Acts X. 23, 24

“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.” (v. 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.” (v. 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.” (v. 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 this⁵⁵⁴

554 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.

555 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 xi. 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. ii. 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.

556 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.

557 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.

558 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.”

559 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. ii. 16, 17, 20; 2 Chron. vi. 42; cf. Gen. xxxii. 21; 1 Kgs. v. i.)—G.B.S.

560 The pertinent comments of Dr. Gloag may here be fitly introduced (v. 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.

561 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 (38) must be construed as the object (resumed in another form) of ὑμεῖς οἴδατε (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 viii. 40).—G.B.S.

562 ᾽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 xiii. 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.”

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) “and⁵⁶³

563 The letters denote the order of the parts in the mss. and Edd.

564 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.)”

565 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.

566 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.

567 Perhaps it should be φαντασθῇ, “that he (Cornelius) may not imagine,” etc., therefore he mentions first the Divine Mission, then the Crucifixion.

568 ταύτης δὲ οὐδὲν οὕτω σημεῖον μεῖζον ἦν, ὡς τὸ φαγεῖν καὶ πιεῖν. Cat. rightly omits μεῖζον ἦν. E. Edd. οὕτως εἰς ἀπόδειξιν μεῖζον, ὡς.

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)⁵⁶⁹

569 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.

570 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.

571 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.

572 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.

573 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.

574 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.”

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. Therefore⁵⁷⁵

575 ῞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.

E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH