1 Men, brethren, and fathers, hear ye my defence which I make now unto you. 2 (And when they heard that he spake in the Hebrew tongue to them, they kept the more silence: and he saith,) 3 I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day. 4 And I persecuted this way unto the death, binding and delivering into prisons both men and women. 5 As also the high priest doth bear me witness, and all the estate of the elders: from whom also I received letters unto the brethren, and went to Damascus, to bring them which were there bound unto Jerusalem, for to be punished. 6 And it came to pass, that, as I made my journey, and was come nigh unto Damascus about noon, suddenly there shone from heaven a great light round about me. 7 And I fell unto the ground, and heard a voice saying unto me, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? 8 And I answered, Who art thou, Lord? And he said unto me, I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom thou persecutest. 9 And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me. 10 And I said, What shall I do, Lord? And the Lord said unto me, Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do. 11 And when I could not see for the glory of that light, being led by the hand of them that were with me, I came into Damascus. 12 And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt there, 13 Came unto me, and stood, and said unto me, Brother Saul, receive thy sight. And the same hour I looked up upon him. 14 And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth. 15 For thou shalt be his witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard. 16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord. 17 And it came to pass, that, when I was come again to Jerusalem, even while I prayed in the temple, I was in a trance; 18 And saw him saying unto me, Make haste, and get thee quickly out of Jerusalem: for they will not receive thy testimony concerning me. 19 And I said, Lord, they know that I imprisoned and beat in every synagogue them that believed on thee: 20 And when the blood of thy martyr Stephen was shed, I also was standing by, and consenting unto his death, and kept the raiment of them that slew him. 21 And he said unto me, Depart: for I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles. 22 And they gave him audience unto this word, and then lifted up their voices, and said, Away with such a fellow from the earth: for it is not fit that he should live. 23 And as they cried out, and cast off their clothes, and threw dust into the air, 24 The chief captain commanded him to be brought into the castle, and bade that he should be examined by scourging; that he might know wherefore they cried so against him. 25 And as they bound him with thongs, Paul said unto the centurion that stood by, Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned? 26 When the centurion heard that, he went and told the chief captain, saying, Take heed what thou doest: for this man is a Roman. 27 Then the chief captain came, and said unto him, Tell me, art thou a Roman? He said, Yea. 28 And the chief captain answered, With a great sum obtained I this freedom. And Paul said, But I was free born. 29 Then straightway they departed from him which should have examined him: and the chief captain also was afraid, after he knew that he was a Roman, and because he had bound him. 30 On the morrow, because he would have known the certainty wherefore he was accused of the Jews, he loosed him from his bands, and commanded the chief priests and all their council to appear, and brought Paul down, and set him before them.
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 22:1-16
"But Paul said, I am a man which am a Jew of Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, a citizen of no mean city: and I beseech you, suffer me to speak unto the people. And when he had given him license, Paul stood on the stairs, and beckoned with the hand unto the people. And when there was made a great silence, he spoke unto them in the Hebrew tongue, saying."

Observe how, when he discourses to those that are without, he does not decline availing himself of the aids afforded by the laws. Here he awes the tribune by the name of his city. And again, elsewhere he said, "Openly, uncondemned, Romans as we are, they have cast us into prison." [Acts 19:37] For since the tribune said, "Are you that Egyptian?" he immediately drew him off from that surmise: then, that he may not be thought to deny his nation, he says at once, "I am a Jew:" he means his religion. (b) What then? He did not deny (that he was a Christian): God forbid: for he was both a Jew and a Christian, observing what things he ought: since indeed he, most of all men, did obey the law: (a) as in fact he elsewhere calls himself, "Under the law to Christ." [1 Corinthians 9:21] What is this, I pray? (c) The man that believes in Christ. And when discoursing with Peter, he says: "We, Jews by nature. — But I beseech you, suffer me to speak unto the people." [Galatians 2:15] And this is a proof, that he does not speak lies, seeing he takes all as his witnesses. Observe again how mildly he speaks. This again is a very strong argument that he is chargeable with no crime, his being so ready to make his defense, and his wishing to come to discourse with the people of the Jews. See a man well-prepared (τεταγμένον ἄνδρα)!— Mark the providential ordering of the thing: unless the tribune had come, unless he had bound him, he would not have desired to speak for his defense, he would not have obtained the silence he did. "Standing on the stairs." Then there was the additional facility afforded by the locality, that he should have a high place to harangue them from — in chains too! What spectacle could be equal to this, to see Paul, bound with two chains, and haranguing the people! (To see him,) how he was not a whit perturbed, not a whit confused; how, seeing as he did so great a multitude all hostility against him, the ruler standing by, he first of all made them desist from their anger: then, how prudently (he does this). Just what he does in his Epistle to the Hebrews, the same he does here: first he attracts them by the sound of their common mother tongue: then by his mildness itself. "He spoke unto them," it says, "in the Hebrew tongue, saying, Men, brethren, and fathers, hear ye my defense which I make now unto you." [Acts 22:1] Mark his address, at once so free from all flattery, and so expressive of meekness. For he says not, "Masters," nor "Lords," but, "Brethren," just the word they most liked: "I am no alien from. you," he says, nor "against you." "Men," he says, "brethren, and fathers:" this, a term of honor, that of kindred. "Hear ye," says he, "my"— he says not, "teaching," nor "harangue," but, "my defense which I now make unto you." He puts himself in the posture of a suppliant. "And when they heard that he spoke in the Hebrew tongue to them, they kept the more silence." [Acts 22:2] Do you observe how the using the same tongue subdued them? In fact, they had a sort of awe for that language. Observe also how he prepares the way for his discourse, beginning thus: "I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as you all are this day." [Acts 22:3] "I am a man," he says, "which am a Jew:" which thing they liked most of all to hear; "born in Tarsus, a city of Cilicia." That they may not again think him to be of another nation, he adds his religion: "but brought up in this city." (p. 282, note 4.) He shows how great was his zeal for the worship, inasmuch as having left his native city, which was so great and so remote too, he chose to be brought up here for the Law's sake. See how from the beginning he attached himself to the law. But this he says, not only to defend himself to them, but to show that not by human intent was he led to the preaching of the Gospel, but by a Divine power: else, having been so educated, he would not have suddenly changed. For if indeed he had been one of the common order of men, it might have been reasonable to suspect this: but if he was of the number of those who were most of all bound by the law, it was not likely that he should change lightly, and without strong necessity. But perhaps some one may say: "To have been brought up here proves nothing: for what if you came here for the purpose of trading, or for some other cause?" Therefore he says, "at the feet of Gamaliel:" and not simply, "by Gamaliel," but "at his feet," showing his perseverance, his assiduity, his zeal for the hearing, and his great reverence for the man. "Taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers." Not simply, "the law," but "the law of the fathers;" showing that he was such from the beginning, and not merely one that knew the Law. All this seems indeed to be spoken on their side, but in fact it told against them, since he, knowing the law, forsook it. "Yes: but what if you indeed knew the law accurately, but did not vindicate it, no, nor love it?" "Being a zealot," he adds: not simply (one that knew it). Then, since it was a high encomium he had passed upon himself, he makes it theirs as well as his, adding, "As ye all are this day." For he shows that they act not from any human object, but from zeal for God; gratifying them, and preoccupying their minds, and getting a hold upon them in a way that did no harm. Then he brings forward proofs also, saying, "and I persecuted this way unto the death, binding and delivering into prisons both men and women. As also the high priest does bear me witness, and all the estate of the elders" (v. 4, 5): "How does this appear." As witnesses he brings forward the high-priest himself and the elders. He says indeed, "Being a zealot, as you" (Hom. xix. p. 123): but he shows by his actions, that he went beyond them. For I did not wait for an opportunity of seizing them: I both stirred up the priests, and undertook journeys: I did not confine my attacks, as you did, to men, I extended them to women also: "both binding, and casting into prisons both men and women."

This testimony is incontrovertible; the (unbelief) of the Jews (is left) without excuse. See how many witnesses he brings forward, the elders, the high-priest, and those in the city. Observe his defense, how it is not of cowardly fear (for himself, that he pleads), no, but for teaching and indoctrination. For had not the hearers been stones, they would have felt the force of what he was saying. For up to this point he had themselves as witnesses: the rest, however, was without witnesses: "From whom also I received letters unto the brethren, and went to Damascus, to bring them which were there bound unto Jerusalem, for to be punished. And it came to pass, that, as I made my journey, and had come near unto Damascus about noon, suddenly there shone from heaven a great light round about me. And I fell unto the ground, and heard a voice saying unto me, Saul, Saul, why do you persecute Me? And I answered, Who are Thou, Lord? And he said to me, I am Jesus of Nazareth, Whom you persecute." (v. 6, 7, 8.) Why then, these very things ought to have been held worthy of credit, from those that went before: otherwise he would not have undergone such a revolution. How if he is only making a fine story of it, say you? Answer me, Why did he suddenly fling away all this zeal? Because he looked for honor? And yet he got just the contrary. But an easy life, perhaps? No, nor that either. Well but something else? Why it is not in the power of thought to invent any other object. So then, leaving it to themselves to draw the inference, he narrates the facts. "As I came near," he says, "unto Damascus, about noonday." See how great was the excess of the light. What if he is only making a fine story, say you? Those who were with him are witnesses, who led him by the hand, who saw the light. "And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of Him that spoke to me." [Acts 22:9] But in another place he says, "Hearing the voice, but seeing no man." [Acts 9:7] It is not at variance: no, there were two voices, that of Paul and the Lord's voice: in that place, the writer means Paul's voice (Hom. xix. p. 124, note 2); as in fact (Paul) here adds, "The voice of Him that spoke unto me. Seeing no man:" he does not say, that they did not see the light: but, "no man," that is, "none speaking." And good reason that it should be so, since it behooved him alone to have that voice vouchsafed unto him. For if indeed they also had heard it, (the miracle) would not have been so great. Since persons of grosser minds are persuaded more by sight, those saw the light, and were afraid. In fact, neither did the light take so much effect on them, as it did on him: for it even blinded his eyes: by that which befell him, (God) gave them also an opportunity of recovering their sight, if they had the mind. It seems to me at least, that their not believing was providentially ordered, that they might be unexceptionable witnesses. "And he said to me" it says, "I am Jesus of Nazareth, Whom you persecute." comp. Acts 9:5] Well is the name of the city (Nazareth) also added, that they might recognize (the Person): moreover, the Apostles also spoke thus. ch. 2:22; 4:10; 10:38 And Himself bore witness, that they were persecuting Him. "And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid, but they heard not the voice of Him that spoke to me. And I said, What shall I do, Lord? And the Lord said to me, Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it shall be told you of all things which are appointed for you to do. And when I could not see for the glory of that light, being led by the hand of them that were with me, I came into Damascus. And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt there, came unto me, and stood, and said to me, Brother Saul, receive your sight. And the same hour I looked up upon him. Enter into the city," it says, "and there it shall be spoken to you of all that is appointed for you to do." [Acts 22:10-13] Lo! Again another witness. And see how unexceptionable he makes him also. "And one Ananias," he says, "a devout man according to the law," — so far is it from being anything alien!— "having a good report of all the Jews that dwelt" (there). "And I in the same hour received sight." Then follows the testimony borne by the facts. Observe how it is interwoven, of persons and facts; and the persons, both of their own and of aliens: the priests, the elders, and his fellow-travellers: the facts, what he did and what was done to him: and facts bear witness to facts, not persons only. Then Ananias, an alien; then the fact itself, the recovery of sight; then a great prophecy. "And he said, The God of our fathers has chosen you, that you should know His will, and see That Just One." [Acts 22:14] It is well said, "Of the fathers," to show that they were not Jews, but aliens from the law, and that it was not from zeal (for the law) that they were acting. "That you should know His will." Why then His will is this. See how in the form of narrative it is teaching. "And see That Just One, and hear the voice of His mouth. For you shall be His witness unto all men of what you have seen and heard. And see," he says, "that Just One." [Acts 22:15] For the present he says no more than this: if He is Just, they are guilty. "And hear the voice of His mouth." See how high he raises the fact! For you shall be His witness— for this, because you will not betray the sight and hearing (i.e. "prove false to") — "both of what you have seen, and of what you have heard:" by means of both the senses he claims his faith, fullness — "to all men. And now why do you tarry? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His name." [Acts 22:16] Here it is a great thing he has uttered. For he said not, "Be baptized in His name:" but, "calling on the name of Christ." It shows that He is God: since it is not lawful to "call upon" any other, save God. Then he shows also, that he himself was not compelled: for, "I said," says he, "What must I do?" Nothing is (left) without witness: no; he brings forward the witness of a whole city, seeing they had beheld him led by the hand. But see the prophecy fulfilled. "To all men," it is said. For he did become a witness to Him, and a witness as it ought to be; by what he suffered, by what he did, and by what he said. Such witnesses ought we also to be, and not to betray the things we have been entrusted withal: I speak not only of doctrines, but also of the manner of life.

For observe: because he had seen, because he had heard, he bears witness to all men, and nothing hindered him. We too bear witness (Mod. text "have heard") that there is a Resurrection and numberless good things: we are bound to bear witness of this to all men. "Yes, and we do bear witness," you will say, "and do believe." How; when you act the contrary? Say now: if any one should call himself a Christian, and then having apostatized should hold with the Jews, would this testimony suffice? By no means: for men would desire the testimony which is borne by the actions. Just so, if we say that there is a Resurrection and numberless good things, and then despise those things and prefer the things here, who will believe us? Not what we say, but what we do, is what all men look to. "You shall be a witness," it says, "unto all men:" not only to the friendly, but also to the unbelievers: for this is what witnesses are for; not to persuade those who know, but those who know not. Let us be trustworthy witnesses. But how shall we be trustworthy? By the life we lead. The Jews assaulted him: our passions assault us, bidding us abjure our testimony. But let us not obey them: we are witnesses from God. (Christ) is judged that He is not God: He has sent us to bear witness to Him. Let us bear witness and persuade those who have to decide the point: if we do not bear witness, we have to answer for their error also. But if in a court of justice, where worldly matters come in question, nobody would receive a witness full of numberless vices, much less here, where such (and so great) are the matters to be considered. We say, that we have heard Christ, and that we believe the things which He has promised: Show it, say they, by your works: for your life bears witness of the contrary — that you do not believe. Say, shall we look at the money-getting people, the rapacious, the covetous? The people that mourn and wail, that build and busy themselves in all sorts of things, as though they were never to die? "You do not believe that you shall die, a thing so plain and evident: and how shall we believe you when you bear witness?" For there are, there are many men, whose state of mind is just as if they were not to die. For when in a lengthened old age they set about building and planting, when will they take death into their calculations? It will be no small punishment to us that we were called to bear witness, but were not able to bear witness of the things that we have seen. We have seen Angels with our eyes, yea, more clearly than those who have (visibly) beheld them. We shall be (Mod. text "Then let us be") witnesses to Christ: for not those only are "martyrs," (or witnesses, whom we so call), but ourselves also. This is why they are called martyrs, because when bidden to abjure (the faith), they endure all things, that they may speak the truth: and we, when we are bidden by our passions to abjure, let us not be overcome. Gold says: Say that Christ is not Christ. Then listen not to it as to God, but despise its biddings. The evil lusts "profess that they know God, but in works they deny Him." [Titus 1:16] For this is not to witness, but the contrary. And indeed that others should deny (Him) is nothing wonderful: but that we who have been called to bear witness should deny Him, is a grievous and a heinous thing: this of all things does the greatest hurt to our cause. "It shall be to (your)selves for a testimony." [Luke 21:13], He says: but (this is) when we ourselves stand to it firmly. If we would all bear witness to Christ, we should quickly persuade the greater number of the heathen. It is a great thing, my beloved, the life (one leads). Let a man be savage as a beast, let him openly condemn you on account of your doctrine, yet he secretly approves, yet he will praise, yet he will admire. For say, whence can an excellent life proceed? From no source, except from a Divine Power working in us. "What if there be heathen also of such a character?" If anywhere any of them be such, it is partly from nature, partly from vainglory. Will you learn what a brilliancy there is in a good life, what a force of persuasion it has? Many of the heretics have thus prevailed, and while their doctrines are corrupt, yet the greater part of men out of reverence for their (virtuous) life did not go on to examine their doctrine: and many even condemning them on account of their doctrine, reverence them on account of their life: not rightly indeed, but still so it is, that they do thus feel (towards them). This has brought slanders on the awful articles of our creed, this has turned everything upside down, that no one takes any account of good living: this is a mischief to the faith. We say that Christ is God; numberless other arguments we bring forward, and this one among the rest, that He has persuaded all men to live rightly: but this is the case with few. The badness of the life is a mischief to the doctrine of the Resurrection, to that of the immortality of the soul, to that of the Judgment: many other (false doctrines) too it draws on with itself, fate, necessity, denial of a Providence. For the soul being immersed in numberless vices, by way of consolations to itself tries to devise these, that it may not be pained in having to reflect that there is a Judgment, and that virtue and vice lie in our own power. (Such a) life works numberless evils, it makes men beasts, and more irrational than beasts: for what things are in each several nature of the beasts, these it has often collected together in one man, and turned everything upside down. This is why the devil has brought in the doctrine of Fate: this is why he has said that the world is without a Providence (Hom. ii. p. 15): this is why he advances his hypothesis of good natures, and evil natures, and his hypothesis of evil (uncreated and) without beginning, and material (in its essence): and, in short, all the rest of it, that he may ruin our life. For it is not possible for a man who is of such a life either to recover himself from corrupt doctrines, or to remain in a sound faith: but of inevitable necessity he must receive all this. For I do not think, for my part, that of those who do not live aright, there could be easily found any who do not hold numberless satanical devices — as, that there is a nativity (or birth-fate) (γένεσις), that things happen at random, that all is hap-hazard and chance-medley. Wherefore I beseech you let us have a care for good living, that we may not receive evil doctrines. Cain received for punishment that he should be (ever) groaning and trembling. [Genesis 4:14] Such are the wicked, and being conscious within themselves of numberless bad things, often they start out of their sleep, their thoughts are full of tumult, their eyes full of perturbation; everything is fraught for them with misgivings, everything alarms them, their soul is replete with grievous expectation and cowardly apprehension, contracted with impotent fear and trembling. Nothing can be more effeminate than such a soul, nothing more inane. Like madmen, it has no self-possession. For it were well for it that in the enjoyment of calm and quiet it were enabled to take knowledge of its proper nobility. But when all things terrify and throw it into perturbation, dreams, and words, and gestures, and forebodings, indiscriminately, when will it be able to look into itself, being thus troubled and amazed? Let us therefore do away with its fear, let us break asunder its bonds. For were there no other punishment, what punishment could exceed this — to be living always in fear, never to have confidence, never to be at ease? Therefore knowing these things assuredly, let us keep ourselves in a state of calm and be careful to practise virtue, that maintaining both sound doctrines and an upright life, we may without offense pass through this life present, and be enabled to attain unto the good things which God has promised to them that love Him, through the grace and mercy of His only-begotten Son, with Whom to the Father and the Holy Ghost together be glory, might, honor, now and ever, world without end. Amen.

[AD 585] Cassiodorus on Acts 22:1
"Men, brethren, hear ye the account which I now give unto you," etc. Paul, being inclined to simplicity of heart, told the people, in order, how he had been chosen by the Lord when he was a persecutor of the church; he did not even fail to mention, with a broken heart, his crime relating to Stephen's blood; but he said that he had heard from the Lord, whom he could not oppose, that he would be sent to preach to the Gentiles. The Jews, who had been listening thus far, began to shout loudly to the tribune that a man trying to convince them of such things should be removed from the living.

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 22:3
[Paul] shows that great was his zeal for the worship. His native city, great as it was, he left behind, so far away, and chose to be brought up here for the sake of the law. Look how from the beginning he heeded the law. He mentions these things not only to defend himself before them, but also to show that he was led to preach the gospel not by human intention but by divine power. For educated in the way that he was, he could not have changed all at once. For if he were one of the hoi polloi, it might have been possible to imagine this. But since he was one of those who were most bound by the law, it was not likely that he should change without strong necessity.

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 22:3
He does not just say “in the school of Gamaliel” but “at the feet of Gamaliel.” By these words, he shows his patient endurance, his loving attentiveness, his eagerness to listen and his tremendous reverence for the man.

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 22:3
He does not simply say “the law” but “the law of our fathers.” This shows what type of person he had been, someone not ignorant of the law. Now this seems to be said for the benefit of his audience, but in fact, it is an accusation. For what if, with all his knowledge, he had been negligent? What if you have a thorough knowledge of the law but do not fulfill it? You do not love it, then, do you? [Paul] then states plainly that he was a zealot. So after he has delivered a great encomium about himself, he then extends this praise by adding, “just as all of you are today,” and thus points out that what they are doing is not just for a human purpose but for their zeal for God. By bestowing this favor on them he also captures their understanding from the beginning.

[AD 735] Bede on Acts 22:3
Educated according to the truth, being a zealot of the paternal law. In Greek it is added more: Being a zealot of God, according to that in Romans: For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge.

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 22:4
He brings forward as witnesses the high priest and the elders. On the one hand, [Paul] makes himself their equal when he says, “I being a zealot just as you,” but then he shows through his deeds that he was a greater zealot than they. “I wasn’t waiting around,” he says, “to arrest them, but I was even stirring up the priests and being sent abroad. And I wasn’t after just men, as you are, but I sought out women too, put them in chains and even threw them into prison.” This is irrefutable testimony. His Jewish credentials could not be disputed. Count the witnesses he brings forward: the body of elders, the high priest, those in the city. Note how his defense is not fearful but instructive rather and educational. Had his audience not been stone, they would have given heed to his words.

[AD 400] Pseudo-Clement on Acts 22:5
"But our friends lifted him up, for they were both more numerous and more powerful than the others; but, from their fear of God, they rather suffered themselves to be killed by an inferior force, than they would kill others. But when the evening came the priests shut up the temple, and we returned to the house of James, and spent the night there in prayer. Then before daylight we went down to Jericho, to the number of 5000 men. Then after three days one of the brethren came to us from Gamaliel, whom we mentioned before, bringing to us secret tidings that that enemy had received a commission from Caiaphas, the chief priest, that he should arrest all who believed in Jesus, and should go to Damascus with his letters, and that there also, employing the help of the unbelievers, he should make havoc among the faithful; and that he was hastening to Damascus chiefly on this account, because he believed that Peter had fled there. And about thirty days thereafter he stopped on his way while passing through Jericho going to Damascus. At that time we were absent, having gone out to the sepulchres of two brethren which were whitened of themselves every year, by which miracle the fury of many against us was restrained, because they saw that our brethren were had in remembrance before God."

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 22:5
Did you see how by his very experience in these things [Paul] has taught all of us that he deserved to be judged worthy of kindness from above and to be led to the path of truth? When God in his goodness sees a well-disposed soul led astray through ignorance, he does not disregard that soul or give it up to its own great recklessness, but he shows it all the good things that come from him and fails in nothing that pertains to our salvation, if we make ourselves worthy to reap abundantly the benefit of grace from above, as did that blessed apostle.

[AD 420] Jerome on Acts 22:6-9
[Daniel 10:7] "And I, Daniel, alone saw the vision, for the men who were with me saw it not; but an exceeding great terror fell upon them, and they fled away and hid themselves." The Apostle Paul had a similar experience in the Book of Acts, in that while the others could see nothing, he alone beheld the vision (Acts 22:6-9).

[AD 735] Bede on Acts 22:7
Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me? In Greek, in this place as well it is added: It is hard for you to kick against the goads.

[AD 202] Irenaeus on Acts 22:8
But again, we allege the same against those who do not recognise Paul as an apostle: that they should either reject the other words of the Gospel which we have come to know through Luke alone, and not make use of them; or else, if they do receive all these, they must necessarily admit also that testimony concerning Paul, when he (Luke) tells us that the Lord spoke at first to him from heaven: "Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou Me? I am Jesus Christ, whom thou persecutest; "

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Acts 22:8
It ought not to be forgotten that in such a Gospel as this there is embraced every good deed that was done to Jesus; as, for example, the story of the woman who had been a prostitute and had repented, and who, having experienced a genuine recovery from her evil state, had grace to pour her ointment over Jesus so that every one in the house smelled the sweet savor. Hence, too, the words, “Wherever this gospel shall be preached among all the nations, there also this that she has done shall be spoken of, for a memorial of her.” And it is clear that whatever is done to the disciples of Jesus is done to him. Pointing to those of them who met with kind treatment, [Jesus] says to those who were kind to them: “What you did to these, you did to me.” So that every good deed we do to our neighbors is entered into the gospel, that gospel that is written on the heavenly tablets and read by all who are worthy of the knowledge of the whole of things. But on the other side, too, there is a part of the gospel that is for the condemnation of the doers of the evil deeds that have been done to Jesus. The treachery of Judas and the shouts of the wicked crowd when it said, “Away with such a one from the earth,” and “Crucify him, crucify him,” the mockings of those who crowned him with thorns, and everything of that kind, is included in all the Gospels. And as a consequence of this we see that everyone who betrays the disciples of Jesus is reckoned as betraying Jesus himself. To Saul, when still a persecutor it is said, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” and, “I am Jesus whom you are persecuting.” There are those who still have thorns with which they crown and dishonor Jesus, those, namely, who are choked by the cares and riches and pleasures of life, and though they have received the word of God, they do not bring it to perfection. We must beware, therefore, lest we also, by crowning Jesus with thorns of our own, should be entered in the gospel and read of in this character by those who come to know how Jesus, who is in all and is present in all rational and holy lives, is anointed with ointment, is entertained, is glorified, or how, on the other side, he is dishonored and mocked and beaten. All this had to be said; it is part of our demonstration that our good actions, and also the sins of those who stumble, are embodied in the gospel, either to everlasting life or to reproach and everlasting shame.

[AD 544] Arator on Acts 22:9
Paul, speaking of his deeds, says that his companions saw the light there some time ago, yet that they did not drink in the voice with their ears; but then, at the time when he fell blind, his companions are said also to have heard the voice. Thus the work of the narrator varies. But there is no doubt that it is necessary for both [passages] to harmonize; for then [according to Luke] they are said to have heard, to have received the sound, now [in Paul’s own words] undoubtedly not to have heard. This will be a simple way of explanation: the voice is justly denied to have spoken since it was indistinct, nor is a thing believed to be given by speech when a person receiving it does not store it up in his understanding. He is stimulated so little on account of his doubting ear, and ambiguous noise strikes only the air. They are said at the same time thus to have heard, thus not to have heard. The one standpoint is of noise, the other standpoint is of true speech, and a single circumstance bears and bears again a twofold meaning.

[AD 735] Bede on Acts 22:9
They did not hear the voice of Him who spoke to me. Above, the story narrates about this vision that his companions stood stupefied, hearing indeed the voice, but seeing no one. Hence it is inferred that they heard the sound of a confused voice, but not the distinction of words.

[AD 735] Bede on Acts 22:9
And those who were with me indeed saw the light. And in Greek it is added more: And they were afraid.

[AD 1781] Richard Challoner on Acts 22:9
Heard not the voice: That is, they distinguished not the words; though they heard the voice. Acts 9. 7.
[AD 220] Tertullian on Acts 22:11
It was of Him, too, that he had said in a previous passage: "Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, to the only God; " so that we might apply even the contrary qualities to the Son Himself-mortality, accessibility-of whom the apostle testifies that "He died according to the Scriptures," and that "He was seen by himself last of all," -by means, of course, of the light which was accessible, although it was not without imperilling his sight that he experienced that light. A like danger to which also befell Peter, and John, and James, (who confronted not the same light) without risking the loss of their reason and mind; and if they, who were unable to endure the glory of the Son, had only seen the Father, they must have died then and there: "For no man shall see God, and live.

[AD 373] Ephrem the Syrian on Acts 22:11
Our Lord spoke humbly from above so that the leaders of his church would speak humbly. Now, if someone should ask, “How did our Lord speak humbly with Paul if Paul’s eyes were seriously injured?” they should realize that this impairment did not [result] from our compassionate Lord, who spoke humbly there. Rather, [it was the result] of the intense light that shone radiantly there. This light was not a punishment that befell Paul on account of the things he had done. It injured him with the intensity of its rays, as he himself said, “When I arose, I could see nothing because of the brilliance of the light.”

[AD 1781] Richard Challoner on Acts 22:14
Just One: Our Saviour, who appeared to St. Paul, Acts 9. 17.
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 22:15
For [Paul] truly became a witness to [Jesus], and a witness as one should be, both by what he did and by what he said. We too must be such witnesses and not betray what we have been entrusted. I speak not only of doctrines, but also of our way of life. Look, what he knew, what he heard, he bore witness to this before all, and nothing hindered him. We too have heard that there is a resurrection and ten thousand good things; therefore, we ought to bear witness to this before all. “We do in fact bear witness,” you say, “and believe.” How, since we do the opposite? Tell me, if someone should say he was a Christian but should then apostatize and act like a Jew, would his testimony be sufficient? No, not at all; for people would look for testimony through his actions. Likewise, if we say that that there is a resurrection and ten thousand good things but then look down upon them and prefer the things here, who will believe us? For all people pay attention not to what we say but to what we do. “You will be a witness,” [Christ] says, “to all.” That is, not only to the friends, but also to the unbelievers. For this is what witnesses are for: they persuade not those who know but those who do not. Let us become trustworthy witnesses. How will we become trustworthy? By the life we lead.

[AD 258] Cyprian on Acts 22:16
Since sins are not remitted save in the baptism of the Church, he who admits a heretic to communion without baptism does two things against reason: he does not cleanse the heretics, and he befouls the Christians.

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 22:16
What he uttered here is important. For he did not say “baptized in his name” but “calling on the name of Christ.” It shows that he is God; for it is not lawful to “call on” anyone else except God.

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 22:17-30
"And it came to pass, that, when I had come again to Jerusalem, even while I prayed in the temple, I was in a trance; and saw him saying unto me, Make haste, and get you quickly out of Jerusalem: for they will not receive your testimony concerning me. And I said, Lord, they know that I imprisoned and beat in every synagogue them that believed on you: and when the blood of your martyr Stephen was shed, I also was standing by, and consenting unto his death, and kept the raiment of them that slew him."

See how he thrusts himself (into danger), I came, he says, after that vision, "to Jerusalem. I was in a trance," etc. Again, this is without witness: but observe, the witness follows from the result. He said, "They will not receive your testimony:" they did not receive it. And yet from calculations of reason the surmise should have been this, that they would assuredly receive him. For I was the man that made war upon the Christians: so that they ought to have received him. Here he establishes two things: both that they are without excuse, since they persecuted him contrary to all likelihood or calculation of reason; and, that Christ was God, as prophesying things contrary to expectation, and as not looking to past things, but fore-knowing the things to come. How then does He say, "He shall bear My name before the Gentiles and kings and children of Israel?" [Acts 9:15] Not, certainly persuade. Besides which, on other occasions we find the Jews were persuaded, but here they were not. Where most of all they ought to have been persuaded, as knowing his former zeal (in their cause), here they were not persuaded. "And when the blood of Your martyr Stephen," etc. See where again his discourse terminates, namely, in the forcible main point (εἰς τὸ ἱσχυρὸν κεφάλαιον): that it was he that persecuted, and not only persecuted but killed, nay, had he ten thousand hands (μυρίαις χερσὶν ἀναιρὥν) would have used them all to kill Stephen. He reminded them of the murderous spirit heinously indulged (by him and them). Then of course above all they would not endure him, since this convicted them; and truly the prophecy was having its fulfilment: great the zeal, vehement the accusation, and the Jews themselves witnesses of the truth of Christ! "And he said to me, Depart: for I will send you far hence unto the Gentiles. And they gave him audience unto this word, and then lifted up their voices, and said, Away with such a fellow from the earth: for it is not fit that he should live." (v. 21, 22.) The Jews would not endure to hear out all his harangue, but excessively fired by their wrath, they shouted, it says, "Away with him; for it is not fit that he should live. And as they cried out, and cast off their clothes, and threw dust into the air, the tribune commanded him to be brought into the castle, and bade that he should be examined by scourging; that he might know wherefore they cried so against him." (v. 23, 24.) Whereas both the tribune ought to have examined whether these things were so — yes, and the Jews themselves too — or, if they were not so, to have ordered him to be scourged, he "bade examine him by scourging, that he might know for what cause they so clamored against him." And yet he ought to have learned from those clamorers, and to have asked whether they laid hold upon anything of the things spoken: instead of that, without more ado he indulges his arbitrary will and pleasure, and acts with a view to gratify them: for he did not look to this, how he should do a righteous thing, but only how he might stop their rage unrighteous as it was. "And as they bound him with thongs, Paul said to the centurion that stood by, Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman and uncondemned?" [Acts 22:25] Paul lied not, God forbid: for he was a Roman: if there was nothing else, he would have been afraid (to pretend this), lest he should be found out, and suffer a worse punishment. (See Sueton. Vit. Claud. §25.) And observe he does not say it peremptorily (ἁ πλὥς), but, "Is it lawful for you?" The charges brought are two, both its being without examination, and his being a Roman. They held this as a great privilege, at that time: for they say that (it was only) from the time of Hadrian that all were named Romans, but of old it was not so. He would have been contemptible had he been scourged: but as it is, he puts them into greater fear (than they him). Had they scourged him, they would also have dismissed the whole matter, or even have killed him; but as it is, the result is not so. See how God permits many (good results) to be brought about quite in a human way, both in the case of the Apostles and of the rest (of mankind). Mark how they suspected the thing to be a pretext, and that in calling himself a Roman, Paul lied: perhaps surmising this from his poverty. "When the centurion heard that, he went and told the tribune, saying, Take heed what you do, for this man is a Roman. Then the tribune came, and said to him, Tell me, are you a Roman? He said, Yea. And the tribune answered, With a great sum obtained I this freedom. And Paul said, But I was free born. Then straightway they departed from him which should have examined him: and the tribune also was afraid, after he knew that he was a Roman, and because he had bound him." [Acts 22:26-29]— "But I," he says, "was free born." So then his father also was a Roman. What then comes of this? He bound him, and brought him down to the Jews. "On the morrow, because he would have known the certainty whereof he was accused of the Jews, he loosed him from his bands, and commanded the chief priests and all their council to appear, and brought Paul down, and set him before them." [Acts 22:30] He discourses not now to the multitude, nor to the people. "And Paul, earnestly beholding the council, said, Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day." [Acts 23:1] What he means is this: I am not conscious to myself of having wronged you at all, or of having done anything worthy of these bonds. What then said the high priest? Right justly, and ruler-like, and mildly: "And the high priest Ananias commanded them that stood by him to smite him on the mouth. Then said Paul unto him, God shall smite you, you whited wall: for do you sit to judge me after the law, and commandest me to be smitten contrary to the law? And they that stood by said, Do you revile God's high priest? Then said Paul, I knew not, brethren, that he was the high priest: for it is written, You shall not speak evil of the ruler of your people." [Acts 23:3-5] Because "I knew not that he was high priest." Some say, Why then does he defend himself as if it was matter of accusation, and adds, "You shall not speak evil of the ruler of your people?" For if he were not the ruler, was it right for no better reason than that to abuse (him or any) other? He says himself, "Being reviled, we bless; being persecuted, we suffer it" [1 Corinthians 4:12]; but here he does the contrary, and not only reviles, but curses. They are the words of boldness, rather than of anger; he did not choose to appear in a contemptible light to the tribune. For suppose the tribune himself had spared to scourge him, only as he was about to be delivered up to the Jews, his being beaten by their servants would have more emboldened him: this is why Paul does not attack the servant, but the person who gave the order. But that saying, "Thou whited wall, and do you sit to judge me after the law?" (is) instead of, Being (yourself) a culprit: as if he had said, And (yourself) worthy of stripes without number. See accordingly how greatly they were struck with his boldness; for whereas the point was to have overthrown the whole matter, they rather commend him. (infra, v. 9.) "For it is written," etc. He wishes to show that he thus speaks, not from fear, nor because (Ananias) did not deserve to be called this, but from obedience to the law in this point also. And indeed I am fully persuaded that he did not know that it was the high priest, sittest thou to judge me?'—But he pretends ignorance: an ignorance which does no harm, but is an 'economy' (οἰκονομοῦσαν): for reserve (μεταχειρισμὸς) may be more forcible than speaking out (παρρησία): an unseasonable παρρησία often hinders the truth: a seasonable μεταχ. as often advances it."}--> since he had returned now after a long interval, and was not in the habit of constant intercourse with the Jews; seeing him too in the midst among many others: for the high priest was no longer easy to be seen at a glance, there being many of them and diverse. So, it seems to me, in this also he spoke with a view to his plea against them: by way of showing that he does obey the law; therefore he (thus) exculpates himself.

(Recapitulation.) (b) But let us review what has been said. (a) "And when I was came again to Jerusalem," etc. [Acts 22:17] How was it, that being a Jew, and there brought up and taught, he did not stay there? Nor did he abide there, unless he had a mind to furnish numberless occasions against him: everywhere just like an exile, fleeing about from place to place. (c) "While I prayed in the temple," he says, "it came to pass that I was in a trance." (To show) that it was not simply a phantom of the imagination, therefore "while he prayed" (the Lord) stood by him. And he shows that it was not from fear of their dangers that he fled, but because they would "not receive" his "testimony." [Acts 22:18] But why said he "They know I imprisoned?" [Acts 22:19] Not to gainsay Christ, but because he wished to learn this which was so contrary to all reasonable expectation. Christ, however, did not teach him (this), but only bade him depart, and he obeys: so obedient is he. "And they lifted up their voices," it says, "and said, Away with him: it is not fit that this fellow should live." [Acts 22:22] Nay, you are the persons not fit to live; not he, who in everything obeys God. O villains and murderers! "And shaking out their clothes," it says, "they threw dust into the air" [Acts 22:23], to make insurrection more fierce, because they wished to frighten the governor. And observe; they do not say what the charge was, as in fact they had nothing to allege, but only think to strike terror by their shouting. "The tribune commanded," etc. and yet he ought to have learned from the accusers, "wherefore they cried so against him. And as they bound him, etc. And the chief captain was afraid, after he learned that he was a Roman." Why then it was no falsehood. "On the morrow, because he would know the certainty wherefore he was accused of the Jews, etc., he brought him down before the council." [Acts 22:24-30] This he should have done at the outset. He brought him in, loosed. This above all the Jews would not know what to make of. "And Paul," it says, "earnestly beholding them." It shows his boldness, and how it awed them (τὸ ἐντρεπτικόν). "Then the high priest Ananias." etc. ch. 23:1, 2 Why, what has he said that was affronting? What is he beaten for? Why what hardihood, what shamelessness! Therefore (Paul) set him down (with a rebuke): "God shall smite you thou whited wall." [Acts 23:3] Accordingly (Ananias) himself is put to a stand, and dares not say a word: only those about him could not bear Paul's boldness. They saw a man ready to die * * * for if this was the case, (Paul) had but to hold his peace, and the tribune would have taken him, and gone his way; he would have sacrificed him to them. He both shows that he suffers willingly what he suffers, and thus excuses himself before them, not that he wished to excuse himself to them — since as for those, he even strongly condemns them — but for the sake of the people. "Violating the law, do you command me to be beaten?" Well may he say so: for to kill a man who had done (them) no injury, and that an innocent person, was a violating of the law. For neither was it abuse that was spoken by him, unless one would call Christ's words abusive, when He says, "Woe unto you, Scribes and Pharisees, for you are like whited walls." [Matthew 23:27] True, you will say: but if he had said it before he had been beaten, it would have betokened not anger, but boldness. But I have mentioned the reason of this. And (at this rate) we often find Christ Himself "speaking abusively" to the Jews when abused by them; as when He says, "Do not think that I will accuse you." [John 5:45] But this is not abuse, God forbid. See, with what gentleness he addresses these men: "I knew not," he says, "that he was God's high priest" (v. 4, 5): and, (to show) that he was not dissembling (εἰρωνεύεται) he adds, "You shall not speak evil of the ruler of your people." He even confesses him to be still ruler. Let us also learn the gentleness also, that in both the one and the other we may be perfect. For one must look narrowly into them, to learn what the one is and what the other: narrowly, because these virtues have their corresponding vices hard by them: mere forwardness passing itself off for boldness, mere cowardice for gentleness: and need being to scan them, lest any person possessing the vice should seem to have the virtue: which would be just as if a person should fancy that he was cohabiting with the mistress, and not know that it was the servant-maid. What then is gentleness, and what mere cowardice? When others are wronged, and we do not take their part, but hold our peace, this is cowardice: when we are the persons ill-treated, and we bear it, this is gentleness. What is boldness? Again the same, when others are the persons for whom we contend. What forwardness? When it is in our own cause that we are willing to fight. So that magnanimity and boldness go together, as also (mere) forwardness and (mere) cowardice. For he that (does not) resent on his own behalf, will hardly but resent on behalf of others: and he that does not stand up for his own cause, will hardly fail to stand up for others. For when our habitual disposition is pure from passion, it admits virtue also. Just as a body when free from fever admits strength, so the soul, unless it be corrupted by the passions, admits strength. It betokens great strength, this gentleness; it needs a generous and a gallant soul, and one of exceeding loftiness, this gentleness. Or, think you, is it a small thing to suffer ill, and not be exasperated? Indeed one would not err if in speaking of the disposition to stand up for our neighbors, one should call it the spirit of manly courage. For he that has had the strength to be able to overcome so strong a passion (as this of selfishness), will have the strength to dare the attack on another. For instance, these are two passions, cowardice and anger: if you have overcome anger, it is very plain that you overcome cowardice also: but you get the mastery over anger, by being gentle: therefore (do so) with cowardice also, and you will be manly. Again, if you have not got the better of anger, you have become forward and pugnacious; but not having got the better of this, neither can you get the better of fear; consequently, you will be a coward too: and the case is the same as with the body; if it be weak, it is quickly overcome both by cold and heat: for such is the ill temperament, but the good temperament is able to stand all (changes). Again, greatness of soul is a virtue, and hard by it stands prodigality: economy is a virtue, the being a good manager; hard by it stands parsimony and meanness. Come, let us again collate and compare the virtues (with their vices). Well, then, the prodigal person is not to be called great-minded. How should he? The man who is overcome by numberless passions, how should he be great of soul? For this is not despising money; it is only the being ordered about by other passions: for just as a man, if he were at the beck and bidding of robbers to obey their orders, could not be free (so it is here). His large spending does not come of his contempt of money, but simply from his not knowing how to dispose of it properly: else, were it possible both to keep it and to lay it out on his pleasure, this is what he would like. But he that spends his money on fit objects, this is the man of high soul: for it is truly a high soul, that which is not in slavery to passion, which accounts money to be nothing. Again, economy is a good thing: for thus that will be the best manager, who spends in a proper manner, and not at random without management. But parsimony is not the same thing with this. For the former indeed, not even when an urgent necessity demands, touches the principal of his money: but the latter will be brother to the former. Well, then, we will put together the man of great soul, and the prudent economist, as also the prodigal and the mean man: for both of these are thus affected from littleness of soul, as those others are (from the opposite). Let us not then call him high-souled, who simply spends, but him who spends aright: nor let us call the economical manager mean and parsimonious, but him who is unseasonably sparing of his money.

What a quantity of wealth that rich man spent, "who was clothed in purple and fine linen?" [Luke 16:19] But he was not high-souled: for his soul was possessed by an unmerciful disposition and by numberless lusts: how then should it be great? Abraham had a great soul, spending as he did for the reception of his guests, killing the calf, and, where need was, not only not sparing his property, but not even his life. If then we see a person having his sumptuous table, having his harlots and his parasites, let us not call him a man of a great mind, but a man of an exceedingly little mind. For see how many passions he is enslaved and subject to — gluttony, inordinate pleasure, flattery: but him who is possessed by so many, and cannot even escape one of them, how can any one call magnanimous? Nay, then most of all let us call him little-minded, when he spends the most: for the more he spends, the more does he show the tyranny of those passions: for had they not excessively got the mastery over him, he would not have spent to excess. Again, if we see a person, giving nothing to such people as these, but feeding the poor, and succoring those in need, himself keeping a mean table — him let us call an exceedingly high-souled man: for it is truly a mark of a great soul, to despise one's own comfort, but to care for that of others. For tell me, if you should see a person despising all tyrants, and holding their commands of no account, but rescuing from their tyranny those who are oppressed and evil entreated; would you not think this a great man? So let us account of the man in this case also. The passions are the tyrant: if then we despise them, we shall be great: but if we rescue others also from them, we shall be far greater, as being sufficient not only for ourselves, but for others also. But if any one, at a tyrant's bidding, beat some other of his subjects, is this greatness of soul? No, indeed: but the extreme of slavery, in proportion as he is great. And now also there is set before us (πρόκειται) a soul that is a noble one and a free: but this the prodigal has ordered to be beaten by his passions: the man then that beats himself, shall we call high-souled? By no means. Well then * *, but let us see what is greatness of soul, and what prodigality; what is economy, and what meanness; what is gentleness, and (what) dulness and cowardice; what boldness, and what forwardness: that having distinguished these things from each other, we may be enabled to pass (this life) well-pleasing to the Lord, and to attain unto the good things promised, through the grace and mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ, to Whom be the glory for ever and ever. Amen.

[AD 735] Bede on Acts 22:17-18
But it happened that when I was returning to Jerusalem and praying in the temple, I fell into a trance, and saw him. For the trance of the mind, some Codices have a mental ecstasy, others a fear, others an alienation. For what is called ecstasis in Greek is variously interpreted in Latin. This word was also used in the vision of Peter above, where he was being called forth to teach Cornelius. For an ecstasy fell upon him, and he saw the heavens opened. But the mind of the praying apostles was alienated, not from the lowly but to the heavenly, not to deviate, but to see.

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 22:18
Look how [Paul] thrusts himself into danger. Even after that vision, I came, he says, “to Jerusalem.” This is again without witnesses. But look, the result provides the witness. He said, “They will not accept your testimony.” They did not accept it. And yet, he says, if one had to make a reasonable guess, one would have guessed that they would certainly accept it. For I was the man who made war upon the Christians, and for this reason they ought to have accepted it. Here [Paul] constructs two arguments: one, they cannot defend their actions, for they persecute him against all likelihood and contrary to reason; and two, Christ was God, who gave prophecies contrary to expectation, not looking to things past but knowing beforehand things to come.

[AD 585] Cassiodorus on Acts 22:23
"And as they cried out and threw off their garments," etc. As the Jews made an uproar and threw dust up into the sky, the tribune commanded Paul to be brought into the castle. While they whipped him to learn the cause of the uproar that had been stirred up, Paul said to the centurion that stood by him: "See if it is lawful for you to scourge a Roman that hath not been condemned. "Terrified by these words, he loosed him and put the imminent tortures on hold. On the next day, he ordered Paul and the council of the Jews to present themselves before him, wishing to know for what reason he had been handed over. Then Paul, looking on the crowd of the Jews, spoke thus.

[AD 735] Bede on Acts 22:23
As they were shouting, throwing off their cloaks, and throwing dust into the air. In the Lord’s passion, the priest alone leaping from the throne tears his garments, because then the old priesthood was to be changed to the new. But now, because after the death of the apostles, the whole nation was to be stripped of the glory of the kingdom, all throw off their garments, and lift their clamor mixed with dust to heaven. According to what the Psalmist says: “The pride of those who hate you rises always” (Psalm 73).

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 22:24
The tribune ought to have questioned more closely whether the things that Paul said were so—even if he had to question the Jews, and if these things were not so, and only then to order that he be scourged, “to find out why they shouted thus against him.” Moreover, he ought to learn from those who were shouting and to ask if they had even heard anything that was said. Instead, he simply used his power and acted according to their pleasure. For he was not trying to do something just but only to stop their rage, unjust as it was.

[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Acts 22:25
However, the face cannot be designated as the right face and the left, but high rank can be either according to God or according to this world. Hence, it is as though the face were divided into the right cheek and the left, in order to signify that, whenever his becoming a Christian becomes an occasion of contempt in the case of any follower of Christ, he should be much more ready to be despised in his own person if he holds any of the honors of this world. Just as in the case of the apostle himself, when in his person people were persecuting the Christian denomination; if he then remained silent regarding the dignity which he held in the world, he would not have turned the other cheek to those who were striking him on the right cheek. But by saying, “I am a Roman citizen,” he was not unprepared to have them despise in his person the thing that he deemed of least value, when in his person they had despised a name so precious and salutary. Did he thereby endure in any less degree the chains which it was not lawful to place on Roman citizens? Or did he blame anyone for this injustice? Even though some people spared him on account of the title of Roman citizen, he did not on that account fail to offer them something to strike, for he yearned to correct by his own patience the perversity of those whom he saw to be honoring in his person the left portion rather than the right. The one thing to be considered is the spirit of kindness and clemency with which he acted toward those from whom he was suffering the injuries.

[AD 458] Theodoret of Cyrus on Acts 22:25
For the divine command made what seems shameful honorable. Thus the apostle called himself at one time a Pharisee and at another a Roman, not because he was afraid of death but because it was fair to do so in a fight. Likewise he appealed to Caesar upon learning of the Jews’ plot against him. He sent his sister’s son to the tribune to report the plots being hatched against him, not because he clung to this present life but in obedience to the divine law. For our Master certainly does not wish us to throw ourselves into obvious peril. This [Jesus] taught us not only with words but also through action, for more than once he avoided the murderous violence of the Jews.

[AD 220] Tertullian on Acts 22:28
Let it suffice to the martyr to have purged his own sins: it is the part of ingratitude or of pride to lavish upon others also what one has obtained at a high price. Who has redeemed another's death by his own, but the Son of God alone? For even in His very passion He set the robber free.

[AD 735] Bede on Acts 22:28
I have obtained this citizenship for a great sum of money. Another edition indicates more clearly what he had said. The tribune said: Do you say so easily that you are a Roman citizen? For I know at what price I obtained this citizenship.

[AD 735] Bede on Acts 22:28
And Paul said: But I was born so. That is, in this I am more of a Roman than you because I did not buy the Roman name elsewhere, but I was born in their city.

[AD 735] Bede on Acts 22:28
I acquired this city with a great sum of money. In Greek, for city it has πολιτείαν: which signifies rather civil society, that is, social interaction among citizens, or the administration of the republic, than city. For the tribune had not bought the Roman citizenship he possessed, but the partnership of the Roman commonwealth of which he was a participant. But Paul was even more a Roman citizen, because he had this not by purchase, but by birth.

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 22:29
He would have earned contempt had he been scourged. But as it is, [Paul] throws them into greater fear. If they had scourged him, they could have dismissed the matter or even killed him. But as it is, the result is not so. See how God permits many results to occur through human ways, both in the case of the apostles and with the rest of humankind.

[AD 735] Bede on Acts 22:29
The tribune also feared, after he discovered that he was a Roman citizen. For citizen, the same word in Greek is placed, which above was for inhabitant, that is, πολίτης.