: for often this is a cause of destruction to thee, if thou be not watchful. Why thinkest thou great things of thyself? Because thou teachest by words? But this is easy, to philosophize in words: teach me by thy life: that is the best teaching. Sayest thou that it is right to be moderate, and dost thou make a long speech about this thing, and play the orator, pouring forth thy eloquence without a check? But “better than thou is he” shall one say to thee, “who teaches me this by his deeds”—for not so much are those lessons wont to be fixed in the mind which consist in words, as those which teach by things: since if thou hast not the deed, thou not only hast not profited him by thy words, but hast even hurt him the more—“better thou wert silent.” Wherefore? “Because the thing thou proposest to me is impossible: for I consider, that if thou who hast so much to say about it, succeedest not in this, much more am I excusable.” For this cause the Prophet says, “But unto the sinner said God. Why declarest thou My statutes?” (Ps. 60:16.) For this is a worse mischief, when one who teaches well in words, impugns the teaching by his deeds. This has been the cause of many evils in the Churches. Wherefore pardon me, I beseech you, that my discourse dwells long on this evil affection (πάθει). Many take a deal of pains to be able to stand up in public, and make a long speech: and if they get applause from the multitude, it is to them as if they gained the very kingdom (of heaven): but if silence follows the close of their speech, it is worse than hell itself, the dejection that falls upon their spirits from the silence! This has turned the Churches upside down, because both you desire not to hear a discourse calculated to lead you to compunction, but one that may delight you from the sound and composition of the words, as though you were listening to singers and minstrels (κιθαρῳδὥν καὶ κιθαριστὣν, supra p. 68): and we too act a preposterous and pitiable part in being led by your lusts, when we ought to root them out. And^[151] so it is just as if the father of a poor cold-blooded child (already, more delicate than it ought to be), should, although it is so feeble, give it cake and cold (drink) and whatever only pleases the child, and take no account of what might do it good; and then, being reproved by the physicians, should excuse himself by saying, “What can I do? I cannot bear to see the child crying.” Thou poor, wretched creature, thou betrayer! for I cannot call such a one a father: how much better were it for thee, by paining him for a short time, to restore him to health forever, than to make this short-lived pleasure the foundation of a lasting sorrow? Just such is our case, when we idly busy ourselves about beautiful expressions, and the composition and harmony of our sentences, in order that we may please, not profit: (when) we make it our aim to be admired, not to instruct; to delight, not prick to the heart; to be applauded and depart with praise, not to correct men’s manners! Believe me, I speak not other than I feel—when as I discourse I hear myself applauded, at the moment indeed I feel it as a man (for why should I not own the truth?): I am delighted, and give way to the pleasurable feeling: but when I get home, and bethink me that those who applauded received no benefit from my discourse, but that whatever benefit they ought to have got, they lost it while applauding and praising, I am in pain, and groan, and weep, and feel as if I had spoken all in vain. I say to myself: “What profit comes to me from my labors, while the hearers do not choose to benefit by what they hear from us?” Nay, often have I thought to make a rule which should prevent all applauding, and persuade you to listen with silence and becoming orderliness. But bear with me, I beseech you, and be persuaded by me, and, if it seem good to you, let us even now establish this rule, that no hearer be permitted to applaud in the midst of any person’s discourse, but if he will needs admire, let him admire in silence: there is none to prevent him: and let all his study and eager desire be set upon the receiving the things spoken.—What means that noise again?^[152] I am laying down a rule against this very thing, and you have not the forbearance even to hear me!—Many will be the good effects of this regulation: it will be a discipline of philosophy. Even the heathen philosophers—we hear of their discoursing, and nowhere do we find that noisy applause accompanied their words: we hear of the Apostles, making public speeches, and yet nowhere do the accounts add, that in the midst of their speeches the hearers interrupted the speakers with loud expressions of approbation. A great gain will this be to us. But let us establish this rule: in quiet let us all hear, and speak the whole (of what we have to say). For if indeed it were the case that we departed retaining what we had heard, what I insist upon is, that even so the praise is not beneficial^[153]—but not to go too much into particulars (on this point); let none tax me with rudeness —but since nothing is gained by it, nay, it is even mischievous, let us loose the hindrance, let us put a stop to the boundings, let us retrench the gambollings of the soul. Christ spoke publicly on the Mount: yet no one said aught, until He had finished His discourse. I do not rob those who wish to be applauded: on the contrary, I make them to be more admired. It is far better that one’s hearer, having listened in silence, should by his memory throughout all time applaud, both at home and abroad, than that having lost all he should return home empty, not possessed of that which was the subject of his applauses. For how shall the hearer be otherwise than ridiculous? Nay, he will be deemed a flatterer, and his praises no better than irony, when he declares that the teacher spoke beautifully, but what he said, this he cannot tell. This has all the appearance of adulation. For when indeed one has been hearing minstrels and players, it is no wonder if such be the case with him, seeing he knows not how to utter the strain in the same manner: but where the matter is not an exhibition of song or of voice, but the drift and purport of thoughts and wise reflection (φιλοσοφίας), and it is easy for every one to tell and report what was said, how can he but deserve the accusation, who cannot tell what the matter was for which he praised the speaker? Nothing so becomes a Church as silence and good order. Noise belongs to theatres, and baths, and public processions, and market-places: but where doctrines, and such doctrines, are the subject of teaching, there should be stillness, and quiet, and calm reflection, and a haven of much repose (φιλοσοφία καὶ πολὺς ὁ λιμήν). These things I beseech and entreat: for I go about in quest of ways^[154] by which I shall be enabled to profit your souls. And no small way I take this to be: it will profit not you only, but us also. So shall we not be carried away with pride (ἐκτραχηλίζεσθαί), not be tempted to love praises and honor, not be led to speak those things which delight, but those which profit: so shall we lay the whole stress of our time and diligence not upon arts of composition and beauties of expression, but upon the matter and meaning of the thoughts. Go into a painter’s study, and you will observe how silent all is there. Then so ought it to be here: for here too we are employed in painting portraits, royal portraits (every one of them), none of any private man, by means^[155] of the colors of virtue—How now? Applauding again? This is a reform not easy, but (only) by reason of long habit, to be effected.—The pencil moreover is the tongue, and the Artist the Holy Spirit. Say, during the celebration of the Mysteries, is there any noise? any disturbance? when we are baptizing (βαπτιζώμεθα), when we are doing all the other acts? Is not all Nature decked (as it were) with stillness and silence?^[156] Over all the face of heaven is scattered this charm (of repose).—On this account are we evil spoken of even among the Gentiles, as though we did all for display and ostentation. But if this be prevented, the love of the chief seats also will be extinguished. It is sufficient, if any one be enamoured of praise, that he should obtain it after having been heard, when all is gathered in.^[157] Yea, I beseech you, let us establish this rule, that doing all things according to God’s will, we may be found worthy of the mercy which is from Him, through the grace and compassion of His only begotten Son our Lord Jesus Christ, with Whom to the Father together with the Holy Spirit be glory, dominion, honor, now and ever, world without end. Amen.

Homily XXXI on Acts xiv. 14, 15.

Homily XXXI.

Acts 14:14–15

“Which when the Apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes, and ran in among the people, crying out and saying, Sirs, why do ye these things? We also are men of like passions with you, and preach unto you that ye should turn from these vanities unto the living God, which made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are therein.”

Mark the vehemence with which all this is done by the Apostles: “rent their clothes, ran in, cried out,” all from strong affection of the soul, revolted^[158] by the things that were done. For it was a grief, indeed a grief inconsolable, that they should needs be thought gods, and introduce idolatry, the very thing which they came to destroy! This also was a contrivance of the devil—but he did not prevail.^[159] But what say they? “We also are men of like passions with you.” At the very outset they overthrew the evil. They said not simply, “Men,” but “As ye.” Then, that they may not seem to honor the gods, hear what they add: “Preaching unto you, that ye should turn from these vanities unto the living God, Who made heaven, the sea, and all things that are therein.” Observe how they nowhere mention things invisible.^[160] (b) For^[161] they had learnt that one should study not so much to say somewhat worthy of God, as to say what is profitable for the hearers. (a) What then? if He be Maker of all things, why does He not also attend to these things by His Providence?—“Who in times past suffered all nations to walk in their own ways” (Acts 14:16)—but wherefore He suffered them, this he does not say, for at present he keeps to the matter of immediate importance, nowhere bringing in the name of Christ. Observe, he does not wish to swell the accusation against them, but^[162] rather that they themselves should refer all to God. “Nevertheless, He left not Himself without witness, in that He did good, giving you rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling your hearts with food and gladness.” (Acts 14:17.) (c) See how covertly he puts the accusation “in that He did good,” etc. And yet if God did this, He could not have “let them alone;” on the contrary, they ought to be punished, for that, enjoying so great benefits, they had not acknowledged Him, not even as their feeder.^[163] “From heaven,” he says, “giving you rain.” Thus also David said, “From the fruit of their corn and wine and oil were they made to abound” (Ps. 4:7), and in many places speaking of Creation, he brings forward these benefits: and Jeremiah mentions first Creation, then Providence (shown) by the rains, so that the Apostle here discourses as taught from those Scriptures. “Filling,” he says, “with food and gladness.” (Jer. 5:24.) With large liberality (φιλοτιμίας) the food is given, not merely for a frugal sufficiency, nor stinted by the need. “And saying these things, they scarcely stopped the multitudes” (Acts 14:18)—indeed by this very thing they gained most admiration—“from sacrificing to them.” Do you observe that this was the point with them to put an end to that madness? “But there came,” it says, “certain Jews from Antioch and Iconium” (Acts 14:19).—Indeed children of the devil, that not in their own cities only, but also beyond them, they did these things, and as much made it their study to make an end of the preaching, as the Apostles were in earnest to establish it!—“and having persuaded the multitude and stoned Paul, they dragged him out of the city.” (e) So then, the Gentiles regarded them as gods, but these “dragged” him, “out of the city, supposing he had been dead. Having persuaded the multitude”—for it is not likely that all thus reverenced them. In the very city in which they received this reverence, in the same were they thus terribly ill treated. And this also profited the beholders. “Lest any man,” he says, “should think of me above that which he seeth me to be, or that he heareth aught from me.” (Acts 14:20; 2 Cor. 12:6.)—“Howbeit as the disciples stood round about him, he rose up and came into the city.” (d) Here is fulfilled that saying, “My grace is sufficient for thee, for My strength is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Cor. 12:9.) Greater this than the raising of the lame man! (f) “Came into the city.” Do you mark the zeal, do you mark how fervent he^[164] is, how set on fire! He came into the city itself again: for proof that if on any occasion he did retire, it was because he had sown the word, and because it was not right to inflame their wrath. (h) Then they went over all the cities in which they had been in danger. “And on the morrow,” it says, “he went forth with Barnabas to Derbe. And when they had preached the Gospel to that city, and had taught many, they returned again to Lystra, and to Iconium, and Antioch, confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.” (Acts 14:21–22.) This they said, this they showed. But it is purposely so done, not only by^[165] the Apostles, but by the disciples also, that they may learn from the very outset both the might of the preaching, and that they must themselves also suffer such things, that they may stand nobly, not idly gaping for the miracles, but much more (ready) for the trials. Therefore also the Apostle himself said, “Having the same conflict which ye saw in me and heard.” (Phil. 1:30.) Persecutions succeeded to persecutions: wars, fightings, stonings. (g) These things, not less than the miracles, both made them more illustrious, and prepared for them a greater rejoicing. The Scripture nowhere says that they returned rejoicing because they had done miracles, but (it does say that they rejoiced), that “they were counted worthy for that Name to suffer shame.” (Acts 5:41.) And this they were taught of Christ, saying, “Rejoice not that the devils obey you.” (Luke 10:20.) For the joy indeed and without alloy is this, to suffer aught for Christ’s sake. (i) “And that through much tribulation:” what sort of cheering (προτροπή) is this? how did they persuade them, by telling them at the outset of tribulations? Then also another consolation.^[166] “And when they had appointed for them elders in every Church,^[167] and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, on whom they believed.” (Acts 14:23.) Do you mark Paul’s ardor?—Then other consolation: “Commended them,” it says, “to the Lord. And after they had passed throughout Pisidia, they came to Pamphylia. And when they had preached the word in Perga, they went down into Attalia (Acts 14:24–25): (l) and thence sailed to Antioch, from whence they had been recommended to the grace of God for the work which they fulfilled.” (Acts 14:26.) Why do they come back to Antioch? To report what had taken place yonder. And besides, there is a great purpose of Providence concerned: for it was needful that they should thenceforth preach with boldness to the Gentiles. They come therefore, reporting these things, that they may be able to know them: and it is providentially ordered, that just then came those who forbade to keep company with the Gentiles in order that from Jerusalem they might obtain great encouragement, and so go their ways with boldness. And besides, it shows that in their temper there was nothing of self-will: for they come, at the same time showing their boldness, in that without the authority of those (at Jerusalem) they had preached to the Gentiles, and their obedience, in that they refer the matter to them: for they were not made arrogant, as (ἀπενοήθησαν) having achieved so great successes. “Whence,” it says, “they had been recommended to the grace of God for the work which they had fulfilled.” And yet moreover the Spirit had said, “Separate Me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.” (Acts 13:2.) “And when they were come, and had gathered the Church together, they rehearsed all that God had done with them, and how He had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles. And there they abode long time with the disciples.” (Acts 14:27–28.) For the city being great had need of teachers.—But let us look over again what has been said.

(Recapitulation.) “Which when the Apostles,” etc. (Acts 14:14). First by the sight they checked them, by rending their garments. This did Joshua the son of Nun upon the occasion of the defeat of the people. Then think not that this action was unworthy of them: for such was the eagerness, they would not otherwise have restrained it would not otherwise have quenched the conflagration (πύραν). Therefore when need is to do something that is fit to be done, let us not decline it. For if even after all this they hardly persuaded them, if they had not acted thus, what might have been the consequence? For if they had not done thus, they would have been thought to make a show of humility (ταπεινοθρονεἵν), and to be all the more desirous of the honor. And observe their language, how in rebuking it is moderated, alike full of wonder and of rebuke. This above all it was that hindered them, the saying, “Preaching unto you to turn from these vanities unto God.” (Acts 14:15.) We are men indeed, they say, but greater than these: for these are dead things. Mark how they not only subvert (the false), but teach (the true), saying nothing about things invisible—“Who made,” say they, “heaven and earth, and the sea, and all things that are therein. Who in times past,” etc. (Acts 14:16–17.) He names as witnesses even the years (in their courses).^[168] “And there came thither certain Jews,” etc. (Acts 14:19.) O that Jewish madness! Among a people that had so honored the Apostles, they had the hardihood to come, and to stone Paul. “And they dragged him out of the city,” being afraid of those (others),—“Supposing he had been dead.” (k) “Howbeit,” etc. “and came into the city.” (Acts 14:20.) For that the spirits of the disciples might not be downcast because they who were accounted gods suffered such treatment, they came in unto them and discoursed. “Then on the morrow,” etc. And observe, first he goes forth to Derbe, and then comes back to Lystra and Iconium and Antioch, (Acts 14:21) giving way to them while their passions are roused, but when they have ceased, then attacking them again. Do you mark, that it was not by (supernatural) grace that they managed all that they did, but by their own diligence? “Confirming,” it says “the souls of the disciples:” ἐπιστηρίζοντες, “further establishing;” so that they were established, but they added more thereto. “And that we must,” etc. (Acts 14:22): they foretold (this), that they might not be offended. “And when they had appointed for them,” etc. Again the ordinations accompanied with fastings: and again fasting, that purifying of our souls. (m) “And having prayed,” it says, “with fastings, they commended them unto the Lord” (Acts 14:23): they taught them to fast also in their trials. (o) Why did they not make elders in Cyprus nor in Samaria? Because the latter was near to Jerusalem, the former to Antioch, and the word was strong there; whereas in those parts they needed much consolation, especially they of the Gentiles, who behooved to have much instruction. “And when they were come,” etc. (Acts 14:27.) They came, teaching them that with good reason had they been ordained by the Spirit. (n) They said not what they themselves, but “what God had done with them.” It seems to me, that they mean their trials. It was not for nothing that they come here, nor to rest, but providentially guided by the Spirit, to the end that the preaching to the Gentiles might be firmly established. (p) And mark Paul’s ardor. He does not ask whether it be right to speak to Gentiles, but he straightway speaks: therefore it is that he says, “I did not refer myself to flesh and blood.” (Gal. 1:16.)

For it is indeed^[169] a great thing, a great, a generous soul (like this)! How many have since believed, and none of them all has shone like him! What we want is earnestness, exceeding ardor, a soul ready to encounter death. Else is it not possible to attain unto the Kingdom, not being crucified. Let us not deceive ourselves. For if in war it is impossible to come off safe while living daintily, and trafficking, and huckstering and idling, much more in this war. Or think ye not that it is a war worse than all others? (Infra, p. 204, note 1.) “For we wrestle not,” he says, “against flesh and blood.” (Eph. 6:12.) Since even while taking our meals and walking, and bathing, the enemy is present with us, and knows no time of truce, except that of sleep only: nay, often even then he carries on the war, injecting into us unclean thoughts, and making us lewd by means of dreams. We watch not, we do not rouse ourselves up, do not look to the multitude of the forces opposed to us, do not reflect, that this very thing constitutes the greatest misfortune—that though surrounded by so great wars, we live daintily as in time of peace. Believe me, worse than Paul suffered may have to be suffered now. Those enemies wounded him with stones: there is a wounding with words, even worse than stones. What then must we do? The same that he did: he did not hate those who cast stones at him, but after they had dragged him out, he entered again into their city, to be a benefactor to those who had done him such wrongs. If thou also endurest him who harshly insults thee, and has done thee wrongs, then hast thou too been stoned. Say not, “I have done him no injury.” For what injury had Paul done, that he should be stoned? He was announcing a Kingdom, he was bringing men away from error, and bringing them to God: benefits these, worthy of crowns, worthy of proclamation by voice of herald, worthy of a thousand good things—not of stones. And yet (far from resenting) he did^[170] just the contrary. For this is the splendid victory. “And they dragged him,” (Acts 14:19) it says. These too they often drag: but be not thou angry; on the contrary, preach thou the word with gentleness. Hath one insulted thee? Hold thy peace, and bless if thou canst, and thou also hast preached the word, hast given a lesson of gentleness, a lesson of meekness. I know that many do not so smart under wounds, as they do under the blow which is inflicted by words: as indeed the one wound the body receives the other the soul. But let us not smart, or rather feeling the smart let us endure. Do you not see the pugilists, how, with their heads sorely battered, they bite their teeth into their lips, and so bear their smarts kindly? No need to grind the teeth, no need to bite (the lips). Remember thy Master, and by the remembrance thou hast at once applied the remedy. Remember Paul: reflect that thou, the beaten hast conquered, and he the beater, is defeated; and by this hast thou cured the whole. It^[171] is the turning of the scale a moment and thou hast achieved the whole: be not hurried away, do not even move, thou hast extinguished the whole (fire). Great^[172] eloquence of persuasion there is in suffering aught for Christ: thou preachest not the word of faith, but thou preachest the word of patience (φιλοσοφίας). But, you will say, the more he sees my gentleness, the more he sets upon me. Is it for this then that thou art pained, that he increases thy rewards the more? “But^[173] this is the way,” you say, “to make him unbearable.” This is mere pretext of thine own littleness of mind: on the contrary, the other is the way to make him unbearable, namely, that thou avenge thyself. If God had known, that through forbearance of revenge, the unjust became unbearable, He would not have done^[174] this Himself: on the contrary, He would have said, Avenge thyself: but He knew, that other than this is the more likely way to do good. Make not thou a law contrary to God: do as He bids thee. Thou art not kinder than He that made us. He hath said, “Bear to be wronged:” thou sayest, “I requite wrong for wrong, that he may not become unbearable.” Hast thou then more care for him than God has? Such talk is mere passion and ill temper, arrogance and setting up laws against God’s laws. For even if the man were hurt (by our forbearance), would it not be our duty to obey? When God orders anything, let us not make a contrary law. “A submissive answer,” we read, turneth away wrath” (Prov. 16:1): not an answer of opposition. If it profits thee, it profits him also: but if it hurts thee who art to set him right, how much more will it hurt him? “Physician, heal thyself.” Hath one spoken ill of thee? Commend him thou. Hath he reviled thee? Praise him thou. Hath he plotted against thee? Do him a kindness. Requite him with the contrary things, if at least thou at all carest for his salvation and wish not thou to revenge thine own suffering. And yet, you will say, though he has often met with long-suffering from me he has become worse. This is not thine affair, but his. Wilt thou learn what wrongs God suffered? They threw down His altars, and slew His prophets (1 Kgs. 19:10), yet He endured it all. Could He not have launched a thunderbolt from above? Nay, when He had sent His prophets, and they killed them, then He sent His Son (Matt. 21:37), when they wrought greater impieties, then He sent them greater benefits. And thou too, if thou seest one exasperated, then yield the more: since this madness has greater need of soothing (παραμθίας). The more grievous his abuse of thee, the more meekness does he need from thee: and even as a gale^[175] when it blows strong, then it requires yielding to, so also he who is in a passion. When the wild beast is most savage, then we all flee: so also should we flee from him that is angry. Think not that this is an honor to him: for is it an honor we show to the wild beast, and to madmen, when we turn aside out of their way? By no means it is a dishonor and a scorn: or rather not dishonor and scorn, but compassion and humanity. Seest thou not how the sailors, when the wind blows violently, take down their sails, that the vessel may not sink? how, when the horses have run away with the driver, he only leads them into the (open) plain, and does not pull against them that he may not voluntarily exhaust his strength? This do thou also. Wrath is afire, it is a quick flame needing fuel: do not supply food to the fire, and thou hast soon extinguished the evil. Anger has no power of itself; there must be another to feed it. For thee there is no excuse. He is possessed with madness, and knows not what he does; but when thou, seeing what he is, fallest into the same evils, and art not brought to thy right senses by the sight, what excuse can there be for thee? If coming to a feast thou see at the very outset of the feast some one drunken and acting unseemly, would not he, who after seeing him makes himself drunk, be much more inexcusable? Just so it is here. Do we think it any excuse to say, I was not the first to begin? This is against us, that even the sight of the other in that condition did not bring us to our right senses. It is just as if one should say, “I did not murder him first.” For this very thing makes thee deserving of punishment, that even upon the warning of such a spectacle thou didst not restrain thyself. If thou shouldest see the drunken man in the act of vomiting, retching, bursting, his eyes strained, filling the table with his filthiness, everybody hurrying out of his way, and then shouldest fall into the same state thyself, wouldest thou not be more hateful? Like him is he that is in a passion: more than he who vomits, he has his veins distended, his eyes inflamed, his bowels racked; he vomits forth words far more filthy than that food; all crude what he utters, nothing duly digested, for his passion will not let it be. But as in that case excess of fumes (χυμων), making an uproar in the stomach, often rejects all its contents; so here, excess of heat, making a tumult in the soul suffers him not to conceal what it were right to leave unsaid, but things fit and unfit to be spoken, he says all alike, not putting the hearers but himself to shame. As then we get out of the way of those that vomit, so let us from those who are angry. Let us cast dust upon their vomit: By doing what?^[176] By holding our peace: let us call the dogs to eat up the vomit. I know that ye are disgusted at hearing this: but I wish you to feel this same disgust when ye see these things take place, and not to be pleased at the thing. The abusive man is filthier than the dog that returneth to its own vomit. For if indeed having vomited once he were done with it, he would not be like that dog: but if he vomits the same things again, it is plain that he does so from having eaten the same again. What then is more abominable than such an one? What filthier than that mouth which chews such food? And yet this is a work of nature, but the other not or rather both the one and the other are contrary to nature. How? Since it is not according to nature to be causelessly abusive, but against nature: he speaks nothing then like a man, but part as beast, part as madman. As then the disease of the body is contrary to nature, so also is this. And to show that it is contrary to nature, if he shall continue in it, he will perish by little and little: but if he continue in that which is natural, he will not perish. I had rather sit at table with a man who eats dirt, than with one who speaks such words. See ye not the swine devouring dung? So also do these. For what is more stinking than the words which abusive men utter? It is their study to speak nothing wholesome, nothing pure, but whatever is base, whatever is unseemly, that they study both to do and say: and what is worse, they think to disgrace others, while they in fact are disgracing themselves. For that it is themselves they disgrace is plain. For, leaving out of the question those who speak lies (in their railings), say it be some notorious harlot, or even from the stage some other (abandoned creature), and let that person be having a fight with some other person: then let the latter cast this up to the former (what she or he is), and the former retort upon the latter the same reproach: which of them is most damaged by the words? For^[177] the former is but called what in fact he or she is, which is not the case with the other: so that the first gets nothing more in the way of shame (than there was before), while to the other there accrues a great accession of disgrace. But again, let there be some hidden actions (mod. text εἰργασμένα “which have been done”), and let only the person abusing know of them: then, holding his peace until now, let him openly parade (ἐκπομπευέτω) the reproach: even so, he himself is more disgraced than the other. How? by making himself the herald of the wickedness, so^[178] getting for himself either the imputation of not being privy to any such thing, or the character of one not fit to be trusted. And you shall see all men forthwith accuse him: “If indeed he had been privy to a murder being done, he ought to have revealed it all:” and so they regard him with aversion as not human even, they hate him, they say he is a wild beast, fierce and cruel: while the other they pardon much rather than him. For we do not so much hate those that have wounds, as those that compel one to uncover and show them. Thus that man has not only disgraced the other, but himself as well and his hearers, and the common nature of men: he has wounded the hearer, done no good. For this reason Paul says: “If there be any word that is good for edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers.” (Eph. 4:29.) Let us get a tongue speaking only good things, that we may be lovely and amiable. But indeed, everything is come to that pitch of wickedness, that many boast of the very things, for which they should hide their faces. For the threats of the many are of this kind: “thou canst not bear my tongue,” say they. Words, these, worthy only of a woman, of an abandoned drunken old hag, one of those that are dragged (to punishment)^[179] in the forum, a procuress. Nothing more shameful than these words, nothing more unmanly, more womanlike, than to have your strength in the tongue, and to think great things of yourself because you can rail, just like the fellows in processions, like the buffoons, parasites, and flatterers. Swine they are rather than men, who pride themselves upon this. Whereas you should (sooner) have buried yourself, and if another gave you this character, should recoil from the charge as odious and unmanly, instead of that you have made yourself the herald of (your own) disgrace (ὓβρεων). But you will not be able to hurt him you speak ill of. Wherefore I beseech you, considering how the wickedness is come to such a height, that many boast of it, let us return to our senses, let us recover those who are thus mad, let us take away these councils^[180] out of the city, let us make our tongue gracious, let us rid it of all evil speaking, that being clean from sins, we may be able to draw down upon us the good-will from above, and to have mercy vouchsafed unto us from God, through the grace and compassion of His only-begotten Son, with Whom to the Father, together with the Holy Spirit, be glory, might, honor, now and ever, world without end. Amen.

← 3

5 →

Notlar

↑ So mss. and Edd. but the clause ὁ Θεὸς τοῦτο ἐκέλευσε might be better transferred, in the sense, “It is only in obedience to God’s command that I come to you.” Below, Εἶτα ἵνα μηδεὶς αὐτῷ τὴν χάριν ἔχῃ (A. B. C. D. F. Cat.) ἐπάγει (om. C.) τί φησίν; (A. B. C. but Cat. for ἐπάγει τί φησίν; has, ταῦτα φησίν·) Καὶ ἐμοὶ κ. τ. λ. We read, Εἶτα ἐπάγει, Καὶ ἐμοὶ ἔδειξεν ὁ Θεὸς (ἵνα μηδεὶς αὐτῷ τὴν χάριν ἔχῃ ταῦτα φησὶν) μηδένα κ. τ. λ.
↑ By saying “it is not lawful,” Peter does not refer to any specific command in the Mosaic law forbidding intercourse with Gentiles. The separateness of the Jewish people from the heathen world had, indeed, its basis in the Levitical system, especially in the regulations concerning ceremonial cleanness. Still the Jews had constant commercial relations with other nations. Peter here refers, no doubt, to the customary and traditional exclusiveness of his nation which had become a social as well as a religious trait, and which had been extended far beyond the purport of the Mosaic requirements, which had for their end the preservation of the truth and purity of the religion of the nation. This exclusive and jealous spirit is frequently reflected in the N.T. and contemporaneous literature. The Jewish Christians accuse Peter (Acts 11:3) of eating with the uncircumcised. On another occasion, the prejudices of his kinsmen and friends intimidated him and constrained him to break off his custom of associating with the Gentile Christians at meals (Gal. 2:11 sq.). “Moses,” says Josephus, “does not allow those who come to us without living according to our laws to be admitted into communion with us” (Contra Apion. ii. 29). Tacitus accuses the Jews of harboring “the bitterest animosity against all other nations” (Hist. v. 5) and Juvenal says that they will not point out the way except to those of their own religion, and that they will “conduct those only to the fountain inquired after who are circumcised” (Sat. xiv. 103). How great was the lesson then, which Peter had been taught in the vision! It is not strange that it was only gradually learned and practised.—G.B.S.
↑ Καὶ ἐν τισὶν ἡμέραις· so all the mss. with Cat. (ἔν τισιν ἡμ.) and Œcum. If the text be not corrupt, Chrys. must be understood to interpret ἀπὸ τετάρτης ἡμ. of the “fourth day of the week:” i.e. Cornelius had anticipated, among other pious observances, this practice also, viz. of the Wednesday fast. Otherwise, there is no intelligible connection for the following words, Διὰ γὰρ τοῦτο εἶπεν, ᾽Απὸ τετάρτης ἡμέρας. This, he says, was an advance in piety: and then it was that the Angel appeared to him. Then he proceeds to argue, that it is not “four days ago,” for the time does not amount to that number of days: the day on which Peter arrived was not the fourth, but between that and the day on which Cornelius prayed, there are but two entire days. It seems that this must be St. Chrysostom’s meaning, though it is obscured by mistakes of the scribes. B. C. αὕτη μία ἡμέρα· καὶ ἥν ἦλθον μία· καὶ τῇ τρίτῃ ἐφάνη· ὡς εἶναι δευτέραν μεθ᾽ ἣν προσηύξατο. (A. omits the passage.) E. D. F. Edd. αὕτη μία ἡμέρα· καὶ ἣν ἀπῆλθον οἱ πεμφθέντες, μία· καὶ ἣν ἦλθον, μία· καὶ τῂ τετάρτῃ ἐφάνη· ὡς εἶναι δευτέραν μεθ᾽ ἣν προσηύξατο. Cat. and Œc. agree with E. D. F. in supplying the clause omitted in B. C , to which however they add παρὰ Κορνηλίου: they have also τετάρτῃ ἐφάνη, but for the last clause they read, ὡσεὶ τρίτην ὥραν μεθ᾽ ἣν προσηύξατο. But the sense intended by Chrys. should be: “This, the day (on which they left Joppa), is one day (before the day on which Cornelius is speaking): and the day on which the messengers from Cornelius came, one day; (therefore the second day before that on which Cornelius is speaking:) and on the third day (previous) the Angel appeared: so that, exclusively of the day on which Cornelius is speaking, and that on which Cornelius prayed, there are two days.” This sense will be satisfied by reading, αὕτη μία ἡμέρα· καὶ ἣν ἦλθον οἱ πεμφθέντες παρὰ Κορνηλίου, μία· καὶ τῇ τρίτῃ ἐφάνη· & 244·στε εἶναι δυὸ ἡμέρας μεθ᾽ ἣν προσηύξατο. The scribes, mistaking both the drift and the method of the calculation, supposed αὕτη ἡμ. to mean “the day of Peter’s arrival:” but the day before that was the day on which they came away (ἀπῆλθον) from Joppa, and on the previous day the messengers arrived (ἦλθον), and on the day before that, which is therefore the fourth, the Angel appeared: hence they insert the words καὶ ἣν ἀπῆlqon…μία, in order to make out the calculation, i.e. to verify the day of the Vision as the fourth day before that on which Cornelius is speaking. So Cat. Œc. and. E.D.F. But B. C. retain the original reading, and only mistake the abbreviated form ὥστε εἶναι β'ἡμ., i.e. δυὸ ἡμέρας, as if it meant “the second day,” δευτέραν ἡμέραν: which reading, though unintelligible, was retained by the later Editors. But what Chrys. means to say, is, that, not reckoning the day of the vision and the day of the meeting, there are two whole days: therefore the day of the vision was not “the fourth day hence;” consequently, that it means “the fourth day of the week.” This hasty and ill considered interpretation of the expression απὸ τετάρτης ἡμέρας, was suggested by the circumstance that the rule was to fast on the dies stationum, τετρὰς and προσάββατον, to “the ninth hour:” so that the practical scope of the interpretation may be of this kind: “See how this man, Gentile as he was, had forestalled our rule of discipline: he fasted on the fourth day of the week, and to the ninth hour of the day: and see how God was pleased to approve of his piety, by sending the Angel to him on that day, and at that hour. But you who know the rule, and why it is prescribed, do not obey it,” etc.—On the Dies Stationum, see Tertull. de Jejun. 1. where in defence of the Montanists, who extended the fast beyond the ninth hour, (or 3 p.m.) he says: Arguunt nos quod stationes plerumque in vesperam producamus: ib. 10. Æque stationes nostras ut indignas, quasdam vero et in serum constitutas, novitatis nomine incusant, hoc quoque munus et ex arbitrio obeundum esse dicentes, et non ultra nonam detinendum, suo scilicet more: i.e. the Catholics maintained, that the fast on these days ought not to be compulsory, nor to be prolonged beyond the ninth hour. Epiphan. Expos. Fid. §. 22. δἰ ὅλου μὲν τοῦ ἔτους ἡ νηστεία φυλάττεται ἐν τῇ αὐτῇ ἁγί& 139· καθολικῇ ἐκκλησί& 139·, φημὶ δὲ τετράδι καὶ προσαββάτω ἕως ὥρας ἐννάτης.
↑ It is wholly improbable that ἀπὸ τετράτης ἡμέρας refers to the fourth day of the week, as Chrys. supposes. The meaning is that, four days ago (reckoning from the time when he was speaking) he was praying (“observing the ninth hour of prayer”) until the time of day at which he was now saying these words to Peter. There is still less ground for Chrysostom’s interpretation if with Lechler, Tischendorf, and Westcott and Hort νηστεὑων be omitted from the text.—G.B.S.
↑ The letters a, b, c, d, mark the order of these portions in B. C. At the end of (a) the clause, “We are present,” etc. is repeated. In A the order is, a, d, the rest being omitted: in the modern text, a, d, c, b: and the text, “Now therefore are we all present,” etc. between (c) and (b).—With the interpretation of δεκτὸς comp. Severianus of Gabala in the Catena on x. 4, οὐκ εἶπεν ἐν παντὶ ἔθνει ὁ ποιῶν δικαιοσύνην σώζεται, ἀλλὰ δεκτός ἐστιν. τούτεστιν, ἄξιος γίνεται τοῦ δεχθῆναι. And St. Chrys. Hom. viii. in 1 Cor. C. δεκτὸς αὐτῷ ἐστι· τούτεστι, καλεῖ καὶ ἐπισπᾶται αὐτὸν πρὸς τὴν ἀλήθειαν. Paul is cited as an instance: persecutor as he was, “yet, because he led a blameless life, and did not these things of human passion, he was both accepted and far outwent all. But if some one should say, ‘How is it that such an one, the Greek, kind as he is and good and humane, continues in error?’ I answer, that he has a fault of a different kind, vainglory or sluggishness of mind, or not being in earnest about his salvation, but thinking that all the circumstances of his life are mere chance-medley and haphazard. But by ‘him that worketh righteousness,’ Peter means, him that is blameless in all things (comp. infra p. 151.)……‘How is it then,’ you will say, ‘that impure persons have been accounted worthy to have the Gospel preached to them (κατηξιώθησαν τοῦ κηρύγματος)?’ Because they were willing and desirous. For some, even which are in error, He draws, when they become cleansed from their vices; and others coming of their own accord, He repulses not: many also have inherited their piety from their ancestors.”
↑ The word προσωπολήμπτης—“respector of persons”—(personarum acceptor Vulg.) is a term founded upon the phrase, λαμβάνειν πρὁσωπον, an imitation of the Hebrew נשא פנים, to accept the person, the presence; to have a favorable or partial regard to the outward appearance,—as opposed to השיב פנים, to turn away the face (of the petitioner) i.e. to deny him favor or acceptance (1 Kgs. 2:16, 1 Kgs. 2:17, 1 Kgs. 2:20; 2 Chr. 6:42; cf. Gen. 32:21; 1 Kgs. 5 i.)—G.B.S.
↑ The pertinent comments of Dr. Gloag may here be fitly introduced (Acts 10:35): “Peter is here speaking of the admissibility of the Gentiles into the Church of Christ; and he here asserts that there is no natural obstacle in the way of any one who fears God and works righteousness; that there is now no barrier such as circumcision, no external hindrance, but that all are equally acceptable to God. As Meyer well puts it, δεκτὸς αὐτῷ ἐστίν indicates the capability in relation to God to become a Christian, but not the capability to be saved without Christ; or, as Bengel observes, non indifferentissimus religionum, sed indifferenta nationum hic asseritur.” (Gloag, Com. in loco).—G.B.S.
↑ There is no sufficient reason for the statement of Chrys. that those to whom Peter spoke did not know Jesus. It is meant that they were acquainted with the chief facts of his life. Grammatically Ιησοῦν (Acts 10:38) must be construed as the object (resumed in another form) of ὑμεῖς οἴδατε (Acts 10:37). Residents in Cæsarea must have heard of Jesus’ teaching and miracles, during his lifetime on earth. Moreover, the apostles had taught in the neighboring cities and wrought miracles, and probably Philip had been for some little time residing and laboring in Cæsarea itself (Acts 8:40).—G.B.S.
↑ ᾽Εντεῦθεν δείκνυσι πολλὰς πηρώσεις διαβολικὰς καὶ διαστροφὴν (B., διαστροφὰς) σώματος (Cat., σωμάτων) ὑπ᾽ ἐκείνου γενομένας. The term πήρωσις here includes loss of sight, speech, hearing, palsied or withered limbs. “He shows that these are diabolical, and that they are a violent wrenching, or distortion, of the body from its proper condition, caused by him.” The sense requires either διαστροφὰς or γενομένην. The next sentence, ὥσπερ καὶ ὁ Χριστὸς ἔλεγεν, omitted by Edd., though, except E., all the mss. and Cat. have it, may refer to such expressions as that in Luke 13:16. Or, it may be in its proper place after the following clause, “For God was with Him:” again, a lowly expression: just as Christ spake: “for My Father is with Me.”
↑ The letters denote the order of the parts in the mss. and Edd.
↑ καὶ δόγμα τίθησι (E. Edd. εἰσάγει) καὶ πολίτειαν. i. e. “it is assumed, or the case is put, that the person has the right doctrine, of the One True God (that feareth God), and that he is of a right conversation (that worketh righteousness.)”
↑ In the mss. and Edd. the order is confused. In the old text: “The word—Lord of all. First he discourses—with ardor. Yet for all this He did not spare them. Then he proves how He is Lord of all. Which He sent, preaching good tidings, not bringing judgment. [3.] He is sent from God to the Jews. Then He shows this withal from the things which He achieved,” etc. So, with verbal alterations, the modern text, except that it omits the clause, οὐ μὴν οὐδὲ οὕτως ἐφείσατο.
↑ Here also the order in the mss. is confused. “Again proof. How God—with power. Whence does this appear? who went about—of the devil. Then from the good that He did, and the greatness,” etc. The modern text has the same order, and the alterations do not affect the sense.
↑ Perhaps it should be φαντασθῇ, “that he (Cornelius) may not imagine,” etc., therefore he mentions first the Divine Mission, then the Crucifixion.
↑ ταύτης δὲ οὐδὲν οὕτω σημεῖον μεῖζον ἦν, ὡς τὸ φαγεῖν καὶ πιεῖν. Cat. rightly omits μεῖζον ἦν. E. Edd. οὕτως εἰς ἀπόδειξιν μεῖζον, ὡς.
↑ The original reporter seems to have misunderstood what was said. If εἰπέ μοι be retained, we must read οὐχὶ αὐτὸς. The sense is, “Take heed lest any lay the blame of your evil doings upon God. For you know what would be said of a magistrate who should let a murderer go unpunished; that he would be held responsible for all the murders that may be afterwards done by that man, or in consequence of his impunity. Dread lest through your misconduct God be thus blasphemed.” But—as if Chrysostom’s meaning had been, Since God’s purpose in forgiving us our sins was, that we should lead more virtuous and holy lives, therefore let none presume to say that God, by forgiving us, is the cause of the evil doings of which we are afterwards guilty”—the modern text (E. D. F. Edd.) goes on thus: “For say, if a magistrate, etc. is he judged to be the cause of the murders thereafter committed? By no means. And how is it that we ourselves, while, by the things we dare to do, we expose God to be insulted by godless tongues, do not fear and shudder? For what,” etc.
↑ E. D. F. Edd. “Therefore, that it may not be possible for Him through us to be called, etc., and lest by the very fact of His being thus blasphemed; we ourselves become liable to the punishment thereof (‘For through you,’ it is written, ‘My Name is blasphemed among the Gentiles,’) let us cause the very opposite to be said, by having our conversation worthy of Him that calleth us, and (worthily) approaching to the baptism of adoption. For great indeed,” etc. In C. it is: “teacher of wickedness. Let us cause the very opposite to be said. For great indeed.” etc. B. “teacher of wickedness. For great indeed,” etc. But the genuineness of the latter clauses, ἀξίως τοῦ καλοῦντος πολιτευόμενοι καὶ τῷ τῆς υἱοθεσίας προσιόντες βαπτίσματι, which are also needed by the following context, is attested by A. which retains them; for this ms. abridges much, but never borrows from the modern text.
↑ Here all the mss. have Τί φεύγεις; τί τρέμεις; τί δέδοικας; (Edd. omit the two latter clauses,) which, being out of place here, and required below, we have transposed to the beginning of the set of questions Μὴ γὰρ οὐκ ἔνι κ. τ. λ.—Below, he laments that the Catechumens, while delaying their baptism, if possible, to their dying hour, think themselves no way concerned to lead a virtuous life: of the baptism he distinguishes three classes: 1. those who received the sacrament in infancy; 2. those who were baptized in sickness and fear of death, but afterwards recovered: both which sorts, he says, are alike careless (the former because baptized in unconscious infancy), the latter because they did not think to survive, and had no hearty desire to live to the glory of God; 3. those baptized in mature age, and in health; and these also, if at the time their affections were kindled, soon let the flame go out.
↑ οὐδὲν προσποιήσονται, meaning perhaps, “they will pretend to make no account of that: they will say that that makes no difference.” Edd. from E. only, οὐδὲ οὕτως ἀφίστανται, “they do not desist for all that.”—Below: καὶ αὐτὰ ταῦτα διάπλαττεκαὶ ῥ& 192·θμιζε: i.e. Christ does not require you to abandon your calling in life, but these same occupations and duties of your station He bids you to mould and bring into entire conformity with His commandments:—τὸν ἀπράγμονα βίον ζῇν καὶ ἀκίνδυνον: something is wanting, the sense being, “making it your object (not to obtain distinction, wealth, etc. but) to lead a quiet life in godliness and honesty.” Savile reads ζῆθι.
↑ Καὶ ἐπὶ προσθήκης μέσει, ἃ προηγουμένως ἐκεῖνος· καὶ οὐκ εἶδεν, φησί, δίκαιον κ. τ. λ. The modern text (E. D. F. Edd.) inverts the meaning: Καὶ ἐκεῖνος μὲν οὐδὲ ἐν προσθήκης μέρει, οὗτος δὲ καὶ προηγουμένως. “And the former does not even by way of additional boon (hold out this), the latter (Christ) as the main thing.” Adding, “I have been young, saith (the Psalmist), for indeed I am become old: and I never saw,” etc.
↑ E. D. F. Edd. “‘Yes,’ say you, ‘those (are to be had) without labor, these with labor.’ Away with (such talk): it is not, no it is not so, but if one must say the truth, those (objects) are more yoked with toils, and are achieved with greater toil: but these, if we choose, easily.”
↑ ῞Ωστε μὴ πρὸς τοῦτο ἐθίζετε ἑαυτοὺς, πρὸς τὸ λύσιν ζητεῖν. A. B. C. Sav. But the modern text has μόνον for πρὸς τοῦτο, and adds ἀλλὰ καὶ πρὸς τὸ μὴ ζητεῖν: “therefore accustom yourselves not only to seek the solution (of the questions), but also not to raise the questions.”—Below: ὥστε τοῦτο μανθάνομεν (so A. D. F. Sav. the rest, μανθάνωμεν) μᾶλλον ζητεῖν, οὐχὶ (Edd. ἢ) τὰ ζητηθέντα λύειν.
↑ This is the only instance in the Acts in which the Holy Spirit is said to be given anterior to baptism (cf. Acts 19:5–6) which was generally accompanied by the laying on of hands by the apostles. A special reason is observable here which greatly diminishes the force of Baur’s objections to the historicity of the narrative drawn from this exceptional order of events, viz: the marked receptivity of Cornelius and his company. Perhaps it was intended by divine providence to signalize this bringing in of the first fruits of the Gentiles by showing how little the gifts of grace are conditioned upon outward rites. Some critics suppose that this gift of the Spirit before baptism was granted to impress Peter with the idea of the admissibility of the Gentiles, but this seems unnecessary, as he had been taught this lesson already by the vision and had distinctly avowed his conviction (Acts 10:35). Chrysostom’s exposition is in the line of the latter interpretation; he forcibly calls this gift of the Spirit an ἀπολογίαμεγάλη for Peter. The principle which Bengel lays down in his comments—liberum gratia habet ordinem—together with the special significance of the occasion is a sufficient explanation of the apparently exceptional manner of the bestowment of the Spirit here.—G.B.S.
↑ καὶ ὁ Πέτρος σχεδὸν ἁπλῶς πάρεστι παιδευόμενος. Erasm. fere simpliciter adest ut discat. Not meaning that St. Peter needed to be taught (see above p. 146, note 1), but that—such is the οἰκονομία for his exculpation—it is made to appear as if he needed the lesson and was now taught it, and had his misapprehensions rectified in common with them. Ben., entirely mistaking the meaning, has quasi fortuito adest docens.
↑ Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο μεθ᾽ ὑπερβολῆς γίνεται. Erasm. Idcirco hæc cum excellentia quadam fiebant. Ben. Ideo hæc modo singulari fiunt. But the meaning is, “There is a lavish array of Divine interpositions. The mission of the Angel to Cornelius, Peter’s vision, the command given by the Spirit, above all, the gift of the Holy Ghost and the speaking with tongues before the baptism. This last was in itself an unanswerable declaration of the will of God, and sufficed for the Apostle’s justification. The others are ἐκ περιουσίας, arguments ex abundanti.”
↑ Some critics (as Meyer, Olshausen) have affirmed the opposite of what Chrys. states, in regard to the ὁι ἐκ περιτομῆς. He excludes the apostles from this category; they would include them. The ὁι ἐκ περιτομῆς, however, seem to have been a special class of Christians in the mind of the writer. In expressing the fact that the Church learned of the reception of the Gentiles, the “apostles and brethren” are named, but when the narrative advances to the thought of the contention against Peter on account of it, a new term is chosen; the writer could not allow the same subject to stand for the verb διεκρίνοντο, but chooses another term—ὁι ἐκ περιτομῆς. The two subjects, then, can hardly be identical. The phrase more probably denotes judaizing Christians, i.e. those who gave special prominence to the Law and the necessity of circumcision (So Lechler, Gloag, Alford).—G.B.S.
↑ ῎Αλλως δὲ οὐ τοσοῦτον τὸ διάφορον Σαμαρειτῶν καὶ ἐθνῶν. Edd. (from E. alone,) for οὐ τοσοῦτον have πολὺ καὶ ἄπειρον, “great and infinite the difference between Samaritans and Gentiles.”
↑ A. B. C. (after Acts 11:11. which we have removed), ᾽Εκεῖνα ἀναγκαῖα ἦν (read τὰ ἀν.) ἀλλὰ διὰ τούτων αὐτὰ κατασκευάζει. By ἐκεῖνα he means, what we have heard above, what happened at Cæsarea. The modern text (Edd.): “What points were essential, he relates, but of the rest he is silent: or rather by these he confirms them also, καὶ αὐτὰ κατασκευάζει.”
↑ τοῦτο εἰκότως πρόσκειται. i.e. though this was not mentioned before (see above, p, 145. note 6) with good reason it is added here: viz. for Peter’s justification. Edd. from E. “that he may not disgust them: but what had nothing great in it. ‘He shall speak,’ etc. Do you mark how for this reason I mentioned before, he hastens on?” But the saying, “He shall speak,” etc. was great, even greater than that which he omits: but this was not necessary, the other (Chrys. means) made a strong point for Peter’s defence, and therefore is added.
↑ ἄνωθεν αὐτῶν τὴν διανοίαν οἰκειοῖ, viz. by letting them see how all along it was not his doing. Then before λέγων πρὸς αὐτοὺς, something is wanting: e.g. “Which done, he urges most effectively, ‘Who have received,’” etc.
↑ E. D. F. Edd. “But there was no need to baptize, it may be said, for the baptism was complete, ‘when the Spirit fell upon them.’ Therefore he does not say, I first ordered them to be baptized but what? ‘Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized?’ By this showing that he did nothing himself. What therefore we have obtained, those received.”
↑ ὅταν ἡμεῖς αὐτοὺς κοινωνοὺς λέγωμεν; “when we put them on a level with us the Apostles and first disciples, in regard that they received the Spirit in the same manner as we received, and as the rest of you did not?”
↑ τότε ὁ Π. ὕστερον ἐξίσταται· καὶ διὰ τοῦτο φησίν. “But when God gave them the Spirit, then Peter afterwards is astonished,” etc. This is evidently corrupt. Τότε ὁ Π. seems to be part of the text Acts 10:46. τότε ἀπεκρίθη ὁ Π. For ὕστερον ἐξίσταται we may perhaps restore, καὶ πρὸς τοῦτο ὁ Π. ὕστερον ἵσταται. “On this Peter afterwards insists (as above, p. 156), and with a view to this he says (before), ‘God hath shown me,’” etc. The innovator substitutes: “When Peter expounded to them his trance, saying, ‘God hath shown me,’” etc. So Edd.
↑ Εἰ γὰρ μηδὲν τούτων ἦν, οὐκ ἦρκει τὸ κατόρθωμα; Of the Edd. only Savile puts this, as it ought to be, interrogatively: Ben. renders, non sat fuisset præstium.
↑ μόνον μὴ καθάπερ οἱ λοιποὶ τῶν νεοφωτίστων ἐπηρεάζονται, ὅταν ἄλλους ὁρῶσι φωτισθέντας, καὶ εὐθὺς ἀπιόντας. Δοξάζειν δεῖ τὸν Θεὸν, κᾂν πάντες σωθῶσιν· καὶ σὺ ἐ& 129·ν θέλῃς κ. τ. λ. Above Hom. i. p. 20, it is said, “the sick man” having received baptism in the prospect of death, “if he recovers, is as vexed” because of his baptism “as if some great harm had happened to him.” And so it might have been said here, “not (to feel) as some of the newly-baptized (are apt to do, who) are annoyed (or aggrieved, ἐτηρεάζονται), when they see others” etc.: i.e. who, seeing such cases, think themselves ill used that they were not allowed to defer their baptism to the last moment, but were forced upon the alternative either of leading a strict life, or of forfeiting the grace of baptism. But the assertion οἱ λοιποὶ τῶν νεοφ. is too sweeping, and the word ἐπηρεάζονται is scarcely suitable to this sense: it should rather have been δεινοπαθοῦσιν or ἀναξιοπαθοῦσιν. The meaning, not fully expressed, is: “only not, like as the rest of the newly-baptized are insulted, taunted or jeered (by some), when they see others,” etc.: i.e. it is right to glorify God, only not to imagine that God is glorified by those who, exulting in the safety of their friends who received baptism at the point of death, taunt the rest of the newly baptized, saying, “See, these men are safe: they are baptized to some purpose; while you have received the gift, only to be in danger of losing it.”—He adds, “It is right to glorify God, though all be saved”—though that were the case with all except yourself, that they passed at once from baptism to that world, with the gift unimpaired, and no more in danger to be lost. “And as for you, if you will, you have received a greater gift,” than they: etc.—For ἐπηρεάζονται, A. has ἐπηρεάζουσιν: and this is adopted by the innovator, who alters the passage thus (E. Edd.): “to glorify God, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἐπηρεάζειν (adopted by F. D.) καθάπερ οἰ πολλοὶ τῶν νεοφωτ. ἐτηρεάζουσιν, when they see, etc. It is right to glorify God, καὶ ὅτι μένειν οὐ συγχωρεῖ· & 169·Ωστε καὶ σὺ ἐ& 129·ν θέλῃς κ. τ. λ.(Erasm. et non insultare: Ben. non autem insultare illis.)
↑ κρείσσων εἷς ποιῶν τὸ θέλημα Κυρίου, ἢ μύριοι παράνομοι. St. Chrys. repeatedly cites this, and almost in the same words, as a text of Scripture, and the Edd. refer it to Sir. 16:3, but there it is, κρείσσων γὰρ εἷς ἢ χίλιοι (with no various reading), and here the following words, οἱ (B. εἰ) γὰρ μύριοι πρὸς τὸν (τὸ, B. F. ἕνα οὐδέπω ἔφθασαν, seem to be meant as part of the citation. For these E. Edd. substitute, Τοῦτο καί τις σοφὸς αἰνιττόμενος οὕτω τως φησί. Savile adopts both, but reads οὐ γὰρ μύριοι.
↑ Οὐδεὶς τὴν ἐπιμέλειαν ἔχει τοῦ παιδὸς τοῦ ἑαυτοῦ· οὐδεὶς ἔχει ζῆλον πρὸς πρεσβύτην ἰδὼν μιμήσασθαι. i.e. “The young are neglected by their own parents and masters, and elsewhere they see no good example of the old to move them to virtue.”
↑ ᾽Επὶ δὲ τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ δεομένου ἡμῶν, οὐκ ἔτι. So A. B. C. The modern text, τοῦ οὐδ.
↑ πάντες νέοι ψυχροὶ καὶ γέροντες. The last word must be corrupt, for he is speaking only of the young: perhaps it should be γέμοντες with some genitive, e.g. “full of folly,” or “evil thoughts.” Then, καθάρματα μᾶλλον ἢ νέοι, more fit to be swept away from the floor as filthy litter than to be regarded as young men. But κάθαρμα, in the sense derived from the heathen ritual, has no equivalent in our language: it means, what remains of the sacrifice used for lustration or atonement, which as having taken into itself the uncleanness or the guilt which was to be removed, was regarded with the utmost abhorrence.
↑ οἱ δὲ ἐπιεικέστεροι αὐτῶν. Erasm., Et quidam ex illis, adhuc meliores scilicet. Ben. alios modestiores scilicet. But the irony is not of this kind, and the word here has its proper sense: “men whose conduct is more of a piece, the more consistent of them.” Some stand and talk during the prayers, yet kneel and are silent for the Benediction: but these make no such inconsistent pretence: they do not commit this absurdity at least.—Comp. Hom. i. in. Oziam, §4, t. vi. p. 101. “A grievous disease prevails in the Church: when we have purposed to hold converse with God, and are in the act of sending up the doxology to Him, we interrupt our business, and each takes his neighbor aside to talk with him about his domestic concerns, about the goings on in the agora, the public, the theatre, the army: how this was well managed, that neglected: what is the strong point, and what the weak point in this or that business: in short, about all sorts of public and private matters they talk here with one another. Is this pardonable? When a man speaks with the earthly sovereign, he speaks only on the subjects the sovereign chooses to speak and put questions about, and if against the will of the sovereign he should presume to start any other subject, he would bring upon himself the severest punishment. And you, who are speaking with the King of kings, to Whom the angels minister with dread reverence, do you leave your converse with Him to talk about mire, and dust, and spiders—for that is what earthly things are? But you say, the public affairs are in such a bad way, and there is much to talk of and much to be anxious about. And whose fault is that? They say, The blunders of our rulers are the cause. No, not the blunders of our rulers, but our sins: the punishment of our faults. It is these have ruined all, have brought upon us all our sufferings, wars, and defeats. Therefore if we had an Abraham, a Moses, a David, a Solomon, for our ruler, yea, the most righteous of men, it would signify nothing as far as the cause of all our evils is concerned…And if we have one of the most iniquitous of men, a blundering ill-managing person for our ruler, it is our own folly and wickedness that has brought this upon us, it is the punishment of our sins. Therefore let each when he comes here think of his own sins, and not complain of others.” Hom. ix. in 1 Tim. he complains of the women talking in Church.
↑ The illustration is taken from some kind of shield dance, which formed one of the amusements of the camp, skilfully executed by a large body of soldiers. The innovator, (E. D. F. Edd.) not understanding the allusion, substitutes: “If you go to a diversion, you will see all keeping time in the dance, and nothing done negligently. As therefore in a well-harmonized and curiously wrought lyre, one well sounding symphony results from the orderly arrangement severally of the component parts, so here there ought to result from all one symphonious harmony. For we are become one Church, we count as members, ‘fitly joined together’ of one Head, we all make one Body: if any carnal point be done negligently, the whole, etc. Thus the good order,” etc.
↑ The narrative beginning with Acts 11:19, may be considered as a resumption of Acts 8:4, sq. where the preaching of Philip in Samaria is referred to the persecution at Jerusalem as its occasion. The dispersion of the disciples now becomes the means of a great extension of the Gospel and the founding of the first Gentile Church (at Antioch in Syria). This is the third great movement in the spread of early Christianity. The order is: (1) The preaching of Philip in Samaria, (2) The conversion of Cornelius and his company—the first Gentile additions to the church, (3) This mission which resulted in the founding of the church at Antioch. But at this time Divine Providence was preparing an agent who was destined soon to enter upon his great life work as the Christian missionary to the Gentile world, to prove the chief means of spreading the gospel throughout the Roman world—this was the former persecutor Saul, now transformed into the great apostle to the Gentiles. The conversion of Cornelius must have occurred about eight years after the ascension of Jesus. During this time the church had continued Jewish. But in this very period the conditions were preparing for the extension of Christianity to the Gentile world. Stephen had caught glimpses of the largeness of God’s truth and purposes. Peter had learned that God is no respecter of persons. The mother church at Jerusalem now finds that God’s grace has outrun all their former conception of its scope; consecrated and able men like Barnabas and Paul are rising up to labor in the line of the more comprehensive conception of Christianity’s method and purpose which is now dawning upon the consciousness of the church.—G.B.S.
↑ While the textual evidence for the reading ῾Ελληνιστάς (Acts 11:20.) predominates over that for the reading ῞Ελληνας (A. C.), yet the latter is the reading adopted by Meyer, Tischendorf, and most critics (not so, W. and H.) on grounds of internal evidence, such as: (1) That they should preach to Hellenists—men of Jewish nationality residing out of Judea—would be nothing noteworthy, since they had long been received into the Christian community. (2) The contrast between Acts 11:19–20 would be greatly weakened, if not lost, on the supposition that Hellenistic Jews were meant. If this view is correct, they now preached to the Greeks, the uncircumcised heathen, and the Antioch Church was founded and its reception into Christian fellowship approved by the mother church at Jerusalem. Antioch now became an important centre of Christian work, second only to Jerusalem. Here Paul labored a year, and from Antioch he went forth to his three great missionary journeys.—G.B.S.
↑ The name Christians was probably given by the Gentiles. The word appears but twice, besides here, in the N.T. (Acts 26:8; 1 Pet. 4:16), and in both cases it is implied that the name was a name applied to the disciples of Jesus by others. The Jews could hardly have originated the name since Christ was to them but the Greek equivalent for their sacred name Messiah, and from that word they would not have formed a name for the hated sect. The Jews called them rather Nazarenes (Acts 24:5). The Romans seem to have misunderstood the origin of the name, as Tacitus says: Auctor nominis ejus (Christiani) Christus, as if Christus was an appellative instead of a title.—G.B.S.
↑ ἀλλ᾽ οἱ τῆς ὁδοῦ μόνον ἤκουον, so Cat. Œcum. which we adopt. A.B.C. ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι, the modern text ἀλλ᾽ ἔτι.
↑ ἀναγκαίως δὲ ἐνταῦθα, as above πῶς ἀναγκαίως. But in the mss. part of the text v. 28. being transposed, it reads “But here of necessity he says there will be a great dearth,” etc.—Below, Εἰ δἰ αὐτοὺς ἦν, πάντως ἔδει καὶ ὄντα παύσασθαι. Τί ἠδίκησαν ῞Ελληνες, ἵνα καὶ αὐτοὶ τῶν κακῶν μετέχωσιν; εὐδοκιμῆσαι γὰρ αὐτοὺς μᾶλλον ἐχρῆν, ὅτι τὸ αὐτῶν ἐποίουν, κ. τ. λ. ᾽Αλλ᾽ εἰ διὰ τὰ κακὰ, φησίν, κ. τ. λ. So the old text in mss. and Cat. The meaning is obscure, but on the whole it seems most probable that all this is an interlocution of an objector. “If as you say, it was because of the Jews, assuredly it ought, even when it was there, to have ceased (and not gone on to the rest of the world). What harm had the Gentiles done, that they should share in the punishment? Why, they ought rather to have been distinguished by special marks of the Divine favor, because they were doing their part (in executing God’s judgments upon the Jews), were slaying, punishing. etc. Observe, too, the time when this visitation first came—precisely when the Gentiles were added to the Church. Whereas if, as you say, it was because of the evils the Jews inflicted upon the believers, these (the believers, Jews and Gentiles) ought to have been exempted,” etc. The modern text has: “But even if (ἀλλ᾽ εἰ καὶ) it were because of them, yet because of the rest (διὰ τοὺς ἄλλους) it ought, even when it was, to have ceased. For what harm had the Gentiles done, that even they, having done no harm, should have their share of the evils? But if not because of the Jews verily they ought rather to have been even marked objects of favor,” etc. Perhaps this was intended to mean: “Suppose it was inflicted by the demons, the Gods of the heathen, because of the Christians, why were the Gentiles included? And as for the Jews, if it was not, as I say, sent by God because of their wickedness, but as the heathen say, was a token of the anger of their Gods because of the new religion, why assuredly the Jews ought to have been marked objects of favor because they were doing all they could to exterminate the faith.” But if so, it does not appear how the next sentence, was understood, “And observe at what time,” etc.
↑ ῎Ετι ᾽Ιάκωβος ἔζη. So, except E., all our mss.—Ben. finds it strange that this clause is added in some mss. “For what is it to the matter in hand, that James was yet living? And which James? For James the brother of John is mentioned presently afterwards, as slain with the sword: and James the brother of the Lord, Bishop of Jerusalem, is repeatedly mentioned as living, in the subsequent history. Then for what purpose should it be noticed here that he was alive? And yet why the copyists should add this clause, is not easy to see.” The copyists are not in fault. St. Chrys. (not fully reported) is identifying this visit to Jerusalem with the visit mentioned in Gal. 2. The mention there made (Gal. 2:9) of James, whom at the moment he takes to be James the brother of John (especially as he is named with Cephas and John), leads him to remark, “James was yet alive:” i.e. when Paul and Barnabas went up with the alms, and when this conference ensued. (Acts 11.) A similar inadvertency with respect to St. Philip has been noted above, p. 115, note 1—E. substitutes τοσοῦτον ὠφέλει ὁ λιμός. and connects the following sentence with this by reading Καὶ ὅρα αὐτοὺς, where the rest have ῾Ορᾷς αὐτοὺς, as if the θλῖψις here spoken of was the famine: which however had not yet begun. Hence Ben. Et vide illos ex fame, etc. In like manner the innovator has mistaken the connection below. See note 1, p. 165. In fact, the Recapitulation begins here.
↑ Here Edd. from E. insert the formula of recapitulation, ἀλλ᾽ ἴδωμεν κ. τ. λ.
↑ Edd, from E.: “Wherefore also with purpose of heart he exhorted all: that is, with encomium and praise:” as if τῆ προθέσει τῆς καρδίας belonged to παρεκάλει, in the sense, “with heartfelt earnestness he exhorted.”
↑ οὐ Παῦλον· διὰ μικρῶν ἀρχὴν τὸ πρᾶγμα ἐλάμβανε. C. omits Παῦλον· διὰ, D. om. οὐ Παῦλον. Edd. from E., “not Paul: and how by the small means, the affair took its beginning, but when it became conspicuous, then they sent Barnabas. And why did they not send him before this? They took much forethought for their own people, and did not wish the Jews to accuse them because they received the Gentiles: and yet because of their inevitably mixing with them, since there was some questioning about to arise, the matters relating to Cornelius forestalled (this). Then indeed they say,” etc.
↑ The meaning seems to be, that they let the preaching to the Gentiles take its course at first; and were enabled to say to the Jews, “See, the Gentiles receive the word without encouragement from us: καὶ οὐ τοσαύτης ἀπολαύοντα ἐπιμελείας.”
↑ The matter contained in this second recapitulation looks as if it were derived from a different, and in part fuller, report. The innovator as above (note 1, p. 164) connects it with the preceding: “they receive the offerings sent from them; who also, not as we,” etc.
↑ Καὶ οὐκ ἐλάλουν τὸν λὸγον εἰ μη ᾽Ιουδαίοις μόνοις· οὕτως τὸν μὲν τῶν ἀνθρώπων φόβον οὐδὲν ἡγοῦντο· τὸν δὲ τοῦ νόμου προετίμων. ᾽Ιουδαίοις μόνοις ἐλάλουν. For προετίμων, A. B. προσετίμουν. The passage is corrupt, but the sense is sufficiently plain, and is thus expressed by E. Edd. “Which thing itself helped not a little. But they came also to Cyprus, where was great fearlessness (ἀδεὲς), and greater freedom from anxiety. ‘But to none,’ it says, ‘did they speak the word save to Jews only.’ Not because of the fear of men, of which they made no account, did they this thing:” but keeping the law, and still bearing them, καὶ αὐτοὺς ἔτι διαβαστάζοντες.”—Below, v. 23, Edd. from E, “Perhaps by praising the multitude and receiving them, by this he converted more: as above, μετὰ ἐγκωμίου καὶ ἐπαίνου.
↑ He means, There is no lack of wealth, no lack of hearing the word of God: this is the ἀφθονία διπλῆ. Yet many poor around us are famishing, and the rich who might aid them, starve their own souls, by their neglect of almsgiving: διπλοῦς λιμός.
↑ ἡμεῖς δὲ ἐν σπατάλῃ τοῦ ἐλέους ὄντες τοῦ Θεοῦ. Read ἡμεῖς δὲ (ἐν σπατάλῃ ὅντες), τοῦ ἐλέους τοῦ Θεοῦ, sc. ἀποροῦντες. The mod. text substitutes σπάνει for σπάτάλῃ.
↑ καθάπερ καὶ ἡμεις τότε μάλιστα ἀθοῦμέν τινας, ὅταν λέγωσιν ἡμῖν…καὶ μὴ ἐπαγάγωμεν, A. B. C. We read τινα, and ἐπαγάγωσιν. “When people bid us exhort some person, adding, Peradventure he will hear, not, He will certainly hear, we are then most urgent in our endeavor to persuade him.” The mod. text ὅταν λέγωμεν. i.e. “When we would induce some persons to exhort some one, we the more effectually urge them to do so, when we say, Peradventure he will hear,” etc. The sense would be improved by reading ἡμᾶς ώθοῦσί τινες, “persons then most urge us, when they say,” etc.
↑ εἰ ταύτης (mod. text adds μόνον) τῆς γυμνότητος ἐπίστασαι τὸν τρόπον: which might also be taken with the following sentence, If you know what sort of nakedness this is (why then, only think) what numbers of women, etc. A. has πόσαι οὖν. The mod. text adds, δυνήσῃ γνῶναι ῥαδίως καὶ τὴν αὐτῆς καταστολήν. “If you know the sort of nakedness this is, you will easily be able to know the (manner of) clothing it.”
↑ E. Edd. “Say, We need other (garments) there, not these.”—Below, θερους δὲ, οὐκ ἔτι: i.e. cold, not heat, makes the naked body shudder: not cold, but hell-fire, the naked soul.
↑ In the “Acts of Paul and Thekla,” Grab. Spicileg. Patr. t. i. p. 95. reprinted with a translation by Jeremiah Jones, On the Canon of the N. T., vol. ii. p. 353 ff. the incident is thus related (ch. ii.): “When the proconsul heard this, he ordered Paul to be bound, and to be put in prison..…But Thekla, in the night taking off her earnings, gave them to the turnkey, and he opened for her the doors, and let her in: and having given to the keeper of the prison a silver mirror, she was admitted unto Paul, and having sat at his feet, heard from him the mighty works of God.” The earliest notice of this work occurs in Tertull. de Bapt. c. 17: Thekla is mentioned, or her history referred to, by other ancient writers, as St. Greg. Naz., Sulpic. Severus, St. Augustin; see Jones u. s. p. 387 ff. A Homily in her praise ascribed to St. Chrysostom, t. ii. p. 749, is justly placed by Savile among the ἀμφιβαλλόμενα.
↑ The modern text (E. D. F. Edd.) “But here it is said in this sense, elsewhere in a different sense. For when Matthew says, ‘In those days cometh John preaching,’ he speaks it not as meaning the days immediately following, but ‘those’ in which the things he relates were about to take place. For it is the custom of Scripture to use this mode of speech, and at one time to expound in their sequence the things successively taking place, at another to relate as in immediate succession the things about to take place afterwards. And he well says that Herod the king did this, for this was not he of Christ’s time:” as if Chrys. meant, He does right to call him king, for this was not the tetrarch of the Gospel history. But this is merely a parenthetic remark: the point to which the καλῶς λέγει refers is this—that the persecution is now raised by a king, not by the Jews: “he does well to designate Herod as the king, thereby showing that the trial here was of a different kind, more severe, as the power wielded against them was greater.”
↑ ἐν δὲ καιρῷ τοιούτῳ τοιαῦτα ἔπραττον. So mss. and Edd. But the Catena has ἐν δὲ καιρῷ τοιούτῳ πράττειν οὐκ ἤθελον. “They had no objection to killing, but they had rather not do it at such a time.”
↑ This seems more suitable to the clause, “And his chains fell off from his hands:” but see below in the recapitulation, p. 170.
↑ i.e. so unexpected was it, so entirely had he made up his mind that he was to be put to death, that he thought it all a dream.
↑ i.e. on the morrow, to be led out to execution, and then and there deliver him.
↑ τοῦτο δὲ πιστὸν ἐγένετο. That would have astonished: this was calculated to obtain belief. E. D. F. Edd. τοῦτο δὲ ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν εγένετο. “But this was done for their sakes for they would not have been counted human beings, if he had done all after the manner of God, εἰ θεοπρεπῶς πάντα ἐποίει.”
↑ In the old text this sentence and the next are transposed. The mod. text has restored the true order, but for ἡδονὴν has ἀπαλλαγὴν, “his deliverance to come to him all at once.”—The connection may be thus supplied, “When he came to himself, he found himself there at large, and with his hands no longer chained. And this circumstance again is a strong evidence that he had not fled.”
↑ The order in mss. and Edd. is a, b, c. Αὕτη, in the beginning of (c) evidently refers to τῆς παραινέσεως τῆς Γαμ. in (a).
↑ James the brother of John was the son of Zebedee, commonly called the “elder” James. He was the first of the apostles to suffer martyrdom. The other James, called “the Lord’s brother” (Gal. 1:19.) mentioned in Acts 5:17 (cf. Acts 15:13; Acts 21:18) was the Bishop of Jerusalem, a man of much importance and influence in the apostolic church, whom Paul reckons among the “pillars” (Gal. 2:9). Chrys. gives no opinion here concerning him. Three views have prevailed in the church: (1) that he was the same as the apostle, James the son of Alphæus and is called the “brother” of Jesus in the loose sense of that word in which it is taken as equivalent to “relative.” (2) That he was the son of Joseph by a former marriage. (3) That he was the son of Joseph and Mary—the real brother of Jesus and is called an apostle in Gal. 1:19, in the more comprehensive sense which that word acquired according to which it was applied also to Paul and Barnabas (Acts 14:14). This view seems to me the correct one. There were also other brothers (Matt. 12:46; Matt. 13:55–56) Joses, Simon and Judas, and sisters who are not personally named. Chrys. seems to have held view (2) in his earlier writings, but to have adopted view (1), following Jerome. (Cf. Lightfoot on Galatians, pp. 289, 290).—G.B.S.
↑ A. B. C. κακία, ἀσέβεια. Cat φονος ἄδικος κακίας;ἀσέβεια ταῖς κ. τ. λ. Mod. text substitutes for these two words, Πολλὴ ἡ ἄνοια τοῦ ῾Ηρώδου.
↑ Καθὼς δὲ ᾤοντο A. B. C. Either this is out of its place, or the sentence is incomplete. The mod. text substitutes, “And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison.”
↑ οὐκ ἐστασίασαν, οὐκ ἐθορυβήθησαν: alluding perhaps to the factious and turbulent proceedings, which in his time often ensued when a Bishop was removed or at the point of death. But possibly ἐστασ. is corrupt.—Below, Τοῦτο δὲ ἦν ὑπὲρ Πέτρου, etc. the meaning seems to be, “That Herod was permitted to do this, and that Peter was delivered into his hands, not withdrawing upon the death of James, was all the better for Peter: it gave fresh proof of his worth, it showed how courageous he was in himself, independently of supernatural aid.”
↑ A. B. C. Cat. καὶ τὸ “ἐν τάχει,” ὥστε μη ῥαθυμησαι· καὶ ἔπληξεν αὐτόν· (C. καὶ ἔκπληξις ἦν εἰς αὐτόν) οὕτω βαθέως ἐκάθευδεν. Perhaps C. has preserved the true reading, see on v. 11. If so, it should be transposed with the part marked (a), viz. “—by the Angel: and it was an amazement to him, so deeply did he sleep: but he thought he saw a vision.” The letters as usual denote the order of parts in the mss. Before (b), the clause, “And he passed the first and second ward,” is inserted. It is not easy to see what can be the reference of the question, Πῶς; ποῦ εἰσὶν οἱ αἱρετικοί; it can hardly be meant for the mention of the sandals and cloak, v. 8, for the persons who objected to the Christians, that, according to Christ’s command, they ought to have no shoes, nor two coats, etc. were not heretics, but heathens: see Hom. in illud, Salutate Prisc. et Aq. t. iii. 181. and Hom. ix. in Philip. t. xi. 272 (the latter cited in the Catena here).
↑ A. B. C. Cat. ἀπιστηθῆναι, “be disbelieved?” But this is evidently corrupt.
↑ ἵσως ἐκεῖνος ὁ ἀεὶ αὐτοῖς συνών. Œcumen. may have read οὐκ ἐκεῖνος, for he has, ἵνα δείξῃ ὅτι οὐ τοῦ ἀεὶ συνόντος αὐτοῖς ᾽Ιωάννου τὴν μήτερα φησίν: “to show that he does not mean the mother of John (the Apostle) who was always with them, he adds his distinctive name.”
↑ ἐν αὐτοῖς τοῖς ἀδικοῦσιν. Perhaps it may mean, He brings it home to the conviction of the wrong-doers themselves, etc. ᾽Εκείνων, i.e. the enemies. But ἀδικουμένοις would suit the meaning better than ἀδικοῦσιν, and then ἐκείνων would be right: otherwise it should be αὐτῶν.
↑ The interpretation of Chrys. regarding the idea of the company assembled in Mary’s house expressed by: “It is his angel,” is doubtless correct. Others interpret: “It is his messenger”—a messenger sent by Peter to them, but it is said that Rhoda recognized Peter’s voice (Acts 12:14). Others understand angel in the sense of spirit—a view which is not sanctioned by linguistic usage. Their idea was that Peter’s guardian angel who had taken on his form and appearance was before the door. The belief in guardian angels attending individuals was common in later Jewish theology as well as in the Greek and Roman religions. It was doubtless stimulated in the early church by the saying of Jesus concerning children: “In heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 17:10), which seems to sanction the idea (cf. Heb. 1:14).—G.B.S.
↑ καὶ τὶ βουλεται ὁ ἄγγελος; A. B. C. Cat. The mod. text substitutes, “And whence did it come into their minds at that time to surmise that it was an Angel?”
↑ i.e. It was so ordered (ᾠκονόμητο) that the notion of its being his Angel came into their minds before they saw him, in order that it might not be possible for them to think this after he was gone.
↑ Πιστοῦται δὲ αὐτοὺς καὶ τὸ ἐν ἡμέρα γενόμενον. i.e. “When it was day there was no small stir among the soldiers,” etc. Acts 12:18. The innovator, not perceiving the meaning, substitutes καὶ τὸ μὴ ἐν ἡμέρᾳ γενεσθαι, “And its not happening by day, confirms their belief.”
↑ ἐμνημονευσεν. i.e. astonishment would have deprived him of the power of remembering, and afterwards relating the circumstances, Acts 12:17.
↑ Here, and on former occasion, Acts 12:19. Hence the plural δἱ εαυτῶν.
↑ διὰ τούτων (the persons assembled in the house of Mary) ἐκεῖνοι (James and the brethren), οὐκ ἐκεῖνοι διὰ τούτου. This is corrupt, but the meaning is, James and the more important of the brethren learn the particulars through these inferior persons, not these through those, but through Peter himself. Mod. text, ἵνα διὰ τούτων ἐκεῖνοι μανθάνωσιν, οὐκ αὐτοὶ δἰ ἐκείνων
↑ Mod. text adds, “thou wilt enjoy all pleasure, being led forthwith to reflect on the Creator.”
↑ ῍Αν διακύψῃς εἰς τὸν στενωπόν. The στενωποὶ, angiportus or vici are the lanes or alleys in the quarters formed by intersection of the broad streets, πλατεῖαι.
↑ Mod. text ἀλλὰ μὴ γένοιτο μηδένα ὑμῶν ὑπέκκαυμα τοῦ πυρὸς ἐκείνου γενέσθαι: “God forbid that any of you should become the fuel of that fire.”
↑ περιεῖδεν τοὺς ἀθλητὰς ἀπολλυμένους: i.e. those (as St. Stephen, St. James) engaged in contending for the heavenly prize. The mod. t. substitutes, “Many are quite at a loss, how God could quietly look on while his children (or servants? τοὺς παῖδας, Ben. infantes) were put to death because of Him, and now again,” etc. After this sentence, the same inserts from the recapitulation: “But—if the Angel,” etc. to…..“why did He not rescue him? and besides”—
↑ μᾶλλον αὐτὸν ἐποίει διαπρίεσθαι (as in Acts 7:54, cut to the heart with passion) καὶ καταγέλαστον εἶναι. The last words are either misplaced, or something is wanting; perhaps (after διαπρίεσθαι), τὸ διακρούεσθαι καὶ καταγέλαστον εἶναι.
↑ i.e. what was to be drawn from them by the torture? Had they let him out, they would have contrived appearances, or would themselves have fled. But the reporter’s notes of what St. Chrys. said, seem to be very defective, and the arrangement much confused.
↑ ἀλλ᾽ ὅρα πῶς οὗτος οὐ κρύπτει ταῦτα. In the recapitulation (see note 3, p. 175) he says, that the death of Herod was regarded as a judgment for his having slain James and the soldiers. Here, it seems, he must have said something to that effect; then, “but observe how St. Luke does not conceal the true state of the case, viz. that he was punished not for this, but for the sin which he proceeds to mention.” We have transposed the text Acts 12:20–23. mss. and Edd. place it before οὐ μικρὸν οὐδὲ τοῦτό ἐστιν, thus separating these words from their connection with the preceding question.
↑ Josephus’ narrative of the death of Herod (Ant. xix. 8, 2) is of peculiar interest here on account of its substantial agreement with that of Luke. The following points of agreement may be noted: (1) The place was Cæsarea. (2) He was attacked by disease in a public assembly when, arrayed in gorgeous apparel, he received the impious flatteries of the people. (3) His disease and death were a penalty for accepting the flattery of those who accorded to him divine honors. Thus the main outlines are the same. Josephus introduces some historical notices, such as that the occasion was a celebration in honor of the Emperor Claudius, which are wanting in Luke. He also relates that after receiving the people’s flattery, Herod observed an owl perched on a rope above him, which he interpreted at once as an omen of the fate which soon befell him. The supernatural element—“an angel smote him”—is wanting in Josephus. The Jewish historian is less specific in describing the disease which he speaks of as violent pains in the bowels and adds that after the attack, Herod lingered five days and died in the fifty-fourth year of his age and the seventh of his reign.—G.B.S.
↑ At this point (Acts 13.) begins the second part of the Book of Acts which has chiefly to do with the missionary labors of Paul. It is a reasonable supposition that the previous chapters rest upon different documents from those which follow. From Acts 16. onward occur the so-called “we” passages (e.g. Acts 16:10; Acts 20:6; Acts 21:1; Acts 27:1) in which the writer, identifying himself with his narratives, indicates that he writes from personal knowledge and experience. The appointment of Barnabas and Saul at Antioch for missionary service, marked an epoch in the history of the early church and practically settled the questions relating to the admission of the Gentiles to the Christian community.—G.B.S.
↑ mss. and Edd. δἰ ἀνθρώπων, but the singular is implied below in οὐχ ὑπὸ τοῦδε. In the old text, B. C. Cat. “Not from men nor by men? Because not man called nor brought him over: that is, neither by men; therefore he says, that he was not sent (B., I was not sent) by this,” etc. The mod. text “Not from men neither by men. The one, not from men, he uses to show that not man, etc.: and the other, neither by men, that he was not sent by this (man), but by the Spirit. Wherefore,” etc.
↑ Here he further answers the question raised in the opening of the discourse. The mod. text transposes it to that place, beginning the recapitulation with, “‘And when it was day there was no small stir among the soldiers because of Peter, and having put the keepers to the question, he ordered them to be led away to execution.’ So senseless was he, οὕτως οὐκ ᾔσθετο, that he even sets about punishing them unjustly.” The latter clause is added by the innovator. For ᾔσθετοCat. has preserved the true reading, ᾔσθοντο.
↑ ἀνάρπαστος ὁ ἄνθρωπος γέγονε. Ben. homo ille raptus non est.
↑ i.e. of the circumstances related Acts 12:22–23.—Below, πλὴν ἀλλὰ καὶ ἡ ἄγνοια ὠφέλει, i.e. to the believers: and yet, as he says above, the writer does not conceal the facts: see note 3, p. 174.
↑ mss. and Edd. οὐδὲν τοιοῦτον εἰπγάσατο· ὅτε δὲ τούτους, λοιπὸν ἐν ἀφασί& 139· ἦν: what this means, is very obscure, only the last clause seems to be explained by the following, ἅτε οὖν ἡπορηκὼς καὶ αἰσχυνόμενος, i.e. not knowing what to think of it, he withdrew from Jerusalem. Ben. quando illos, nihil dicebat. Erasm., et quando alios, nihil de illis traditur.—Below, ᾽Εμοὶ δοκεῖ καὶ ἐκείνους πρὸς τὴν ἀπολογίαν ἐνάγων ἀπαγαγεῖν ὠργίζετο γὰρ ἐκείνοις, τούτους οὕτω θεραπεύων. By ἐκείνους, ἐκείνοις, he means the Tyrians and Sidonians: ἀπαγαγεῖν, sc. ἑαυτόν, to have withdrawn himself from Jerusalem, to Cæsarea, nearer to Tyre and Sidon. The innovator substitutes, ᾽Εμοὶ δοκεῖ καὶ ἐκείνους ἀπαγαγεῖν βουλόμενος, πρὸς ἀπολογίαν ἦλθε τούτων· ὠργίζετο γὰρ κ. τ. λ. which Ben. renders Mihi videtur, cum illos abducere vellet, ad hos venisse ut sese purgaret.
↑ οὐκ ἀποστήσομεν…ἂν μὴ ἑτερον ἀντιστήσωμεν πάθος (Mod. text πρὸς ἕτ. and τὸ πάθος), i.e. unless, as Solomon does in the last clause of the text cited, we set against this lust a different affection, viz. vanity, especially female vanity, regard to personal appearance. Hence that last clause might be better transposed to the end of this sentence.
↑ That Barnabas and Saul preached first to the Jews for the reason mentioned by Chrysostom is wholly improbable. The mission to the Gentiles entrusted to them never cancelled, in their minds, their obligation to the Jews as having in the plan of God an economic precedence. Paul not only maintained throughout his life an ardent love and longing for his people (Rom. 9.) and a confident hope of their conversion (Rom. 11.), but regarded them as still the people of privilege, on the principle: “To the Jew first, and also to the Greek.” (Rom. 1:16.) This view, together with the fact that they were Jews, constitutes a sufficient explanation for their resort to the synagogues. Additional reasons may be found in the fact that in the synagogues might be found those who were religiously inclined—of both Jewish and Gentile nationality—and who were therefore most susceptible to the influence of Christian truth, and in the fact that the freedom of speech in the synagogue-service offered the most favorable opportunity to expound the Gospel.—G.B.S.
↑ Chrysostom here hints at the most probable explanation of the change of name in the Acts from Saul to Paul, although that change is not strictly simultaneous with his ordination which occurred at Antioch (Acts 13:3), whereas the first use of the name “Paul” is in connection with his labors at Paphos, after he had preached for a time in Salamis. It seems probable that, as in so many cases, Paul, a Hellenist, had two names, in Hebrew Saul, and in Greek Paul, and that now when he enters distinctively upon his mission to the Gentiles, his Gentile name comes into exclusive use. (So, among recent critics, De Wette, Lechler, Alford, Neander, Gloag.) Other opinions are: (1) that he took the name Paul—signifying little—out of modesty (Augustin); (2) that he was named Paul, either by himself (Jerome), by his fellow-Christians (Meyer) or by the proconsul (Ewald), in honor of the conversion of Sergius Paulus.—G.B.S.
↑ It can hardly be meant that the smiting of Elymas with blindness was not a judicial infliction to himself; but that the proconsul should see it rather on its merciful side as being only ἄχρι καιροῦ. The Hebraistic use of Χεὶρ Κυρίου clearly implies a divine judgment upon Elymas as does the whole force of the narrative.—G.B.S.
↑ Καὶ τὰ ὀνόματα δὲ λέγει· ἐπειδὴ προσφάτως ἔγραφον· & 234·ρα κ. τ. λ. A. B. C. N. Cat. It is not clear whether this relates to the two names, Barjesus and Elymas, (if so we might, read ἔγραφεν, “since he wrote just before, (whose name was Barjesus, but now Elymas, for so is his name interpreted,”) or to the change of the Apostle’s name “Then Saul, who is also called Paul,” (and then perhaps the sense of the latter clause may be, Since the change of name was recent: ἐπειδἡ προσφάτως μετεγράφη or the like.) The mod. text substitutes, “But he also recites the names of the cities: showing that since they had but recently received the word, there was need (for them) to be confirmed, to continue in the faith: for which reason also they frequently visited them.”
↑ Mod. text omits this sentence. The connection is: Paul inflicts this blindness upon him, not in vengeance, but in order to his conversion, remembering how the Lord Himself had dealt with him on the way to Damascus. But it was not here, as then—no “light shown round about him from heaven.”
↑ Καὶ (Εἶτα mod.) (ὁρᾷ C. N. Cat.) τὴν πήρωσιν (Cat. πύρωσιν) ὁ ἀνθ. καὶ (om. Cat.) μόνος ἐπίστευσεν (mod. εὐθὺς πιστεύει). The reading in Cat. is meant for emendation: “And mark the fervor (or kindling, viz. of the proconsul’s mind): the proc. alone believed” etc.
↑ Mod. text adds, “but, the ways of the Lord, which is more: that he may not seem to pay court.”
↑ οὐ γὰρ τούτου ἦν. “Down. renders it non enim iræ deditus erat, he was not the man for this (anger): or perhaps, For he (John) was not his, not associated by him, but by Barnabas.” Ben. But the meaning should rather be, “So great a work was not for him (Mark); he was not equal to it.” The connection is of this kind: “Paul knew how great grace had been bestowed on him, and on his own part he brought corresponding zeal. When Mark withdrew, Paul was not angry with him, knowing that the like grace was not bestowed on him, therefore neither could there be the like σπουδὴ on his part.”
↑ In mss. and Edd. this portion, to the end of the paragraph, is placed after the part relating to Elymas, “He first convicted,” etc. and immediately before the Morale, as if the occasion of the invective against φιλαρχία and κενοδοξία were furnished by the conduct of the rulers of the synagogue: but see above, p. 178, in the expos. of Acts 13:8, πανταχοῦ ἡ κενοδοξία καὶ ἡ φιλαρχία αἴτιαι τῶν κακῶν, and below, the allusion to the blindness of Elymas.
↑ καὶ οὐδὲν ἀπ᾽ αὐτῆς καρπουμένους, i.e. reaping no fruit from it (the glory which they sought here) where they are now. Mod. text οὐδὲν ἀπ᾽ αὐτῶν καρπωσαμένους: “reaped no fruit while here, from their money which they squandered”—mistaking the meaning of the passage, which is, “They got what they sought, but where is it now?”
↑ i.e. for one of the congregation to expound or preach: or perhaps rather, to preach standing, not sitting, as Christian bishops did for their sermons. We have transposed the comment to its proper place.—Mod. text adds, “Wherefore he too in accordance with this discourses to them.”
↑ ὅπερ ἦν συμφορᾶς ὄνομα, in regard that a proselyte might be deemed inferior to a Jew of genuine descent, “a Hebrew of the Hebrews.”
↑ καὶ μὴν τοὐναντίον γέγονεν. Here also we have transposed the comment to the clause to which it belongs. In the Edd. it comes after “And with a high arm,” etc. whence Ben. mistaking its reference says, “i.e., if I mistake not, God brought them out of Egypt, that he might bring them into the Land of Promise: but, for their wickedness, the contrary befell: for the greatest part of them perished in the wilderness.” It plainly refers to ὕψωσεν—i.e. how is it said, that He exalted them in Egypt, where, on the contrary, they were brought low? This is true—but He did exalt them by increasing them into a great multitude, and by the miracles which He wrought on their behalf.
↑ Upon the reading of the T. R. (A.V.) the period of the Judges is here stated to have been 450 years. This agrees with the chronology of the book of Judges and of Josephus, but conflicts with 1 Kgs. 6:1 where we are told that “in the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign over Israel, he began to build the house of the Lord.” This would give but 331 years for the period of the Judges. It is the view of many critics that Paul has here followed a different chronology from that of 1 Kings which was also in use among the Jews and was followed by Josephus (so Meyer.) But if the reading of Tischendorf, Lechler, and Westcott and Hort (R.V.) is adopted—and it is sustained by A. B. C. א—the difficulty, so far as Acts 13:21 is concerned, disappears. This reading places μετὰ ταῦτα after ὡς ἔτεσιν sq. and inserts a period after πεντήκοντα. Then the translation would be, “He gave them their land for an inheritance for about four hundred and fifty years. And after these things He gave them judges,” etc. On this reading the 450 years is the period of their inheritance, approximately stated, up to the time of the judges. The point from which Paul reckoned is not stated and is uncertain. This is the preferable reading and explanation.—G.B.S.
↑ Καὶ πόθεν ὅτι ἀνέστη φησι καὶ μάρτυρες εἰσιν. Εἶτα πάλιν ἀπὸ τῶν γραφῶν, followed by Acts 13:29–37. We read, καὶ πόθεν; ὅτι τὰς φωνὰς τῶν προφ., κρίναντες τοῦτον ἐπλήρωσαν. Εἶτα πάλιν ἀπὸ τ. γρ. Acts 13:29–31, ending, καὶ μάρτυρες αὐτοῦ εἰσιν πρὸς τὸν λαὸν ὅτι ἀνέστη. The mod. text “And that no man may say, And whence is this manifest that He rose again? He says that (word), And are His witnesses. Then again He presses them from the Scriptures, Acts 13:29–37.”
↑ This comment, which in the mss. and Edd. is inserted after Acts 13:37, refers to the following Acts 13:38–39, i.e. to what is there said of the insufficiency of the Law for justification: we have therefore transposed it.
↑ In the old text the parts lie in the order here shown by the letters a, b, etc. The confusion may be explained by the scribe’s copying in the wrong order from the four pages of his tablets: viz. in the first place, in the order 1, 3, 2, 4: then 2, 4, 1, 3: and lastly, 2, 1. In the modern text, a different arrangement is attempted by which all is thrown into worse confusion. Thus it was not perceived that Chrys. having in a cursory way read through Acts 13:24–41, begins his exposition in detail with the remark of the Apostle’s passing and repassing from the Old to the New Test. and vice versa, viz. alleging first the Promise, then John, then the Prophets, then the Apostles, then David and Isaiah, Acts 13:24–34; then comments upon the matters contained in these and the following verses, and then as usual goes over the whole again in a second exposition. Now the innovator makes the recapitulation begin immediately after (a), commencing it at Acts 13:26, and collecting the comments in this order: Acts 13:26–32; Acts 13:24–36; Acts 13:17–41.
↑ The transposition of the part (c), makes this read in the mss. and Edd. as if it were parallel with ἀπὸ τῶν παρόντων (i.e. New Testament facts), ἀπὸ τῶν Προφητῶν (Old Testament testimonies).
↑ It is probable that Chrys. has pointed out the true connection of thought as established by γὰρ (Acts 13:27). “The word of this salvation is sent unto you (of the dispersion) on the ground that the Jews at Jerusalem have rejected it.” (So Meyer, Gloag.) The more common explanation is: The word is sent unto you because the Jews have fulfilled the prophecies which spoke of the rejection of the Messiah and have thus proved that He is the Messiah. (De Wette, Hackett, Lechler.)—G.B.S.
↑ i.e. Though not one of the original witnesses, Acts 13:31, yet, being one who has been moved or raised up, κεκινημένον, by the Spirit of Christ Himself, he preaches as they did, insisting much on the Passion, etc.
↑ ᾽Αντὶ τοῦ, Οἱ ἄνδρες οἱ συναναβάντες κ. τ. λ. Perhaps the sense may be supplied thus: ᾽Αντὶ τοῦ, Οὗ πάντες ἡμεῖς ἐσμεν μάρτυρες, Acts 2:32, οὗ ἡμεῖς μάρτ. ἐσμεν, Acts 3:15. Instead of saying as Peter does, “Whereof we are witnesses.”
↑ Καὶ οὐκ ἐγχρονίζει τούτοις, as in the recapitulation on Acts 13:40–41. καὶ ὅρα, τραχὺ ὂν πῶς ὑποτέμνεται. Hence it is clear that τούτοις refers not to “the sure mercies of David,” as in mss. and Edd. (end of e), but to the threats and terrors (end of h). Below, for ἀλλ᾽ ἐπιτείνει τὴν κόλασιν the sense of ἐπιτείνει (not as Ben. minatur, but intentat, “makes much of, aggravates, dwells upon the greatness of)”, and the whole scope of the passage, require us to read οὐδὲ. Then, καὶ μετέρχεται with the negative extending to the whole clause, “and (like Stephen) assail that which is dear to them, (viz. their preëminence as Jews,) by showing the Law on the point of being cast out:” then, ἀλλὰ (so we restore for καὶ) τῷ συμφ. ἐνδιατρ., but dwells, etc.
↑ Edd. “But let us hear τί καὶ λέγοντες οἱ ᾽Απόστ. ἔπεισαν, ὅτι ἐσταυρώθη, by saying what, by what announcement, the Apostles persuaded (men) that He was crucified.” For τί τούτου ἀπιθ. B. has τὸ τ. ἀ. “(yea), what is more incredible still.” Both clauses must be read interrogatively. The scope of the whole passage (which is obscure in the original) is, the supreme importance of the article of the Resurrection. Leave that out, and see what the preaching of the Apostles would have been; how it would have been received.
↑ The reading: “In the Second Psalm” is the best attested and is followed by the T. R., R.V. and Wescott and Hort. Πρώτῳ is found in D. and is supported by the Fathers. It is the more difficult reading and for this reason is preferred by Tischendorf, Lachmann, Meyer, Alford and Gloag. If it is correct, we must suppose that what we now call the first psalm was considered introductory and that our second psalm was counted as the first. In some Heb. mss. this order actually occurs. The reading δευτέρῳ, however, is better supported. The expression: “this day have I begotten thee” refers evidently to the resurrection of Christ. (Cf. Heb. 1:5; Rom. 1:4.) The resurrection is conceived as the solemn inauguration of Christ into his office as theocratic king represented under the figure of begetting.—G.B.S.
↑ We have transposed this clause from before, “Behold,” etc. preceding.
↑ Mod. text needlessly adds, Καὶ καταφρονοῦμεν; “And do we make light of these things?”
↑ Τοῦτο καὶ ἐφ᾽ ἡμῶν γενέσθαι, ἑτέραν ἐπεισαχθῆναι συνήθειαν. Morel. Ben. ἀφ᾽ ἡμῶν, “By our means,” idque unum probandum, Ed. Par. but ἐφ᾽ ἡμῶν is not as he renders it, in nobis; the meaning is, “where habit works, this is the effect (in the case of habit): wish it were so in the case of us (where we work).”
↑ Mod. text “Having been so sufficiently spoken, that ye are able to correct others, εἴγε ἀπόντων ὠφέλειά τις ὑμῖν προσεγίνετο, since in their absence some benefit accrued to you.”
↑ ὅπως εἰς ᾽Εκκλησίαν ἐμβάλητε, ἀλλ᾽ ὅπως τι καὶ λαβόντες ἀναχωρῆτε. (Above we had the phrase παραβάλλειν τῇ συνάξει.) Here the metaphor is taken from an invading army. So below, p. 188, μη ἐμβάλῃς εἰς αγοράν.
↑ mss. and Edd. ἀπάρτισαι καὶ οἰκειῶσαι ἑαυτῷ. The Catena has preserved the true reading ἀναρτῆσαι. in the sense, to make them hang upon (him for further communications).—Below, τῷ πάντα ἀθρόον εἰς τὰς ἐκείνων ῥ& 178·ψαι ψυχάς, the ἐκείνων distinguishes the first hearers from the people generally: if he had spoken all at once to those, the consequence would have been χαυνοτέρους ἐργάσασθαι, not that “nearly the whole city” should assemble on the following sabbath.
↑ Edd. from E .F. αὐτὸς ἑαυτοῦ instead of τοῦ Παυλοῦ. We have restored the comments to their proper clauses in the Scripture text.
↑ The order of the exposition in the mss. and Edd. marked by the letters a, b, etc. is much confused, but not irremediably. The matter falls into suitable connection, when the parts are taken in the order c, a, d, b.
↑ ἀλλ᾽ ὅρα τὴν παρρησίαν μετὰ μέτρου γινομένην. Α. μετὰ τὸ μέτρου. Mod. text μέτρῳ. If this be not corrupt, it may be explained by the clause at the end of c, πολλῆς ἐπιεικείας ἡ παρρ. γέμουσα, but then the connection with the following εἰ γὰρ Πέτρος κ. τ. λ. is obscure. Perhaps from A. we may restore μετὰ το Πέτρου: “the boldness coming to them after the affair of Peter.”
↑ ὡς ἐκ τῆς ἐκείνων σπουδῆς μὴ (om. A. B. ) τυγχάνοντα τῶν ἀγαθῶν.
↑ The expression: “As many as were ordained to eternal life believed,” has been both minimized and exaggerated. Chrys. points the way to its correct interpretation in saying: “set apart for God” and adding later: “not in regard of necessity.” The writer is by no means seeking to define a doctrine of the divine plan in its bearing upon human self-determination, but pointing out a historical sequence. Those who became believers were as truly so in God’s plan as they are so in fact. The passage says nothing of the relation of God’s ordainment to the believer’s choice. It is an example of the Pauline type of thought which grounds salvation upon the eternal purpose of God. Whoever are saved in fact, were saved in God’s purpose. If as matter of fact they are saved on condition of faith and not through the enforcement of a decretum absolutum, then it is certain that their salvation as foreseen in God’s purpose does not exclude their self-determination and personal acceptance.—G.B.S.
↑ διεφέρετο, was published, E.V. διαφέρειν ἀγγελίας, “to bear tidings,” and διαφέρεται ὁ λόγος, “the saying is bruited,” are classical, but perhaps the expression was not familiar to Chrysostom’s hearers.
↑ ᾽Αντὶ τοῦ, οὐκ ἔστησαν μεχρὶ τοῦ ζῆλου. As in the mss. this clause follows that at the end of a, ἀντὶ τοῦ, διεκομίζετο, the ἀντὶ τοῦ may be only an accidental repetition. At the end of this clause, the mss. have ὅρα πάλιν πῶς (om. A. C. Cat.) διωκόμενοι, and then, πῶς (C. Cat.) ἕτερα κατασκ. (beginning of c.) The former clause, as the conclusion of b, may be completed with “they extend the preaching,” or the like. But probably διωκόμενοι is due to the scribes, who seem to have understood by ζήλου here the zeal of the Apostles, not the envy of the Jews, Acts 13:45.
↑ ἐκ πολλῆς περιουσίας ὅμως ἀναιροῦσιν αὐτῶν τὴν ἀπολογίαν. The sense is evidently as above, but ἀναιρ. will hardly bear this meaning, and perhaps was substituted for some other word by the copyist, who took it to mean, “They leave the Jews no excuse.”—The connection is, It was not because they were less bold than when they said, “We turn unto the Gentiles,” that they still went to the Jews first: but ex abundanti they enabled themselves to say to their brethren at Jerusalem, We did not seek the Gentiles, until repulsed by the Jews.
↑ τῶν σημείων ἦν. A. has σημεῖον ἦν. In the preceding clause, C. μεχρὶ πολλοῦ σημεῖα ποιοῦσι, the rest οὐ ποιοῦσι. The antithesis τὴν μὲν (om. A.) παρρησίαν…τὸ δὲ πιστεῦσαι must be rendered as above: not as Ben. immo fiduciam addebat ipsorum alacritas.…Quod autem auditores crederent inter signa reputandum.
↑ Here all the mss. have καὶ μεγάλῃ τῇ φωνῇ (to which mod. text adds καὶ πῶς, ἄκουε.) then the text Acts 14:8–10, followed by Διὰ τί, μεγ. τῇ φ. and so all the Edd. But in fact that clause is only the reporter’s abbreviation of the Scripture text, καὶ [ἐν Λύστροις.…to] μεγάλῃ τῇ φωνῇ, followed by its comment.
↑ Mod. text adds, τοῦτο γάρ ἐστι τὸ ἤκουσεν.—Below παρεβλάβη is an expression taken from the foot-race: this was a race in which his lameness was no hindrance.
↑ ῎Ηδη ᾠκείωτο τὴν προαίρεσιν. Strangely rendered by Erasmus, Jam præelectione assumptus familiariter erat, and Ben. Jam præelectionem in familiaritatem assumserat.
↑ οὐδὲν ὑβριστικόν, ὃ δὴ καὶ ἐπι τῶν προφ. ἐποίουν. The meaning appears from the context to be: he speaks throughout with much ἐπιεικεία. When he says ἀπωθεῖσθε, he does not upbraid them with this as ὕβρις, a personal outrage to himself and Barnabas, though in fact he might have done so, being just what their fathers did to the prophets: but he does not say, Ye repulse us, for the affront is not to us. And he says it to show that in what he is going to say, “Ye judge yourselves not worthy of eternal life,” he does not mean that they do this of humility. In short, he says it not by way of complaint, but to justify what he adds, “Lo, we turn to the Gentiles.”
↑ Mod. text omits this clause, which we take as an interlocution: q. d. “If the Lord ordered you to go to the Gentiles, why did ye not do this in the first instance.” In the next sentence, A. C. καὶ τοῦτο οὐ παῤ ἡμῶν παῤ ὑμῶν δὲ γέγονε τὸ, πρὸ ὑμῶν (B., with accidental omission, καὶ τοῦτο πρὸ ὑμῶν. Οὕτω γὰρ), meaning, “And this is not our doing, but yours, the ‘before you:’ i.e. the Gentiles hearing the word before you. But Cat., καὶ τοῦτο οὐ πρὸ ὑμῶν, παῤ ὑμῶν δὲ κ. τ. λ. (attested by the mutilated reading in B.) which we have expressed in the translation.—The mod. text has πλὴν τοῦτο οὐ παῤ ἡμῶν, παῤ ὑμῶν δὲ γέγονε τὸ πρὸ ὑμῶν ὀφεῖλον: which Ben. takes to be corrupt, but leaves in the text, only adopting in the translation τὸ παῤ ἡμῶν ὀφεῖλον, which interpres legisse videtur. Downe ap. Sav. proposes τὸ πρὸ τούτων ὑμῖν ὀφειλόμενον vel ὁφεῖλον. Sed præstare videtur lectio quam propono, quamque secutus est vetus Interpres Latinus, Ben. forgetting that the Latin version is Erasmus’s (Veruntamen hoc non ex nobis facimus. A vobis autem factum est, quod a nobis oportebat, Erasm.) and was made from E. which has no such reading here. Ed. Par. Ben. 2. expresses the sense of E. thus, Quod nos oporteat ante vos gentes erudire,’ it is your doing that it is become our duty to teach the Gentiles before you.
↑ ἀπλάστους ὄντας (i.e. the Gentiles who would otherwise have received the Apostles) κακούργως διέθηκαν, evidently the interpretation of ἐκάκωσαν: not evil-treated the Apostles, etc.
↑ Μὴ τοῦτο ἐλαττώσεως εἶναι νομίσῃς. The innovator (Edd.), mistaking the meaning, connects this and the following clauses thus: “For when they said, ὅτε γὰρ ἔλεγον, “Which witnessed,” saith it, “before Pontius P., then the (His?) boldness was shown, but here he speaks concerning the people:” what he meant is not easy to see, nor does it much matter. Below, ἐνταῦθα περὶ τοῦ λαοῦ φησιν, i.e. the παρρησία is in reference to their own nation (Israel): they spake boldly to the Gentiles, fearless of the reproaches of the Jews.
↑ It seems clear from the fact that the apostles are said to have been aware (Acts 14:6) of what the Jews had done against them, that the word ὁρμή (Acts 14:6) can hardly mean an “assault” (A.V.) or even “onset” (R.V.) in the sense of any open violence. There would be no propriety in Luke adding that they became aware of an attack upon them. ῾Ορμή must have here the sense of appetitus animi—a strong movement of mind, an intention to attack them—“Trieb” “Drang.” (Meyer.) The word occurs in but one other passage (Jas. 3:4) where the ὁρμή of the pilot is spoken of as directing the ship, evidently, meaning the “purpose” or “intention.” (So Trench, Gloag, Meyer, Lechler, Alford.)—G.B.S.
↑ οὐδαμοῦ τὸν θυμὸν αὐτῶν ἐκκαίοντες (restored to its fitting-place after κατέφυγον), i.e. as on all occasions we find them forbearing to kindle the wrath of their enemies, so here, seeing the intended assault, they fled. Mod. text ἔνθα οὐδαμοῦ and ἐκκαίειν ἦν, “fled to Derbe,” etc. where (the enemies) had nowhere power to let their wrath blaze against them: so that they went away into the country-parts, etc.
↑ So the order must be restored instead of, καὶ τοῦτό φησι διὰ πίστεως οὐκ ἐξ ἡμῶν· ἀλλὰ τὸ πλέον τοῦ Θεοῦ· Θεοῦ γὰρ φησι τὸ δῶρον. The mod. text, “And that it is not ours, but the more (part) God’s:” hear Paul saying, “And this not of ourselves, it is the gift of God:” omitting διὰ πίστεως, which is essential to the sense.—Perhaps we may read, καὶ τοῦτο, φησί, τὸ “διὰ π.”
↑ ἑαυτοὺς ἐταλάνισαν, “not as thou, ἑαυτοὺς ἐμακάρισαν.”
↑ διὰ τὴν ὠμότητα καὶ τὴν ἀπανθρωπίαν. A strong expression, but so in the Homily on the Parable of the Virgins, Matt. p. 751, Am. Ed. p. 470, he interprets that the oil is charity (alms-giving), and that even virgins, lacking this, “are cast out with the harlots:” καὶ τὸν ἀπάνθρωπον καὶ τὸν ἀνελεήμονα ἵστησι μετ᾽ αὐτῶν (sc. τῶν πόρνων).
↑ μετὰ ἀπονοίας, so Hom. xxxi. p. 196, οὐκ ἀπενοήθησαν, “they did not bear themselves proudly.”
↑ οὐκοῦν καὶ ταπεινοῦσθαι χρή. “if he to whom most is forgiven, loveth most, so ought he to whom more is given, to humble himself more.”
↑ καὶ ταὐτὸν γίνεται, οἷον ἂν εἰ τις πατὴρ ψυχροῦ (mod. text om.) καὶ πέρα τοῦ δέοντος μαλθακοῦ παιδίου κ. τ. λ. πλακοῦντα ἐπιδῷ καὶ ψυχρὸν καὶ ὅσα τέρπει μόνον κ. τ. λ. Erasmus translates loosely, videns puerum, quem supra modum tenere amat, ægrotum, illi frigida et quæcumque oblectant, porrigat. Ben., si pater nimis molli puero, etsi infirmanti, frigidam placentam et quæ solum oblectant porrigat. If the text be not corrupt, πέρα τοῦ δ. μαλθ. may mean, “brought up more tenderly than need be although ill,” and ψυχροῦ, “silly.” But the ψυχρὸν following may rather imply the physical sense as above expressed: the child is a poor creature, with no warmth or life in it, yet the father instead of warm and nourishing food, gives it cake and cold drink, etc.
↑ Διὰ τί ἐκροτήσατε; even now while he was protesting against this evil custom, derived from the theatres, some of the hearers could not refrain from expressing their approbation by applause.—Comp. de Sacerdot. lib. v. init. Hom. xv. in Rom. fin, Hom, vii. in Laz. §I. xvii. in Matt. §7.
↑ μάλιστα μὲν οὐδὲ οὕτω χρήσιμος ὁ ἔπαινος. i.e. as appears from the context, “to the preacher:” it does him no good, it is even a harm, both by hindering him (κώλυμα) and by elating his mind (σκιρτήματα καὶ πηδήματα τῆς ψυχῆς). In the intermediate clause, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἂν ἠκριβολογησάμην, μὴ μέ τις ἀγροικίας γραφέτω, the meaning implied seems to be—“as it would be easy to show, were it not ungracious to point out to you how little your praise is worth.”
↑ Περίειμι γὰρ τούτους ζητῶν. Read τρόπους. Mod. text adds πάντας εἰδένα to the former sentence, and here ΙΙ. γὰρ καὶ αὐτὸς τρόπους παντοίους ἐπιζητῶν.
↑ διὰ τῶν χρωμάτων τῆς ἀρετἡς. Erasm. and Ben. ungrammatically, propter (ob) coloris virtutem; as meaning that such is the virtue or value of the colors, that they are fit to be employed only on imperial portraits. But the connection is plainly this: “the colors are the hues of virtue, the pencil is the tongue, the Artist the Holy Spirit.” In the next sentence the old text has: οὐκ εὔκολον τοῦτο ἀλλὰ τὸ μὴ πολλῇ συνηθεία κατορθωθῆναι, which is corrupt, unless indeed it may be construed, “but (it is) the not being, by reason of long habit, successfully achieved: i.e. it only shows that I have not, such is the force of long habit, succeeded in carrying my point.” The mod. text Οὐκ εὐκ. τὸ πρᾶγμα δοκεῖ, καὶ τοῦτο οὐ φύσει ἀλλὰ τῷ συνηθεί& 139· πολλῇ μήπω κατορθοῦν αὐτὸ μεμαθηκέναι. “It seems to be no easy matter, this: and this, not naturally, but by reason that from long habit you have not yet learnt to effect this reformation.”
↑ οὐκ ἡσυχί& 139· καὶ σιγῇ (mss. ἡσυχία καὶ σιγὴ) τὰ πάντα κεκόσμηται (mod. text κατέχει). We alter the punctuation, and understand by τὰ πάντα not “all the proceedings in Church,” but “all nature.”
↑ ὅταν πάντα συλλέγῃ, when all (that he has spoken) is gathered in by diligent attention of the hearers. Mod. text ὅταν τοὺς κάρπους συλλέγῃ, “when he collects the fruits.”
↑ A. B. C. Cat. ἀποστρεφομένης Mod. text ἀποστρεφόμενοι, and adds καὶ πένθους σημεῖα ποιοῦντες, and so Œcumen.
↑ A. B. C. ἀλλ᾽ οὐχ ἡσύχασαν. The true reading is preserved by Cat. ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἴσχυσεν. Mod. text ἀλλ᾽ οὐχ ἡσυχάζουσιν.
↑ All our mss. τῶν προφητῶν. From the recapitulation we restore τῶν ἀοράτων. The meaning may be, He abstains from the mention of things invisible, because he would recall them from their polytheism, therefore avoids whatever would seem to favor the notion of inferior gods. With the restoration ἀοράτων we obtain a suitable connection for the part b, both grammatically (in respect of the plur. ἔμαθον), and in respect of the sense: they spoke only of things visible, for they had learned not always to speak according to the dignity of the subject, but according to the needs of the hearers. In the next sentence (a) in A. B. C. τί οὖν; εἰ πάντων ἐστὶ δημιουργὸς, διὰ τί μὴ καὶ εἰς ταῦτα προνοεῖ; we may understand by εἰς ταῦτα “the nations of the world, or their doings:” but the sense perhaps would be improved by supplying εἷς after εἰ, and restoring εἷς for εἰς. Perhaps also ταῦτα is a corruption of πάντα. “If One be the Maker of all, why not One also direct all by His Providence:” i.e. if One Creator, why not One Providence? Why imagine a number of inferior Providences?—Mod. text “nowhere mentioning the Prophets, nor, saying for what reason, being Maker of all, He left the Gentiles independent, τὰ ἔθνη ἀφῆκεν αὐτόνομα.”
↑ From this point to the end of the recapitulation the matter required to be rearranged. The letters show the sequence of the parts in the old text: in the mod. text a partial restoration of the order has been attempted. The “method” of the derangement explains itself thus—the true order being denoted by the figures 1, 2, 3, etc. we have two portions transposed into the order, 2, 1; (a, b): then four portions taken alternately in the order 1, 3, 2, 4. (c to f): then again two portions in the order 2, 1, (g, h): then again four portions in the alternate order 1, 3, 2, 4, (i to m): and lastly, two in the order 2, 1.
↑ ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον ἐπὶ τὸν Θεὸν τὸ πᾶν ἄγειν αὐτοὺς ἐκείνους, A. B. C. As Acts 14:17, “Nevertheless,” etc. is placed in the mss. before “Observe, he does not wish,” etc. the intention is that τὸ πᾶν should refer to the contents of that verse: “he does not say this to increase their culpability, but he wishes them to refer all to God.” But then ἐκείνους is idle, accordingly mod. text substitutes παιδεύει. We have removed the text Acts 14:17. to the end of this sentence, so that its comment is (c) ὅρα πῶς λανθανόντως κ. τ. λ. and ὅρα οὐ βούλεται κ. τ. λ. will belong to Acts 14:10, and τὸ πᾶν will refer to their ignorance and walking in their own ways.—So Cat. seems to take it, reading ἄγει ἢ αὐτοὺς ἐκείνους, viz. he rather refers the whole to God, than to those (the heathen) themselves.
↑ There was doubtless something polemic in the words of Acts 14:16–17 inasmuch as the apostle ascribes to the “living God” alone the blessings which the heathen were wont to attribute to their divinities. The language has also a conciliatory element. Their guilt is mitigated, no doubt, by their limited light, but by no means removed, because God had given them evidences of his goodness and power in the return of seasons and harvests. The thought is closely akin to that in the address at Athens (Acts 17:23–31) where God is said to have overlooked the times of the ignorance of the heathen, and to that of Rom. 1:18–32; Rom. 2:14–15, where emphasis is laid upon the revelation of God to the heathen world which renders their sinful lives without excuse. The three passages combined yield the following ideas: (1) God has revealed Himself to the heathen in nature and conscience. (2) This revelation is sufficient to found responsibility. (3) As obedience to this inner law would merit God’s approval (Rom. 2:14), so disobedience to it would merit his displeasure. (4) As matter of fact the Gentiles have not followed the light which they had and thus they have wickedly brought upon themselves the wrath of God and the penalties of his moral law.—G.B.S.
↑ B. and mod. text have πόθον “his affection,” C. and Cat. om. A. “his zeal, fervent and set on fire.” Below, for κατεσπαρκέναι, mod. text βούλεσθαι σπεῖραι, “because he wished to sow the word (elsewhere).”
↑ οὐ διὰ τῶν ἀποστόλων κ. τ. λ. so all our mss. The sense rather requires διὰ τοὺς ἀπ. or ἕνεκα τῶν ἀπ. “for the sake of the Apostles,” etc.
↑ παραμυθία i.e. by the ordination of elders, as explained below in the recap. “but there they needed πολλῆς παραμυθίας, and especially they of the Gentiles, who behooved to be taught much.”—The θερμότης of Paul, shown in his zeal for the establishment of the Gospel among the Gentiles: see below at the end of the recap. Then, εἶτα ἄλλη παραμυθία, if it be not an accidental repetition of the clause before Acts 14:23. must be referred to the clause, “They commended them to the Lord,” which it follows in the mss.
↑ The appointment of elders in every church (which the apostles visited on this journey) is made by Paul and Barnabas. Meyer supposes that the apostles only superintended the popular choice by the church itself. The word employed (χειροτονέω), meaning to stretch forth the hand, as in voting would seem especially appropriate to the idea of a popular election, but the participle here employed (χειροτονήσαντες) has not the church but Paul and Barnabas for its subject. It seems necessary, therefore, to take it in the general and derived sense—to elect—to choose. There were several elders for each church as there had been several for each synagogue, the model for the constitution of the early churches. They were also called bishops (επίσκοποι). These with the deacons were the only church officers. (Phil. 1:1.) Their duty was to be leaders, teachers, and rulers in the churches. They were at once pastors, teachers and rulers. Their functions were coördinate. No one of them was above the others in any particular church. Each church had several co-pastors, teachers or bishops.—G.B.S.
↑ τοὺς ἐνιαυτούς. Cat. τοὺς ἐνιαυσιαίους ὑετους, “the yearly rains.”—Below, our mss. have, “And out of the city,” being afraid of those, O the madness! “they dragged him.” etc. (ὣ τῆς μανίας! repeated from above).—Mod. text But “out of the city they dragged” (him). perhaps being afraid of him, ἐκεῖνον.
↑ Μέγα γὰρ ὄντως μεγάλη ψυχὴ γενναία: for this, which is evidently meant as eulogy of St Paul. the mod. text substitutes Μέγα ὄντως ἀγαθὸν ἡ θλῖψις: καὶ μεγάλης ψυχῆς καὶ γενναίας κατόρθωμα. “A great benefit indeed is affliction, and an achievement of a great and generous soul.”
↑ ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως τἀναντία ἐποίει. But A. ἔπαθεν, mod. text ἔπασχεν, “the treatment he received was just the opposite to these (honors).”
↑ τοὺς ὀδόντας ἐνδάκνουσιν. Erasm. dentibus studentes, ἐνδακόντες mod. text for which, as “gnashing the teeth” does not suit the context, Ben. gives dentes excussi.
↑ ῥοπή ἐστι, καὶ τὸ πᾶν κατώρθωσας εὐθέως, μὴ συναρπαγῇς μηδὲ κινηθῇς. Mod. text ῥοπή ἐστι, “be not hurried, and thou” etc; μὴ κιν., “do not move, and,” etc.—Below μεγάλη παραμυθία. meaning either consolation to the beholders, or rather as below, a soothing of the excited passions of the opponent.
↑ ᾽Αλλ᾽ ἄχρηστος γίνεται: i.e. “It is bad for himself that he should go unpunished: so he becomes good for nothing.”
↑ ἐποίησεν: i.e. “He would not Himself have exercised this forbearance.” Mod. text ἐπέταξεν, “He would not have enjoined this.”
↑ All our mss. καὶ καθάπερ πυρετὸς ὅταν σφοδρὸν πνεύσῃ, and this the Edd. retain without remark. We restore πνεῦμα, or ἄνεμος…σφόδρα. Between πνεῦμα and ἄνεμος as an interlinear correction arose the absurd reading πυρετός.
↑ In the mod. text τὶ ποιοῦντες; is placed before Κονιν επιβ and σιγῶντες is connected with τοὺς κύνας καλῶμεν: “by holding our peace let us call the dogs,” etc.
↑ In the original the sense is perplexed by the negligent use of the demonstr. οὗτος and ἐκεῖνος, supra p. 42. The meaning is: “B. (the second person mentioned) says to A. (suppose a πόρνη περιφανής), “You are so and so,” such being the fact: she retorts with a like reproach, which is not true: whether is most damaged (ὕβρισται)? Not she, for being what the other calls her she is just where she was before. The disgrace is to him; and that, not from her words, for they do not fit: but from his own indecent railing: so that he thinking to disgrace her has more disgraced himself. He is more disgraced by calling the other the thing that she is, than by being called by her the thing that he is not.”
↑ ἀσυνειδησίας ἄπιστον δόξαν λαβών: which being unintelligible, must be restored by replacing ἡ before ασυν. and before ἀπιστου(so mod. text rightly for ἄπιστον). “He gets the δόζα either of άσυνειδ. in which case he is a foul calumniator, or of an ἄπιστος:” which latter in the way in which it is put supra Hom. xiv. p. 193: “as regards himself, he has shown all men that he is not to be trusted, as not knowing how to screen his neighbor’s faults.”
↑ τῶν ἐπ᾽ ἀγορᾶς συρομένων, not as Ben. eorum qui forum frequentant: but, “one of those old hags, bawds, and the like, whom for their crimes you may see dragged by the officers to punishment, and screaming out their foul-mouthed railings.”
↑ ταῦτα ἐκ τῆς πόλεως τὰ συνέδρια. So all our mss.: perhaps ταυτας—τὰς συνηθειας.

Source: Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series I, vol. 11: Saint Chrysostom: Homilies on the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistle to the Romans, ed. Philip Schaff, , pp. 149–201. Christian Classics Ethereal Library: https://ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf111

Sayfa oluşturma tarihi: 2026-10-21, Güncelleme: 2026-10-21

Düzeltmek veya yorum yapmak mı istiyorsunuz? Bize sohbette anlatın: https://bibleox.com/tr/chat