Acts IX. 26, 27

“And when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples: but they were all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a disciple. But Barnabas took him, and brought him to the Apostles, and declared unto them how he had seen the Lord in the way.”

One may well be much at a loss here to understand how it is that, whereas in the Epistle to the Galatians Paul says, “I went not to Jerusalem,” but “into Arabia” and “to Damascus,” and, “After three years I went up to Jerusalem,” and “to see Peter” (Gal. i. 17), (ἱστορἥσαι Cat.) here the writer says the contrary. (There, Paul says,) “And none of the Apostles saw I; but here, it is said (Barnabas), brought him to the Apostles.”—Well, then, either (Paul) means, “I went not up with intent to refer or attach myself to them (ἀναθέσθαι)—for what saith he? “I referred not myself, neither went I to Jerusalem to those who were Apostles before me:”⁴⁹¹

491 St. Chrysostom’s exposition cannot be correctly reported here. Perhaps what he did say, was in substance as follows: “but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus: whence we learn, that the plot against him at Damascus was after his return from Arabia, and then the visit (to Jerusalem), after the escape from Damascus. Certainly of his own accord he went not to the Apostles,” etc.—(So far, the first hypothesis, viz. that the visit, Acts ix. and the visit in Gal. are one and the same. Then) “or else, Paul does not mean this visit (viz. after the flight from Damascus), but passes it by, so that the order (in his narration) is as follows: I went to Arabia, then to Damascus, then viz., at some time during the residence in Damascus, to Jerusalem (to see Peter), then to Syria, i.e. back to Damascus: whereas, had he related matters fully, it should have been, that he went into Arabia, thence to Damascus, then to Jerusalem to see Peter, thence to Damascus again, then again to Jerusalem after the escape from D., thence to Cæsarea.”

492 For ἢ εἰ μὴ τοῦτο, E. gives (as emendation) εἶτα πάλιν, and ἐκεῖθεν, for ἀπὸ ᾽Αραβίας, but retains the ἢ εἰ μὴ τοῦτο of the preceding clause, which equally needs correction.

493 E. F. D. Edd. “As not being a teacher, but a disciple:” the reading of A. B. C. N. is attested by Cat. Œc. but below it is said that he joined himself to the disciples, ἅτε μαθητὴν ὄντα, Infra, note 1, p. 135.

494 Here should begin the alternative to the former hypothesis (beginning ἢ τοίνυν τοῦτο φησίν) perhaps, with ἢ, εἰ μὴ τοῦτο. Cat, has ἀπῆλθον, ἦλθον, which we adopt, as the mention of Syria shows that the narrative in Gal. i. 17–21, is referred to; the subject therefore of λέγει, ἀφίησιν is Paul, and ταύτην means the visit in Acts ix. The next sentence, for ἢ εἰ μὴ τοῦτο πάλιν κ. τ. λ. requires to be remodelled as above, e. g. δέον λέγειν ὅτι ἐξ ᾽Αραβίας εἰς Δαμ. ὑποστρέψας, ἀνῆλθεν εἰς ῾Ιεροσόλυμα, εἶτα εἰς Δαμ. ἀπῆλθε πάλιν, εἰτα πάλιν εἰς ῾Ιεροσ., εἶτα ἐξεπέμφθη εἰς Καισαρείαν. The reporter, or redactor, seems to have intended a recital of St. Paul’s movements before as well as after his conversion; viz. (from Tarsus) he went up to Jerusalem, then was sent (by the high-priest) to Damascus: then (after his conversion) went into Arabia (the mod. substitutes, Syria): then returned to Damascus: then (omitting all the rest) to Cæsarea.—In the Comment. on Gal. i. t. x. 675, D. Chrys. expounds thus: “Whereas he says, ‘I went not up,’ this also may be said, that he went not up at the outset of his preaching, and, when he did, it was not for the purpose of learning.”

495 Chrys. here confuses the visits of Paul to Jerusalem. That mentioned in Acts xi. 30, was the second visit, when he went to carry the gift of alms to the poor. The visit mentioned in Gal. ii. 1, synchronizes with Acts xv. 1, sq., when Paul went to attend the Apostolic council.—G.B.S.

496 The incredulity of the Christians at Jerusalem concerning the genuineness of Saul’s conversion is difficult to understand, especially since they must have heard of the miraculous manner of it. It can, however, more readily be conceived of if, as we suppose, the three years absence from the city had intervened, and during this period, Saul had been unheard of. The impression might have gone abroad that he had fallen back into his old Jewish life. Certainly the persecution which the Christians at Jerusalem had suffered at his hands would incline them to be incredulous concerning his conversion, unless there were positive proof of it. When it is said (27) that Barnabas brought Paul “to the apostles” in Jerusalem, we must hold this statement subject to the modification made in Paul’s own statement (Gal. i. 18) that during this visit he saw, of the apostles, only Peter and James, the Lord’s brother. These may have been the only apostles then in the city, for Paul’s stay was but for fifteen days. The purpose of this visit was to see Peter (Gal. i. 18).—G.B.S.

497 A. B. C. ἐκεῖνο. Βαρνάβας δὲ ἄνθρωπος ἐπιεικὴς καὶ ἥμερος ἥν· καὶ ὅρα κ. τ. λ. Cat. ἐκεῖ. Βαρνάβας ἄνθρωπος ἐπιεικὴς ἦν· καὶ ὅρα. The epithet ἥμερος, “tamed,” was felt to be unsuitable to Barnabas, hence Cat. omits it, Œc. substitutes (from below) καὶ χρηστὸς σφόδρα. The mod. t. transposes the clause to the comment on v. 27. The fact seems to be, that Βαρνάβας δὲ is out of its place, and that ἄνθρ. ἐπ. καὶ ἡμ. is a description of Saul’s present bearing contrasted with his former character: and that the sentence should begin with ἐκεῖνο, somewhat in this way: οὐ γὰρ ἦν ὄντως προσδοκίας ἀνθρωπίνης. ᾽Εκεῖνο e.g. τὸ θήριον, that raging wild-beast, now was a man, mild and gentle.—Below, all the mss. have ἅτε μαθητὴν ὄντα, which is not easily reconciled with the former passage (note c). There it is represented, that he assayed to join himself to the disciples as being a teacher, and not a disciple; here, that he did this as being a disciple, and διὰ τὸ μετριάζειν. Œc, combines this with the former statement: “he went not to the Apostles, but assayed,” etc., μετριάζων, ἅτε διδ. ὢν, καὶ οὐ μαθ., where Henten. renders modeste de se sentiens “quum tamen” præceptor esset et non discipulus: rather, forbearing to put himself forward as he might have done, seeing he was himself a teacher, etc. The Catena has the διὰ τὸ μετριάζειν after ἀπιόντα, and again after ὄντα. Hence the true reading may be, καὶ ὅρα αὐτὸν οὐ πρὸς τ. ἀπ. ἀπιόντα, ἀλλὰ πρὸς τοὺς μαθητάς· οὐχ ἃτε μαθητὴν ὄντα, ἀλλὰ διὰ τὸ μετριάζειν.

498 A. B. C. (and Cat.) give the text, “But Barnabas—in the way,” continuously, and then the comments all strung together. Also the clause “it is likely—about him” is placed last, after γοργὸς ἦν ὁ ἀνήρ. This expression (Cat. adds γὰρ) may denote either the quick, keen glance of Paul’s eye, or the terror with which he was regarded—“to them the man had a terrible look with him.”—The modern text: “‘But Barnabas—in the way.’ This Barnabas was a mild and gentle sort of man. ‘Son of Consolation’ is the meaning of his name: whence also he became a friend to Paul. And that he was exceedingly kind and accessible, is proved both from the matter in hand, and from the affair of John. Whence he is not afraid, but relates ‘how he had seen,’ etc.—‘in the name of the Lord Jesus.’ For it is likely, etc. Wherefore also ταῦτα ἐκείνων κατασκευαστικὰ ποιῶν, διὰ τῶν ἔργων ἐβεβαίωσε τὰ λεχθέντα.” In the original text it is simply Ταῦτα ἐκείνων κατασκευαστικά, καί διὰ τῶν ἔργων ἐβεβαίωσε τὰ λεχθέντα, which being put before v. 28, would mean, that the conduct of Paul “in Damascus,” the πῶς ἐπαρρησ., evidenced the truth of what he said, about the Lord’s appearing to him in the way. Hence in the mod. text: “wherefore Barnabas making the latter prove the former, confirmed by (Paul’s) deeds the things told of him.” (But Ben., Ideo hæc ad illa præparant, dum ille operibus dicta confirmat. Erasm., Ideo et hæc præparatoria facit operibus confirmans ea quæ dicta erant.) We have transposed the clause, as comment on v. 28.

499 This and the next clause are transposed in the mss. so that ἐπ᾽ αὐτῶν would mean “in the case of the brethren.”

500 The reason given in v. 30 for Paul’s leaving Jerusalem is, that he was in danger of being slain by his opponents; that assigned by himself in xxii. 17, 18 is a revelation of the Lord given to him when in a trance in the temple, warning him that Jerusalem would not receive his message, and charging him to go unto the Gentiles. The two explanations have a common element in the opposition of the Jews and Hellenists at Jerusalem to Paul and their rejection of his message. “Paul, notwithstanding the opposition and machinations of the Jews, may have felt desirous to remain: he had a warm heart toward his brethren according to the flesh; he was eager for their conversion; and it required a revelation from Christ himself to cause him to comply with the importunity of his friends and to depart. Luke mentions the external reason; Paul the internal motive.” (Gloag.)—G.B.S.

501 A. B. C. of N.T. and vulg. Hieron. have the singular throughout; and so Cat. in 1. Edd. from E. the plural throughout: our other mss.; οἰκοδομούενοι and πορευόμενοι (F. D. περισσευόμενοι), “they being edified” etc., in apposition with ᾽Εκκλησία.

502 i.e. ‘If Paul had remained there would not have been peace and quiet.’ It is doubtful, as the text stands, whether the subject to ᾐδοῦντο is, the Jewish believers, or, the adversaries: and κατεφρόνουν, ἠγρίαινον seem inconsistent as predicated of the same persons. Perhaps what Chrys. said is not fully reported, and the text may be completed thus: (comp. p. 304,) “there is no war from without, nor disturbance within. For the Jewish believers respected the Apostles, as having often stood by them, and the unbelievers durst not attack them as being had in admiration by the people: but as for Paul, the one party—viz. the zealous Jewish believers, ‘the profound Hebrews,’ despised him, while the others—viz. the unbelievers were more savage against him.” Edd. (from E. alone). “And why, you may ask, does he this, and ‘passes through’ when there is peace, and after Paul’s departure, i.e. why does Peter delay his journey until Paul is gone, and all is quiet? Because them they most respected, as having,” etc.

503 Καὶ ἔνθα οἰκονομία· ἔνθα δὲ, κ. τ. λ. It does not appear what οἰκονομία can be intended, unless it be the order taken for the appointment of the deacons, but this was the act of all the Apostles, vi. 2. Hence perhaps the reading should be: ἔνθα δὲ οἰκονομία, καὶ ἔνθα.…“But where management (or regulation) only is concerned, and where all is peace,” etc.

504 εἴπου (ἤπου, B) ἐν τάξει παρέργου τοῦτο ᾔτουν (ἦν, C.), προηγουμένως δὲ οὐκ ἔτι, μαθήτρια γὰρ ἦν. A. B. C. Cat. But Edd. ὥστε δεῖξαι ὅτι ἐν κ. τ. λ. and μαθήτρια γὰρ ἦν before προηγ. Œcum, ἐν τάξει γὰρ παρ. τοῦτο ᾔτουν, μαθ. γὰρ ἦν, omitting. προηγ. δὲ οὐκέτι.—“If the place had not been near, they would not have made the request: for it was asking him to put himself out of his way, to do this over and above, and not in the regular course.”—This is a hint to the hearers that they should show the like forbearance and discretion, in not giving their Bishop unnecessary trouble.

505 ῾Ορᾷς ἐλεημοσύνης πόση γίνεται προτροπή. Edd. from E, “Thus is here fulfilled the saying, ‘Alms delivereth from death. And all the widows,’” etc. Below, for Εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν εἰσήει ὁ Πέτρος ὡς φιλοσοφῶν· ὅρα δὲ πόση ἡ ἐπίδοσις γέγονεν: the same have, “Where she was laid out dead, they take Peter, τάχα οἰ& 231·μενοι πρὸς φιλοσοφίαν αὐτῷ τι χαρίζεσθαι, perhaps thinking to give him a subject for elevated thought. Seest thou,” etc.—The meaning seems to be, “Peter went to see the dead body, expecting no miracle, but only as one who could bear such sights, and would teach others to do so: but see what a mighty additional boon came of it!”

506 In the mss. Καὶ κρατήσας, φησί, τῆς χειρός. & 169·Ορα (E. Edd. ᾽Ενταῦθα δείκνυσι) κατὰ μέρος κ. τ. λ. But the passage cited is from Luke viii. 52, καὶ κρατήσας τῆς χειρὸς αὐτῆς, ἐφώνησε κ. τ. λ. to which, and probably to the ἐκβαλὼν ἔξω πάντας there preceding, St. Chrys. here referred.

507 Edd. from E. ὃς καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ἔκρινε διελθεῖν, ἐπείδη τῆς αὐτοῦ διδασκαλίας ἐδέοντο οἱ πιστεύσαντες. “Who also for this reason judged it right to make this circuit, because those who had believed needed his instruction.”

“Assayed,” it says, “to join himself to the disciples.” (Recapitulation, v. 26.) He did not come up to them unabashed, but with a subdued manner. “Disciples”⁵⁰⁸

508 The modern text: “He calls by the name of ‘disciples’ even those who were not included in the company of the twelve (Apostles), because they were all called disciples,” etc.

509 Here the modern text has: “And the Churches had peace, being edified, and walking in the fear of the Lord:” i.e. they increased, and (had peace), peace as it is in itself, the true peace, εἰρήνην αὐτὴν δὴπου πρὸς ἑαυτὴν, τὴν ὄντως εἰρήνην.” (The singular ἡ ᾽Εκκλ. being altered to the plural, the reference in πρὸς ἑαυτὴν was not perceived.) “With good reason. For the war from without exceedingly afflicted them. ‘And were filled with the consolation of the Holy Ghost.’” See p. 136, note 3.

510 Something must be supplied: e.g. “He did not wait for Eneas to ask, or to show his faith,” as above, p. 301.—Edd. from E. “‘And it came to pass—maketh thee whole.’ It is not the word of one making a display, but of confidence that the thing shall be. And it does very much seem to me, that the sick man believed this word, and was made whole. That Peter is unassuming, is clear from what follows. For he said not, In the Name of Jesus, but rather as a miracle he narrates it. ‘And they that dwelt at Lydda saw, and turned unto the Lord.’ It was not for nothing that I said, that the miracles were wrought in order to persuade and comfort. ‘But in Joppa—and died.’ Do you mark the miracles everywhere taking place? It is not merely said, etc. Wherefore also they do not call Peter until she was dead. ‘And having heard, (that Peter was there) the disciples sent,’” etc.

511 ᾽Αλλ᾽ ὡς σημεῖον μᾶλλον αὐτὸ (αὐτὸς B.) διηγεῖται καὶ εὐαγγελίζεται: “he speaks not in the form of command or promise, but of narration: he relates it, Evangelist-like, as a fact.”

512 ῞Ορα πῶς διακαθαίρεται τὰ πράγματα (omitted in E. D. F. Edd.): i.e. how the Gospel has purged away all excess of mourning, and all noisy demonstrations of grief. St. Chrys. frequently inveighs against the heathenish customs of mourning for the dead, which were still practised—such as the hiring of heathen mourning-women: Hom. in Matt. xxxi. p. 207. A. “I confess to you, I am ashamed when I see the troops of women tearing their hair, gashing their flesh, as they move through the market—and this under the very eyes of the heathen.” Conc. in Laz. v. t. i. p. 765 D. where the Christian mode of interment is described; viz. the procession of clergy with psalms and hymns of praise, lighted tapers, etc. comp. Hom. iv. in Heb. (ii. 15.)

⁵¹³

513 ῎Ενθα γὰρ δάκρυα, μᾶλλον δὲ ἔνθα θαύματα, οὐ δεῖ δάκρυα παρεῖναι· ἔνθα τοιοῦτον μυστήριον τελεῖται. It seems, he was going to say, “Where tears are, it is no fit time for miracles,” but corrects himself, for put in that way the proposition was not true. The innovator weakly substitutes, “For where tears are, such a mystery ought not to be performed: or rather, where miracles are, there tears ought not to be.”

514 The rest of the Hom. is given in the Florilegium or Eclogæ, in t. xii. ecl. xlv.—the only instance in which these Homilies have been employed in that compilation. Its author used the old text: it does not appear that any of his various readings were derived from the modern text.

515 ἐπὶ τῶν εὐδοκίμων: i.e. those who are certainly not reprobates (οὐκ ἀδοκίμων). In the next sentence, E. Edd. καὶ τί πρὸς σὲ, ἄνθρωπε; σὺ γὰρ οὐδὲ ἐπὶ τῶν εὐδοκ. τοῦτο ποιεῖς. Ben. Et quid hoc ad te, o homo? tu enim erga probos hoc non agis. Erasm. tu enim neque apud probatissimos hoc agis. The other mss. and Ecl. τί οὖν…ὅτι.

516 ῞Οταν δὲ ἀνακαλούμενος ῥ& 208·ματα λέγῃς καὶ συνήθειαν καὶ προστασίαν, so mss. and Edd. but Ecl. ἀνακαλουμένου, which we adopt. To the same purport, but more fully, Hom. xii. in 1 Cor. p. 392. (and Ecl. xlv.) “If when some (friend) were taken into the palace and crowned, thou shouldest bewail and lament, I should not call thee the friend of him that is crowned, but very much his hater and enemy. ‘But now, say you, I do not bewail him, but myself.’ But neither is this the part of a friend, that for thine own sake thou wouldest have him still in the contest, etc. ‘But I know not where he is gone.’ How knowest thou not, answer me? For whether he lived rightly or otherwise, it is plain where he will go. ‘Why, this is the very reason why I do bewail—because he departed a sinner.’ This is mere pretence. If this were the reason of thy lamenting him that is gone, thou oughtest while he was alive to have amended him, and formed his manners,” etc.

517 Εἰ γὰρ Παῦλος ἕτερον ἠλέ& 219·σε, καὶ δἰ ἄλλους ἄλλων (Ecl. ἄλλον) ἐφείσατο, πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἡμᾶς τοῦτο δεῖ ποιεῖν. But E. Edd. Εἰ διὰ Παῦλον ἑτέρους διέσωσε, καὶ δἰ ἄλλους ἄλλων φείδεται, πῶς οὐχὶ καὶ δἰ ἡμᾶς τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐργάσεται; “If (God) for Paul’s sake saved others, and for some men’s sake spares other men, how shall He not for our sakes do this same thing?” In Hom. xli. in 1 Cor. p. 393. B. Chrys. uses for illustration Job’s sacrifice for his sons, and adds, “For God is wont to grant favors to others in behalf of others, ἑτέροις ὑπὲρ ἑτέρων χαρίζεσθαι. And this Paul showed, saying, ῞Ινα ἐν πολλῷ προσώπῳ, κ. τ. λ. 2 Cor. i. 11.” But here the reference seems to be to 2 Cor. ii. 10, “To whom ye forgive anything, I forgive also; for if I forgave anything, to whom I forgave it, ‘for your sakes’ forgave I it in the person of Christ.”—St. Chrysostom constantly teaches, as here, that the souls of the departed are aided by the prayers, alms, and Eucharistic oblations of the living, Hom. xli. in 1 Cor. u. s. “Even if he did depart a sinner,…we ought to succor him, in such sort as may be (ὡς ἂν οἷ& 231·ν τε ᾖ), not by tears, but by prayers and supplications, and alms and oblations. For not idly have these things been devised, nor to no purpose do we make mention of the departed in the Divine Mysteries, and for them draw near, beseeching the Lamb Which lieth there, Which taketh away the sins of the world, but in order that some consolation may thence come to them. Nor in vain does he that stands beside the altar, while the dread Mysteries are celebrating, cry out, ‘For all that sleep in Christ, and for them that make the memorials for them.’” See also Hom. iii. ad Phil. p. 217, 218. Comp. St. Cyrill. Hier. Catech. Mystag. v. §9, St. Augustin, Serm. 172.

How then if one be poor? say you. Again I say, the greatness of the alms is not estimated by the quantity given, but by the purpose. Only give not less than thine ability, and thou hast paid all. How then, say you, if he be desolate and a stranger, and have none to care for him? And why is it that he has none, I ask you? In this very thing thou sufferest thy desert, that thou hast none to be thus thy friend, thus virtuous. This is so ordered on purpose that, though we be not ourselves virtuous, we may study to have virtuous companions and friends—both wife, and son, and friend—as reaping some good even through them, a slight gain indeed, but yet a gain. If thou make it thy chief object not to marry a rich wife,⁵¹⁸

518 εὐλᾶβῆ γυναῖκα καὶ θυγάτριον ἀγαγέσθαι σεμνόν. A. B. C. In the Edd. καὶ θυγ. σεμνὸν, is transposed after μὴ πλουτοῦντα υἱ& 232·ν καταλιπεῖν ἀλλ᾽ εὐλαβῆ: and so in the Ecl. which however retains ἀγ, between θυγ. and σεμνόν. In the old text, wife and daughter are mentioned first, as the persons most apt to perform these offices of religion: in ἀγαγέσθαι there is a zeugma; “to take to wife, and to have wife and daughter, etc.”

519 Hom.iii. in Phil. ad fin. Οὐκ εἰκῆ ταῦτα ἐνομοθετήθη ὑτὸ τῶν ἀποστόλων κ. τ. λ. “Not idly were these things enacted by the Apostles, that in the dread mysteries there is mention made of the departed: they know that to them great is the gain which accrues, great the benefit. For when the whole congregation stands there, all lifting up their hands, the sacerdotal body (πλήρωμα ἱερατικὸν), and the dread sacrifice is laid out, how shall we fail to prevail with God, in supplicating for these?”

520 Τί οἴει τὸ ὑπὲρ μαρτύρων προσφέρεσθαι, τὸ κληθῆναι ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ὥρᾳ κἂν μάρτυρες ὦσι, κἂν (καὶ A. ὑπὲρ μαρτύρων; There is no reason to suppose (as Neander, Der Heilige Johannes Chrysostomus, t. ii. p. 162) that the words κἂν μάρτυρες κ. τ. λ. are part of the Liturgy: the meaning is, Think what a great thing it is to be mentioned in that Prayer of Oblation; to be mentioned as the martyrs are mentioned, for of them also, martyrs though they be, the same form of expression is used, ὑπὲρ μαρτύρων.—In the Liturgy of St. Chrysostom the words are, ῎Ετι προσφέρομεν σοι τὴν λογικὴν ταύτην λατρείαν ὑπὲρ τῶν ἐν πίστει ἀναπαυομένων προπατόρων, πατέρων, πατριαρχῶν, προφητῶν, ἀποστόλων, κηρύκων, εὐαγγελιστῶν, μαρτύρων κ. τ. λ. See St. Augustin, Hom. on St John, p. 842, note a.

521 i.e. not to intercede on their behalf, but for commemoration of Christ’s victory over death, achieved in Himself and in them. The Eucharist is, so to say, Christ’s ἐπινίκια, in which the Martyrs are eulogized as sharers of His triumph (and this is our commemoration of truth), and the prisoners are set at liberty (and in this sense we name our dead).

E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH