Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Homily XXXIV on Acts xv. 35. PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP
Homily XXXIV.
Acts XV. 35
“Paul also and Barnabas
continued in Antioch, teaching and preaching the word of the Lord, with
many others also.”
Observe again their humility, how they let others also take part in the
preaching. “And some days after Paul said unto Barnabas, Let us
go again and visit our brethren in every city where we have preached
the word of the Lord, and see how they do. And Barnabas determined to
take with them John, whose surname was Mark. But Paul thought not good
(ἡξίου see note 3, p.
213) to take him with them, who departed from them from Pamphylia, and
went not with them to the work. And the contention (or exasperation)
was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the
other.” (v.
36–39.) And already indeed Luke has described to us the character
of the Apostles,791
791 mss. and Edd. after τῶν
ἀποστόλων add τῶν
λοιπῶν, which we
omit as evidently out of place: for “the Apostles” here are
Paul and Barnabas. Possibly it should be διὰ τῶν
λοιπῶν,
“by the rest of the particulars related on former
occasions,” but if so, this must be placed after τῶν ἀπ. τὸ
ἦθος. | that the one was
more tender and indulgent, but this one more strict and austere. For
the gifts are diverse—(the gifts, I say), for that this is a gift
is manifest—but the one befitting one, the other another set of
characters, and if they change places, harm results instead of good.
(b) In the Prophets792
792 The
notes of this Homily have fallen into extreme confusion, and we have
but partially succeeded in restoring the true order. | too we find this:
diverse minds, diverse characters: for instance, Elias austere, Moses
meek. So here Paul is more vehement. And observe for all this, how
gentle he is. “Thought not good,” it says, “to take
him with them that had departed from them from Pamphylia.”
(a) And there seems indeed to be exasperation (παροξυσμός), but in fact the whole matter is a plan of the Divine
Providence, that each should receive his proper place: and it behooved
that they should not be upon a par, but the one should lead, and the
other be led. “And so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus;
and Paul chose Silas, and departed, being recommended by the brethren
unto the grace of God. And he went through Syria and Cilicia,
confirming the Churches.” (v.
39–41.) And this also is a work of Providence. For the Cyprians
had exhibited nothing of the like sort as they at Antioch and the rest:
and those needed the softer character, but these needed such a
character as Paul’s. “Which793
793 Mod. text omits this question: C. for ἀφεὶς has ἀφεθεὶς,
“he that was left, or, dismissed.” Part of the answer has
dropped out, “Paul did well: for” etc. The interlocutor
rejoins: “Then if Paul did well, Barnabas did ill?” Here
Edd. and all our mss. οὐκοῦν,
φησὶ, κακὸς ὁ
Βαρνάβας; to which mod. text adds, “By no means: but it is even
exceedingly absurd to imagine this. And how is it not absurd to say,
that for so small a matter this man became evil?” We
restore οὐκοῦν
κακῶς ὁ
Βαρνάβας; |
then,” say you, “did well? he that took, or he that
left?” *** (c) For just as a general would not choose to
have a low person always to his baggage-bearer, so neither did the
Apostle. This corrected the other’s, and instructed (Mark)
himself. “Then did Barnabas ill?” say you. “And how
is it not amiss (ἄτοπον), that upon so small a matter there should arise so great an
evil?” In the first place then, no evil did come of it, if,
sufficing each for whole nations, they were divided the one from the
other, but a great good. And besides, they would not readily have
chosen to leave each other. But admire, I pray you, the writer, how he
does not conceal this either. “But at any rate,” say you,
“if they must needs part, let it be without exasperation.”
Nay, but if nothing more, observe this, that in this too is shown what
was of man794
794 μάλιστα
μὲν οὖν καὶ
ἐντεῦθεν (as by other instances of human infirmity, so by this also)
δείκνυται
τὰ
ἀνθρώπινα, i.e. we are shown what in the preaching of the Gospel
proceeded from man: that man, as man, did his part, which part is
betokened by the ordinary characters of human nature. If even in Christ
it behooved that He should not do all as God, but that His Human Nature
should also be seen working, much more was it necessary that the
Apostles, being but men, should work as men, not do all by the
immediate power of the Spirit. | (in the preaching of the Gospel).
For if the like behooved to be shown (even) in what Christ did, much
more here. And besides, the contention cannot be said to be evil, when
each disputes for such objects (as here) and with just reason. I grant
you, if the exasperation were in seeking his own, and contending for
his own honor, this might well be (reproved): but if wishing, both the
one and the other, to instruct and teach, the one took this way and the
other that, what is there to find fault with? For in many things they
acted upon their human judgment; for they were not stocks or stones.
And observe how Paul impeaches (Mark), and gives the reason. For of his
exceeding humility795
795 This
refers to ἠξίου in
the sense “he begged,” as he says below, in the beginning
of the Recapitulation, καίτοι οὐκ
ἔδει ἀξιοῦν
αὐτὸν ἔχοντα
κατηγορεῖν
μετὰ ταῦτα. | he reverenced
Barnabas, as having been partner with him in so great works, and being
with him: but still he did not so reverence him, as to overlook (what
was necessary). Now which of them advised best, it is not for us to
pronounce: but thus far (we may affirm), that it was a great
arrangement of Providence, if these796
796 If
this sentence be in its place, something is wanting for connection:
e.g. (It was a great οἰκονομία) for the more extended preaching of the word: since on
Barnabas’s plan these “at Cyprus” were to have a
second visitation, but those “in Asia” not even once. But
it may be suspected that this part is altogether misplaced: and that
the οὗτοι are the
brethren “in the cities where we have preached,” and
ἐκεῖνοι the
people of Macedonia," etc. See end of Recap. where Chrys. says, had it
not been for this parting, the word would not have been carried into
Macedonia. | were to be
vouchsafed a second visitation, but those were not to be visited even
once.797
797 Chrys. has treated the dissension of Paul and Barnabas with
discrimination, without, however, placing quite the emphasis
upon ἠξίου—“he thought good not to”—“he
determined not to”—and upon τον
ἀποστάντα—“who had fallen away from—apostatized
from,”—which those terms seem to require. The conduct of
Mark in returning to Jerusalem from Pamphylia (Acts xiii. 13) was clearly
regarded as reprehensible by Paul, apparently as an example of
fickleness in the service of Christ. It is not strange that Barnabas,
Mark’s cousin (Col. iv. 10) should have been
more lenient in his judgment of his conduct. It is certain that this
difference of opinion regarding Mark did not lead to any estrangement
of Paul and Mark, for in his imprisonment the apostle speaks of Mark as
a trusted fellow-worker (Col. iv. 10; 2 Tim. iv.
11).—G.B.S. |
(a) “Teaching and
preaching the word of the Lord.” (v. 35.) They798
798 The method of the derangement here is, that there being five
portions, these were taken alternately, in the order 1, 3, 5, and then
2, 4. | did not simply
tarry in Antioch, but taught. What did they “teach,” and
what “preach” (evangelize)? They both (taught) those that
were already believers, and (evangelized) those that were not yet such.
“And some days after,” etc. (v. 36.) For because there were offences without number, their
presence was needed. (d) “How they do,” he says. And
this he did not know: naturally. See him ever alert, solicitous, not
bearing to sit idle, though he underwent dangers without end. Do you
mark, it was not of cowardice that he came to Antioch? He acts just as
a physician does in the case of the sick. And the need of visiting them
he showed by saying, “In which we preached the word. And Barnabas
determined,” etc. (v.
37–40.) (So) Barnabas799
799 So
Edd. and all our mss. ἀπέστη ἀπ᾽
αὐτῶν ὁ
Βαρνάβας: which may mean, “And so the same may now be said of
Barnabas, viz. that he departed (from Paul),” etc. The same
word ἀπέστη is
applied to Barnabas below, p. 216. | “departed,
and went not with (him).” (b) The point to be considered,
is not that they differed in their opinions, but that they accommodated
themselves the one to the other (seeing), that thus it was a greater
good their being parted:800
800 συγκατέβησαν
ἀλλήλοις
οὕτω μεῖζον
ἀγαθὸν εἶναι
τὸ
χωρισθῆναι. The meaning is as below, that they parted κατὰ
σύνεσιν.
Mod. text “συγκατ. ἀλλ.
ἰδεῖν. The point
required is to see that,” etc. Then, Οὕτω μ. ἀ.
γέγονε τὸ
χωρ. “Thus their being
parted became a greater good,” etc.—Καὶ
πρόφασιν ἐκ
τούτου τὸ
πρᾶγμα
ἔλαβε, i.e.
“They saw that it was best to part viz.: that so the word would
be more extensively preached, and this difference gave a pretext for so
doing.” He means that the contention was οἰκονομία
(see the Recap.), the object being, partly this which
is here mentioned, partly a lesson to Mark. | and the matter took
a pretext from this. What then? did they withdraw in enmity? God
forbid! In fact you see after this Barnabas receiving many encomiums
from Paul in the Epistles. There was “sharp contention,” it
says, not enmity nor quarrelling. The contention availed so far as to
part them. “And Barnabas took Mark,” etc. And with reason:
for what each supposed to be profitable, he did not forego801
801 Edd.
and mss. οὐ
προσήκατο, against the sense of the passage, whence Œcum. omits
the negative, not much improving it. The Catena has preserved the true
reading, οὐ
προήκατο. See instances of confusion the other way in Mr. Field’s
Index to Hom. in Matt. s. v. προσίημι. | thereafter, because of the fellowship with
the other. Nay, it seems to me that the parting took place advisedly
(κατὰ
σύνεσιν),
and that they said one to another, “As I wish not, and thou
wishest, therefore that we may not fight, let us distribute the
places.” So that in fact they did this, altogether yielding each
to the other: for Barnabas wished Paul’s plan to stand, therefore
withdrew; on the other hand, Paul wished the other’s plan to
stand, therefore he withdrew. Would to God we too made such
separations, as to go forth for preaching. A wonderful man this is; and
exceedingly great! To Mark this contest was exceedingly beneficial. For
the awe inspired by Paul converted him, while the kindness of Barnabas
caused that he was not left behind: so that they contend indeed, but
the gain comes to one and the same end. For indeed, seeing Paul
choosing to leave him, he would be exceedingly awed, and would condemn
himself, and seeing Barnabas so taking his part, he would love him
exceedingly: and so the disciple was corrected by the contention of the
teachers: so far was he from being offended thereby. For if indeed they
did this with a view to their own honor, he might well be offended: but
if for his salvation, and they contend for one and the same object, to
show that he who honored him * * * had well determined,802
802 ὥστε
δεῖξαι τὸν
τιμήσαντα
αὐτὸν καλῶς
βεβουλευμένον. The sense requires τὸν τιμ.
αὐτὸν καὶ
τὸν μὴ
τιμήσαντα
καλῶς βεβ. or the like: “that both Barnabas and Paul had taken the
course which was for his (Mark’s) own good.” | what is there amiss (ἄτοπον) in
it?
(e) “But
Paul,” it says, “departed, having chosen Silas, and being
commended to the grace of God.” What is this? They prayed it
says: they besought God. See on all occasions how the prayer of the
brethren can do great things. And now he journeyed by land, wishing
even by his journeying to benefit those who saw (τοὺς
ὁρὥντας)
him. For when indeed they were in haste they sailed, but now not so.
(c) “And he went through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the
Churches. Then came he to Derbe and Lystra.” (v. 41.) Mark the wisdom of Paul: he does not go to other cities
before he has visited them which had received the Word. For it is folly
to run at random. This let us also do: let us teach the first in the
first place, that these may not become an hindrance to them that are to
come after.
“And, behold a certain
disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which
was a Jewess, and believed; but his father was a Greek: which was well
reported of by the brethren that were at Lystra and Iconium. Him would
Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him because of
the Jews which were in those quarters; for they knew all that his
father was a Greek.” (ch. xvi.
1–3.) It is indeed amazing, the wisdom of Paul! He that has had so
many battles about circumcision, he that moved all things to this end,
and did not give over until he had carried his point, now that the
decree is made sure, circumcises the disciple. He not only does not
forbid others, but himself does this thing. (b)
“Him,” it says, “he would have to go forth with
him.” And the wonder is this, that he even took him unto him.803
803 ὅτι
καὶ ἐπήγετο
αὐτόν. The meaning
seems to be, (but the confusion into which the text has fallen, leaves
it very uncertain), “The wonder is that he took Timothy, being as
he was the son of a heathen father, and
uncircumcised.” | “Because of the Jews,” it
says, “which were in those parts:” for they would not
endure to hear the word from one uncircumcised. (a) Nothing
could be wiser. So that in all things he looked to what was profitable:
he did nothing upon his own preference (προλήψει). (c) And what (then)? Mark the success: he
circumcised, that he might take away circumcision: for he preached the
decrees of the Apostles. “And as they went through the cities,
they delivered them the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of the
Apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem. And so were the Churches
established in the faith, and increased in number daily.”
(v. 4, 5.) Dost thou mark
fighting, and by fighting, edification? Not warred upon by others, but
themselves doing contrary things, so they edified the Church! They
introduced a decree not to circumcise, and he circumcises! “And
so were the Churches,” it says, “established in the
faith,” and in multitude: “increased,” it says,
“in number daily.” Then he does not continue to tarry with
these, as having come to visit them: but how? he goes further.
“Now when they had gone throughout Phrygia and the region of
Galatia, and were forbidden of the Holy Ghost to preach the word in
Asia,” (v. 6.) having left Phrygia
and Galatia, they hastened into the interior. For, it says,
“After they were come to Mysia, they assayed to go into Bithynia:
but the Spirit suffered them not.” (v. 7.) Wherefore they were forbidden, he does not say, but that
they were “forbidden,” he does say, teaching us to obey and
not ask questions, and showing that they did many things as men.
“And the Spirit,” it says, “suffered them not: but
having passed by Mysia they came down to Troas.” (v. 8.) “And a vision
appeared to Paul in the night; There stood a man of Macedonia, and
prayed him, saying, Come over into Macedonia, and help us.”
(v. 9.) Why a vision, and not
the Holy Ghost? because He forbade the other.804
804 ὅτι
ἐκεῖνο
ἐκώλυσεν. Mod. text καὶ
μὴ τὸ Πν. τὸ A. ἐκέλευσεν; But see the Recap. where the question is explained, viz.,
How is it that when they were to be kept from preaching, the Holy Ghost
spoke to them, but here a vision, and that in a dream, is
all? | He
would even in this way draw them over: since to the saints also He
appeared in a dream, and in the beginning (Paul) himself saw a vision,
“a man coming in and laying his hands upon him.”
(ch. ix. 12.) In805
805 In
the mss. this sentence is placed before
“And now he crosses over,” etc. v. 10.—“In this manner:” i.e. in a night-vision
or dream; the allusion is to xxiii.
11,
“the Lord stood by him,” confused with xxvii, 23, “the Angel of
the Lord.” | this manner also Christ appears to him,
saying, “Thou must stand before Cæsar.” Then for this
reason also He draws him thither, that the preaching may be extended.
This is why he was forbidden to tarry long in the other cities, Christ
urging him on. For these were to enjoy the benefit of John for a long
time, and perhaps did not extremely need him (Paul), but thither he
behooved to go. And now he crosses over and goes forth. “And
after he had seen the vision, immediately we endeavored to go into
Macedonia, assuredly gathering that the Lord had called us for to
preach the Gospel unto them.” (v. 10.) Then the writer mentions also the places, as relating a
history, and showing where he made a stay (namely), in the greater
cities, but passed by the rest. “Therefore loosing from Troas, we
came with a straight course to Samothracia, and the next day to
Neapolis; and from thence to Philippi, which is the chief city of that
part of Macedonia, and a colony.” (v. 11, 12.) It is a high
distinction for a city, the being a colony. “And in this city we
were tarrying certain days.” But let us look over again what has
been said.
(Recapitulation.) “And
after some days, Paul said,” etc. (ch. xv. 36.) He put to Barnabas a
necessity for their going abroad, saying “Let us visit the cities
in which we preached the word.” “But Paul begged,”
etc. (v. 38.) And yet no need for
him to beg, who had to make an accusation presently. This806
806 i.e.
just displeasure on the one side; lenity, compassion, intercession,
etc. on the other. Thus God is wroth with Miriam, Moses pleads for her,
and so in the other cases. | happens even in the case where God and men
are the parties: the man requests, God is wroth. For instance, when He
saith, “If her father had spit in her face” (Num. xii. 14):
and again, “Let me alone, and in Mine anger I will blot out this
people.” (Ex. xxxii. 32.) And Samuel when he
mourns for Saul. (1 Sam. xv. 35.) For by both, great
good is done. Thus also here: the one is wroth, the other not so. The
same happens also in matters where we are concerned. And the sharp
contention with good reason, that Mark may receive a lesson, and the
affair may not seem mere stage-playing. For it is not to be thought
that he807
807 Mod. text omits this clause relating to St. Paul, as in the old
text it is incomplete, the remainder of the sentence (“would not
have been wroth,” etc.) having been transposed to the end of what
relates to Barnabas, after “relating to the
decree.”—Below, ἀλλὰ
λαμβάνουσιν
ἑαυτοὺς,
may perhaps be ἑαυτοῖς, sc. τοὺς
δεομένους below, i.e. choose their spheres of action where each was
most needed. But the context rather seems to require this sense:
“There is no animosity between them, but they take their parts in
this dispute for the good of those who, as Mark, need the instruction
which was to be derived from the gentleness of Barnabas, and the
severity of Paul’s character. Paul indeed is stern, but his
object is to do good: as 2 Thess. iii. 13,
where (comp. the context) rebuking, and enjoining severity to be shown
to the disorderly, he says, “And be not weary in
well-doing.” We have changed the order of the two sentences,
“And he rebukes,” etc. and, “As he does
elsewhere,” etc.—Τοῦτο καὶ ἐν
τῇ συνηθεί&
139· ποιοῦμεν. i.e. this putting on a show of anger, to do good to one
whom we would correct: or perhaps, of altercation, as when, for
instance, father and mother take opposite parts, the one for punishing,
the other for sparing an erring child—συναγανακτῆσαι
τῳ Παυλῷ.
Ben.indignati esse in Paulum. But whether it means this, or
“to have had indignation together with Paul,” there is
nothing to show: nor is it clear what is the reference of the following
sentences; unless it be, But he would not allow these persons who were
indignant along with, or at, him, to retain this feeling: he takes them
apart, makes them see the thing in its right light, and so departs in
peace, “being commended by the brethren to the grace of
God,” with the prayers of concord and charity. Great is the power
of such prayer. (See the former comment on this verse, p.
214.)—Κἂυ
ὑπὲρ μεγάλου
ἀξιοῖς, κἂν
ἀνάξιος ᾖς. Perhaps it should be ᾖ, “Whether it be on behalf of
a great man (as Paul), or whether the person be unworthy,”
etc. | who bids, “Let not the sun go down
upon your wrath,” (Eph. iv. 26) would have been
wroth because of such a matter as this: nor that he who on all
occasions gave way would not have given way here, he who so greatly
loved Paul that before this he sought him in Tarsus, and brought him to
the Apostles, and undertook the alms in common with him, and in common
the business relating to the decree. But they take themselves so as to
instruct and make perfect by their separation them that need the
teaching which was to come from them. And he rebukes others indeed, but
bids do good to all men. As in fact he does elsewhere, saying,
“But ye, be not weary in well-doing.” (2 Thess. iii. 13.)
This we also do in our common practice. Here it seems to me that others
also were alike displeased with Paul. And thereupon taking them also
apart, he does all, and exhorts and admonishes. Much can concord do,
much can charity. Though it be for a great matter thou askest; though
thou be unworthy, thou shalt be heard for thy purpose of heart: fear
not.
“He went,” it says,
“through” the cities “And, behold, there was a
disciple, by name Timothy, who had a good report of the brethren which
were in Lystra and Iconium.” (v. 41; xvi. 1.) Great was the grace
of Timothy. When Barnabas departed (ἀπέστη), he finds
another, equivalent to him. Of him he saith, “Remembering thy
tears and thy unfeigned faith, which dwelt first in thy grandmother
Lois, and in thy mother Eunice.” (2 Tim. i. 5.) His father
continued to be a Gentile,808
808 So
in Gen. Serm. ix. text iv. 695. D. Chrys. infers from this
passage with 2 Tim. i. 5, that the father
ἔμεινεν ἐν τῇ
ἀσεβεία καὶ
οὐ
μετεβάλλετο. Hom. i. in 2 Tim. p. 660. E.
“Because of his father who was a Gentile, and because of the Jews
he took and circumcised him. Do you mark how the Law began to be
dissolved, in the taking place of these mixed marriages?” (so
here ὅρα ἤδη τὸν
νόμον
λυόμενον.) In the mss. all this is extremely
confused by transpositions (the method; 1, 4: 2, 5: 3, 6) and
misplacing of the portions of sacred text (where these are given). Thus
here, “And therefore because of the Jews which were in those
parts he circumcised him. Οὐκ ἦν
ἐμπερίτομος.”—Mod. text “thy mother Eunice. And he
took and circumcised him. And wherefore, he himself goes on to say:
Because of the Jews, etc. For this reason then he is circumcised. Or
also because of his father: for he continued to be a Greek. So then he
was not circumcised. Observe the Law already broken. But some think he
was born,” etc. He is commenting on the fact, that Timothy was
uncircumcised: viz., because his father was a heathen. Here then was a
devout man, who from a child had known the Holy Scriptures, and yet
continued uncircumcised. So that in these mixed marriages we see the
Law already broken, independently of the Gospel. It may be indeed that
he was born after the conversion of his mother to the faith, and
therefore she was not anxious to circumcise him. But this (he adds) is
not likely. | and therefore it
was that (Timothy) was not circumcised. (a) Observe the Law
already broken. Or if not so, I suppose he was born after the preaching
of the Gospel but this is perhaps not so. (c) He was about to
make him a bishop, and it was not meet that he should be uncircumcised.
(e) And this was not a small matter, seeing it offended after so
long a time:809 (b) “for from a
child,” he says, “thou hast known the Holy
Scriptures.” (ib. iii.
15.)
(d) “And as they went through the cities, they delivered
them the decrees for to keep.” (v. 4.) For until then, there was no need for the Gentiles to
keep any such. The beginning of the abrogation was the Gentiles’
not keeping these things, and being none the worse for it: nor having
any inferiority in respect of faith: anon, of their own will they
abandoned the Law. (f) Since therefore he was about to preach,
that he might not smite the Jews a double blow, he circumcised Timothy.
And yet he was but half (a Jew by birth),810
810 Therefore he might have been exempt by the Apostles’ decree.
St. Paul, however, having carried his point in securing the immunity of
the Gentile converts, did not care to insist upon this in behalf of
Timothy. | his
father being a Greek: but yet, because that was a great point carried
in the cause of the Gentiles, he did not care for this: for the Word
must needs be disseminated: therefore also he with his own hands
circumcised him.811
811 Our
author correctly apprehends the ground on which Paul circumcised
Timothy—an act which has often been thought to be inconsistent
with his steadfast resistance to the imposition of the Jewish law. It
is noticeable that he did not allow Titus to be circumcised
(Gal. ii. 3) when the Jewish-Christian faction desired it. The two cases are
materially different in the following particulars: (1) Titus was a
Gentile; Timothy was born of a Jewish mother. (2) The circumcision of
Titus was demanded by the Judaizers; that of Timothy was performed for
prudential reasons as a concession to unbelieving Jews in order that
Paul might the better win them to Christ. (3) The question of
circumcising Titus was a doctrinal question which was not the case in
the instance before us. Meyer well says: “Paul acted according to
the principle of wise and conciliatory accommodation, not out of
concession to the Judaistic dogma of the necessity of circumcision for
obtaining the Messianic salvation.”—G.B.S. | “And so were
the churches established in the faith.” Do you mark here also how
from going counter (to his own object) a great good results? “And
increased in number daily.” (v. 5.) Do you observe, that the circumcising not only did no
harm, but was even of the greatest service? “And a vision
appeared unto Paul in the night.” (v. 9.) Not now by Angels, as to Philip, as to Cornellius, but
how? By a vision it is now shown to him: in more human sort, not now as
before (i.e., v. 6, 7) in more divine manner.
For where the compliance is more easy, it is done in more human sort;
but where great force was needed, there in more divine. For since he
was but urged to preach, to this end it is shown him in a dream: but to
forbear preaching, he could not readily endure: to this end the Holy
Ghost reveals it to him. Thus also it was then with Peter,
“Arise, go down.” (ch. x.
20.)
For of course the Holy Spirit did not work what was otherwise easy: but
(here) even a dream sufficed him. And to Joseph also, as being readily
moved to compliance, the appearance is in a dream, but to the rest in
waking vision. (Matt. i. 20; ii. 13, 19.) Thus to Cornelius,
and to Paul himself. “And lo, a man of Macedonia,” etc. and
not simply enjoining, but “beseeching,” and from the very
persons in need of (spiritual) cure. (ch. x. 3; ix. 3.) “Assuredly
gathering,” it says, “that the Lord had called us.”
(v. 10), that is, inferring,
both from the circumstance that Paul saw it and none other, and from
the having been “forbidden by the Spirit,” and from their
being on the borders; from all these they gathered. “Therefore
loosing from Troas, we came with a straight course,” etc.
(v. 11.) That is, even the
voyage made this manifest: for there was no tardiness. It became the
very root of Macedonia.812
812 A.
B. C. Cat. εἰς
αὐτὴν τὴν ῥ&
176·ζαν τῆς
Μακεδονίας
ἐγένετο (Cat. ἐγένοντο). Οὐκ
ἀεὶ (Cat., οὐκ ἂν
εἰ) κατὰ
παροξυσμὸν
ἐνήργησε τὸ
Πν. τὸ ῞Α. The
former sentence may possibly mean, that Philippi became the root of the
Churches in Macedonia. But it is more probable that the text is
mutilated here, and that Chrys. speaks of the parting of Paul and
Barnabas, as having become the very root or cause of the extension of
the Gospel (into Macedonia and Greece). In the next sentence, the
reading of Cat. may perhaps deserve the preference. “Not, if
(they had parted) in a state of exasperation, would the Holy Ghost have
(thus) wrought.”—Mod. text “And besides, even the
voyage showed this: for there was no long time ere they arrive at the
very root of Macedonia (ὅθεν
εἰς…παραγίνονται). So that the sharp contention is providentially ordered
to be for the best. For (otherwise) the Holy Ghost would not have
wrought, Macedonia would not have received the Word. But this so rapid
progress,” etc. | It was not always
in the way of “sharp contention” that the Holy Spirit
wrought: but this so rapid progress (of the Word) was a token that the
thing was more than human. And yet it is not said that Barnabas was
exasperated, but, “Between them there arose a sharp
contention.” (v.
39.)
If the one was not exasperated neither was the other.
Knowing this, let us not merely
pick out (ἐκλέγωμεν) these things, but let us learn and be taught by them: for
they were not written without a purpose. It is a great evil to be
ignorant of the Scriptures: from the things we ought to get good from,
we get evil. Thus also medicines of healing virtue, often, from the
ignorance of those who use them, ruin and destroy: and arms which are
meant to protect, are themselves the cause of death unless one know how
to put them on. But the reason is, that we seek everything rather than
what is good for ourselves. And in the case of a house, we seek what is
good for it, and we would not endure to see it decaying with age, or
tottering, or hurt by storms: but for our soul we make no account: nay,
even should we see its foundations rotting, or the fabric and the roof,
we make no account of it. Again, if we possess brute creatures, we seek
what is good for them: we call in both horse-feeders and horse-doctors,
and all besides:813
813 καὶ πάντα
καλοῦμεν. Mod. text substitutes the proverbial expression, καὶ
πάντα κάλων
κινοῦμεν, “we put every rope in motion,” which is hardly
suitable here, and not at all necessary. “We call to our aid
horse-feeders, and doctors, and every one else who can help
us.” | we attend to
their housing, and charge those who are entrusted with them, that they
may not drive them at random or carelessly, nor take them out by night
at unseasonable hours nor sell away their provender; and there are many
laws laid down by us for the good of the brute creatures: but for that
of our soul there is no account taken. But why speak I of brute
creatures which are useful to us? There are many who keep small birds
(or “sparrows”) which are useful for nothing except that
they simply amuse, and there are many laws even about them, and nothing
is neglected or without order, and we take care for everything rather
than for our own selves. Thus we make our selves more worthless than
all. And if indeed a person abusively call us “dog,” we are
annoyed: but while we are opprobrious to ourselves, not in word, but in
deed, and do not even bestow as much care on our soul as on dogs, we
think it no great harm. Do you see how all is full of darkness? How
many are careful about their dogs, that they may not be filled with
more than the proper food, that so they may be keen and fit for
hunting, being set on by famine and hunger: but for themselves they
have no care to avoid luxury: and the brute creatures indeed they teach
to exercise philosophy, while they let themselves sink down into the
savageness of the brutes. The thing is a riddle. “And where are
your philosophic brutes?” There are such; or, say, do you not
take it to be philosophy, when a dog gnawed with hunger, after having
hunted and caught his prey, abstains from the food; and though he sees
his meal ready before him, and with hunger urging him on, yet waits for
his master? Be ashamed of yourselves: teach your bellies to be as
philosophic. You have no excuse. When you have been able to implant
such philosophic self-command in an irrational nature, which neither
speaks nor hears reason, shall you not much more be able to implant it
in yourself? For that it is the effect of man’s care, not of
nature is plain: since otherwise all dogs ought to have this habit. Do
you then become as dogs. For it is you that compel me to fetch my
examples thence: for indeed they should be drawn from heavenly things;
but since if I speak of those, you say, “Those are (too)
great,” therefore I speak nothing of heavenly things: again, if I
speak of Paul, you say, “He was an Apostle:” therefore
neither do I mention Paul: if again I speak of a man, you say,
“That person could do it:” therefore I do not mention a man
even, but a brute creature; a creature too, that has not this habit by
nature, lest you should say that it effected this by nature, and not
(which is the fact) from choice: and what is wonderful, choice not
self-acquired, but (the result of) your care. The creature does not
give a thought to the fatigue, the wear and tear it has undergone in
running down the prey, not a thought to this, that by its own proper
toil it has made the capture: but casting away all these regards, it
observes the command of its master, and shows itself superior to the
cravings of appetite. “True; because it looks to be praised, it
looks to get a greater meal.” Say then to yourself, that the dog
through hope of future pleasure, despises that which is present: while
you do not choose for hope of future good things to despise those which
are present; but he indeed knows, that, if he tastes of that food at
the wrong time and against his master’s will, he will both be
deprived of that, and not get even that which was apportioned to him,
but receive blows instead of food: whereas you cannot even perceive
this, and that which he has learnt by dint of custom, you do not
succeed in acquiring even from reason. Let us imitate the dogs. The
same thing hawks also and eagles are said to do: what the dogs do with
regard to hares814
814 Our
mss. have ἀλόγων: Savile
(from N.?) λαγῶν, which we
adopt. | and deer, the
same do those with regard to birds; and these too act from a philosophy
learnt from men. These facts are enough to condemn us, these enough to
convict us. To mention another thing:—they that are skilled in
breaking horses, shall take them, wild, fierce, kicking, biting, and in
a short time so discipline them, that though the teacher be not there,
it is a luxury to ride them, their paces are so thoroughly
well-ordered: but the paces of the soul may be all disordered, and none
cares for it: it bounds, and kicks, and its rider815
815 καὶ
σύρεται
χάμαι
καθάπερ
παιδίον, καὶ
ἀσχημονεῖ
μυρία: this cannot be
meant for the horse, but for the rider. Perhaps καὶ οὐδεὶς,
κἂν σύρεται κ
τ. λ. | is dragged along the ground like a child,
and makes a most disgraceful figure, and yet no one puts curbs on her,
and leg-ties, and bits, nor mounts upon her the skilful
rider—Christ, I mean. And therefore it is that all is turned
upside down. For when you both teach dogs to master the craving of the
belly, and tame the fury in a lion, and the unruliness of horses, and
teach the birds to speak plainly, how inconsistent must it not
be—to implant achievements of reason in natures that are without
reason, and to import the passions of creatures without reason into
natures endowed with reason? There is no excuse for us, none. All who
have succeeded (in mastering their passions) will accuse us, both
believers and unbelievers: for even unbelievers have so succeeded; yea,
and wild beasts, and dogs, not men only: and we shall accuse our own
selves, since we succeed, when we will, but when we are slothful, we
are dragged away. For indeed many even of those who live a very wicked
life, have oftentimes changed themselves when they wished. But the
cause is, as I said, that we go about seeking for what is good for
other things, not what is good for ourselves. If you build a splendid
house, you know what is good for the house, not what is good for
yourself: if you take a beautiful garment, you know what is good for
the body, not for yourself: and if you get a good horse, it is so
likewise. None makes it his mark how his soul shall be beautiful; and
yet, when that is beautiful, there is no need of any of those things:
as, if that be not beautiful, there is no good of them. For like as in
the case of a bride, though there be chambers hung with tapestry
wrought with gold, though there be choirs of the fairest and most
beautiful women, though there be roses and garlands, though there be a
comely bridegroom, and the maidservants and female friends, and
everybody about them be handsome, yet, if the bride herself be full of
deformity, there is no good of all those; as on the other hand if she
were beautiful, neither would there be any loss arising from (the want
of) those, nay just the contrary; for in the case of an ugly bride,
those would make her look all the uglier, while in the other case, the
beautiful would look all the more beautiful: just so, the soul, when
she is beautiful, not only needs none of those adjuncts, but they even
cast a shade over her beauty. For we shall see the philosopher shine,
not so much when in wealth, as in poverty. For in the former case many
will impute it to his riches, that he is not superior to riches:816
816 καὶ τὸ but Sav. Marg. καὶ τῷ μὴ
κρείττονα
χρημάτων
εἶναι: some slight
emendation is necessary, but it is not clear whether it should
be, καὶ μὴ
τῷ.…“and not to his
being above wealth:” i.e. good in spite of his riches: or
καὶ τὸ
μὴ…with some verb supplied,
i.e. “and make it a reproach to him that (though a good man) he
is not above riches,” seeing he does not abandon his
wealth.—Mod. text καὶ τῷ μὴ
ἐνδεᾶ
χρημάτων
εἶναι· | but when he lives with poverty for his
mate, and shines through all, and will not let himself be compelled to
do anything base, then none claims shares with him in the crown of
philosophy. Let us then make our soul beauteous, if at least we would
fain be rich. What profit is it, when your mules indeed are white and
plump and in good condition, but you who are drawn by them are lean and
scurvy and ill-favored? What is the gain, when your carpets indeed are
soft and beautiful, full of rich embroidery and art, and your soul goes
clad in rags, or even naked and foul? What the gain, when the horse
indeed has his paces beautifully ordered, more like dancing than
stepping, while the rider, together with his choral817
817 μᾶλλον
μετὰ τῆς
πορείας καὶ
κόσμῳ
κεκοσμημένος
νυμφικῷ· ὁ δὲ
ἐπικαθ. κ. τ.
λ. The passage is corrupt: perhaps, as in
the Translation, it should be μᾶλλον ἢ
νυμφικῷ,
but this as a description of the horse is evidently out of place.
For πορ., we read χορείας as in mod. text (which has καὶ μετὰ τῆς
χορείας
κόσμω κεκ. ᾖ
νυμφικῷ.)
Then transposing this, we read ὁ δὲ
ἐπικαθ., μετὰ
τῆς χορ.,
καὶ.—Below, B. C.
ἂν
σκολιάζῃ: A. and mod. text ἀσκωλιάζῃ—alluding to the game of leaping on greased bladders
or skins, unctos salire per utres; which does not suit
τῶν
χωλῶν. | train and adorned with more than bridal
ornaments, is more crooked than the lame, and has no more command over
hands and feet than drunkards and madmen? Tell me now, if some one were
to give you a beautiful horse, and to distort your body, what would be
the profit? Now you have your soul distorted, and care you not for it?
Let us at length, I beseech you, have a care for our own selves. Do not
let us make our own selves more worthless than all beside. If anyone
insult us with words, we are annoyed and vexed: but insulting ourselves
as we do by our deeds, we do not give a thought to it. Let us, though
late, come at last to our senses, that we may be enabled by having much
care for our soul, and laying hold upon virtue, to obtain eternal good
things, 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 evermore, world without end. Amen.E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|