Bible Verses and Early Church Commentary | Historical Christian Faith

[AD 585] Cassiodorus on Acts 23:1

"And Paul looking upon the council, said," etc. When Paul had said right in front of the council: "Men, brethren, I have conversed with all good conscience before God until this present day," the high priest Ananias commanded the men who stood by him to strike Paul's mouth, on the grounds that it had been blaspheming. But Paul replied to him with a free voice: "God shall strike thee, thou whited wall, that, sitting in a judge's place, commandest against the law that I be struck." When they accused him of wishing to revile the high priest, he replied that he had not known he had such a high dignity. And Paul, knowing that both Pharisees and Sadducees, who hold divergent beliefs from one another, had assembled there, proclaimed with a loud voice that he was a Pharisee and that he was standing a grievous trial because of the hope and resurrection of the dead, which they themselves believed in. At these words, a dispute soon arose among them, and the assembly was scattered.

Source: Complexiones on the Acts of the Apostles

[AD 220] Tertullian on Acts 23:2

"Know ye not that we are to judge angels? " Again, of how open censure (does) the free expression (find utterance), how manifest the edge of the spiritual sword, (in words like these): "Ye are already enriched! ye are already satiated! ye are already reigning!" and, "If any thinks himself to know, he knoweth not yet how it behaves him to know I" Is he not even then "smiting some one's face," in saying, "For who maketh thee to differ? What, moreover, hast thou which thou hast not received? Why gloriest thou as if thou have not received? " Is he not withal "smiting them upon the mouth," (in saying): "But some, in (their) conscience, even until now eat (it) as if (it were) an idol-sacrifice.

Source: On Modesty

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Acts 23:2

We read in the Acts of the Apostles that someone, ordered by Ananias the high priest, struck Paul because he said, “God will strike you, oh whitewashed wall.” And even to this day, the Ebionites, under orders from their illegitimate high priest, strike the apostle of Jesus Christ with their calumnies, and Paul says to such a high priest of the Word, “God will strike you,” and such a high priest is beautiful from without and a whitewashed wall but “within full of dead bones and every filth.” But why do I speak about Paul …? It is my Lord, Jesus Christ, himself who speaks: “I have given my back to scourgings, and my cheeks to slaps, and my face I did not turn from the shame of being spit upon.” The simple know of these things as happening at one particular time, when Pilate scourged him, when the Jews plotted against him. I, however, see Jesus daily giving his back to scourgings: go into synagogues of the Jews, and see Jesus scourged by their blasphemous speech. See those gathered from among the nations5 plotting against the Christians, how they seize Christ, and he gives his back to scourgings. Consider the Word of God insulted, reviled, hated by unbelievers. See that he gave his cheeks to be slapped, and after he taught “Should someone slap you on one cheek, offer him the other,” that he himself did the same.

Source: HOMILIES ON JEREMIAH 19.12

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 23:3

Some say that he [Paul] did not know that he was the high priest. Then why does he defend himself as if there was an accusation and adds, “You shall not speak evil of a ruler of your people.” For if he was not the ruler, was he then to be abused? Paul himself says, “When we are cursed we bless; when we are persecuted, we endure it.” But here he does the opposite. He not only reviles but also curses him. These are words of boldness rather than anger. He did not wish to appear contemptible to the tribune. For the tribune himself had refrained from scourging him, since he was about to be handed over to the Jews. Had he been struck by the servants, it would have rather emboldened the tribune. For this reason he directs his attack not at the servant but at the one who gave the order. The words “you whitewashed wall” and “you are sitting to judge me according to the law” stand for “you are responsible,” as if he had said, “you deserve ten thousand lashes.” See how they were thunderstruck by his boldness. The point was to undermine him completely, but they commended him instead.

Source: HOMILIES ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 48

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 23:3

This is well said. For to kill one who had done no wrong and moreover does not deserve punishment is a violation of the law. For his words could not be called abusive unless one also called Christ’s words abusive, when he said, “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees! You are like whitewashed walls.” True, you will say. But since [Paul] spoke before he was struck, it was not out of anger but out of boldness. But I have mentioned the reason for this. Indeed, Christ often insulted the Jews, when he himself had been abused by them, as when he said, “Do not think I will accuse you before the Father.” But [Paul’s words] are not abuse; God forbid. See with what gentleness he addresses these men: “I did not know that he was the high priest of God.” And to show that he was not being ironic, he adds, “You shall not speak evil of a ruler of your people.” [Paul] even acknowledges that he is still a ruler. Let us learn the gentleness as well as the boldness, so that we may be complete in both. For much exactness is needed to learn what each of them is. Exactness, because these virtues have their attendant vices: near boldness stands audacity, near gentleness, cowardice.

Source: HOMILIES ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 48

[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Acts 23:3

Of course, those who do not understand him think that [Paul] uttered a reproach when he had been slapped by order of the high priest, for, with seeming insolence, he then said, “God will strike you, you whitewashed wall.” But those who understand him take this as a prophecy. The “whitewashed wall” stands for hypocrisy; it is pretense, veiled beneath the priestly dignity, and under this title—as though beneath a white covering—it conceals, as it were, an inner slimy filthiness.

Source: SERMON ON THE MOUNT 1.19.58

[AD 735] Bede on Acts 23:3

God will strike you, whitewashed wall. He did not say this disturbed in mind, but indeed he spoke prophetically, because that figurative priesthood, which was composed in the likeness of a whitewashed wall, was to be struck and destroyed when the true priesthood of Christ had come, with the apostles preaching the Gospel. And that is why he said: God will strike you. He did not say, may He strike you: indeed indicating this in the indicative mode that it would happen, not cursing in the optative. For that he spoke these things with a calm mind, he shows by the following response, saying:

Source: Commentary on Acts

[AD 258] Cyprian on Acts 23:4

For since it is written, "Neither shall revilers inherit the kingdom of God," and again the Lord says in His Gospel, "Whosoever shall say to his brother, Thou fool; and whosoever shall say, Raca, shall be in danger of the Gehenna of fire," how can they evade the rebuke of the Lord the avenger, who heap up such expressions, not only on their brethren, but also on the priests, to whom is granted such honour of the condescension of God, that whosoever should not obey his priest, and him that judgeth here for the time, was immediately to be slain? In Deuteronomy the Lord God speaks, saying, "And the man that will do presumptuously, and will not hearken unto the priest or to the judge, whosoever he shall be in those days, that man shall die; and all the people, when they hear, shall fear, and shall do no more wickedly." Moreover, to Samuel when he was despised by the Jews, God says; "They have not despised thee, but they have despised me." And the Lord also in the Gospel says, "He that heareth you, heareth me, and Him that sent me; and he that rejecteth you, rejecteth me; and he that rejecteth me, rejecteth Him that sent me." And when he had cleansed the leprous man, he said, "Go, show thyself to the priest." And when afterwards, in the time of His passion, He had received a buffet from a servant of the priest, and the servant said to Him, "Answerest thou the high priest so? " the Lord said nothing reproachfully against the high priest, nor detracted anything from the priest's honour; but rather asserting His own innocence, and showing it, He says, "If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if well, why smitest thou me? " Also subsequently, in the Acts of the Apostles, the blessed Apostle Paul, when it was said to him, "Revilest thou God's priest? " -although they had begun to be sacrilegious, and impious, and bloody, the Lord having already been crucified, and had no longer retained anything of the priestly honour and authority-yet Paul, considering the name itself, however empty, and the shadow, as it were, of the priest, said, "I wist not, brethren, that he was the high priest: for it is written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy, people."

Source: Epistle LIV

[AD 258] Cyprian on Acts 23:4

Moreover also Solomon, established in the Holy Spirit, testifies and teaches what is the priestly authority and power, saying, "Fear the Lord with all thy soul, and reverence His priests; " and again, "Honour God with all thy soul, and honour His priests." Mindful of which precepts, the blessed Apostle Paul, according to what we read in the Acts of the Apostles, when it was said to him, "Revilest thou thus God's high priest? "answered and said, "I wist not, brethren, that he was the high priest; for it is written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people." Moreover, our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, our King, and Judge, and God, even to the very day, of His passion observed the honour to priests and high priests, although they observed neither the fear of God nor the acknowledgment of Christ. For when He had cleansed the leper, He said to him, "Go, show thyself to the priest, and offer the gift." With that humility which taught us also to he humble, He still called him a priest whom He knew to be sacrilegious; also under the very sting of His passion, when He had received a blow, and it was said to Him, "Answerest thou the high priest so? "He said nothing reproachfully against the person of the high priest, but rather maintained His own innocence saying, "If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if well, why smitest thou me? " All which things were therefore done by Him humbly and patiently, that we might have an example of humility and patience; for He taught that true priests were lawfully and fully to be honoured, in showing Himself such as He was in respect of false priests.

Source: Epistle LXIV

[AD 258] Cyprian on Acts 23:4

But with respect to what you have said, that priests should be lowly, because both the Lord and His apostles were lowly; both all the brethren and Gentiles also well know and love my humility; and you also knew and loved it while you were still in the Church, and were in communion with me. But which of us is far from humility: I, who daily serve the brethren, and kindly receive with good-will and gladness every one that comes to the Church; or you, who appoint yourself bishop of a bishop, and judge of a judge, given for the time by God? Although the Lord God says in Deuteronomy, "And the man that will do presumptuously, and will not hearken unto the priests or unto the judge who shall be in those days, even that man shall die; and all the people, when they hear, shall fear, and do no more presumptuously." And again He speaks to Samuel, and says, "They have not despised thee, but they have despised me." And moreover the Lord, in the Gospel, when it was said to Him, "Answerest thou the high priest so? "guarding the priestly dignity, and teaching that it ought to be maintained, would say nothing against the high priest, but only clearing His own innocence, answered, saying, "If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if well, why smitest thou me? " The blessed apostle also, when it was said to him, "Revilest thou God's high priest? "spoke nothing reproachfully against the priest, when he might have lifted up himself boldly against those who had crucified the Lord, and who had already sacrificed God and Christ, and the temple and the priesthood; but even although in false and degraded priests, considering still the mere empty shadow of the priestly name, he said, "I wist not, brethren, that he was the high priest; for it is written, Thou shall not speak evil of the ruler of thy people."

Source: Epistle LXVIII

[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Acts 23:4

But when [Paul] was asked, “Do you revile the high priest?” then he marvelously complied with the requirements of humility, for he replied, “Brothers, I did not know that he was the high priest; for it is written, ‘You shall not speak evil of a ruler of your people.’ ” The mildness of this prompt reply shows how calmly he had spoken what he seemed to have uttered in anger, for such a reply could not be given by those who are angered or perturbed. And in the reply, “I did not know that he was the high priest,” he spoke the truth to those who understand him. It is as though he were saying, “I have come to know another high priest, for whose name’s sake I am suffering these injuries—a high priest whom it is not lawful to revile but whom you are reviling, because in me you hate nothing else than his name.” Thus, a man ought not to parade those prerogatives under a false pretense, but he should have his heart prepared for everything, so that he will be able to accord with that expression of the prophet, “My heart is ready, O God, my heart is ready.”

Source: SERMON ON THE MOUNT 1.19.58

[AD 258] Cyprian on Acts 23:5

For since it is written, "Neither shall revilers inherit the kingdom of God," and again the Lord says in His Gospel, "Whosoever shall say to his brother, Thou fool; and whosoever shall say, Raca, shall be in danger of the Gehenna of fire," how can they evade the rebuke of the Lord the avenger, who heap up such expressions, not only on their brethren, but also on the priests, to whom is granted such honour of the condescension of God, that whosoever should not obey his priest, and him that judgeth here for the time, was immediately to be slain? In Deuteronomy the Lord God speaks, saying, "And the man that will do presumptuously, and will not hearken unto the priest or to the judge, whosoever he shall be in those days, that man shall die; and all the people, when they hear, shall fear, and shall do no more wickedly." Moreover, to Samuel when he was despised by the Jews, God says; "They have not despised thee, but they have despised me." And the Lord also in the Gospel says, "He that heareth you, heareth me, and Him that sent me; and he that rejecteth you, rejecteth me; and he that rejecteth me, rejecteth Him that sent me." And when he had cleansed the leprous man, he said, "Go, show thyself to the priest." And when afterwards, in the time of His passion, He had received a buffet from a servant of the priest, and the servant said to Him, "Answerest thou the high priest so? " the Lord said nothing reproachfully against the high priest, nor detracted anything from the priest's honour; but rather asserting His own innocence, and showing it, He says, "If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if well, why smitest thou me? " Also subsequently, in the Acts of the Apostles, the blessed Apostle Paul, when it was said to him, "Revilest thou God's priest? " -although they had begun to be sacrilegious, and impious, and bloody, the Lord having already been crucified, and had no longer retained anything of the priestly honour and authority-yet Paul, considering the name itself, however empty, and the shadow, as it were, of the priest, said, "I wist not, brethren, that he was the high priest: for it is written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy, people."

Source: Epistle LIV

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 23:5

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 23:5

I did not know, brothers, that he was the high priest. For although he truly knew that this was not the high priest in the new testament, nonetheless teaching others, and thus urging those who are in power to behave more modestly, he also wanted to temper himself here.

Source: Commentary on Acts

[AD 220] Tertullian on Acts 23:6

You find Paul confessing his faith before the chief priests, under the shelter of the chief captain, among the Sadducees and the Pharisees: "Men and brethren," he says, "I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee; of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am now called in question by you," -referring, of course, to the nation's hope; in order to avoid, in his present condition, as an apparent transgressor of the law, being thought to approach to the Sadducees in opinion on the most important article of the faith-even the resurrection.

Source: On the Resurrection of the Flesh

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 23:6-30

"But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question. And when he had so said, there arose a dissension between the Pharisees and the Sadducees: and the multitude was divided. For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both."

Again he discourses simply as man, and he does not on all occasions alike enjoy the benefit of supernatural aid. "I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee:" both in this, and in what comes after it, he wished to divide the multitude, which had an evil unanimity against him. And he does not speak a falsehood here either: for he was a Pharisee by descent from his ancestors. "Of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question." For since they would not say for what reason they arraigned him, he is compelled therefore to declare it himself. "But the Pharisees," it says, "confess both." And yet there are three things: how then does he say both? "Spirit and Angel" is put as one. When he is on their side, then they plead for him. "And there arose a great cry: and the scribes that were of the Pharisees' part arose, and strove, saying, We find no evil in this man: but" (what) "if a spirit has spoken to him, or an angel?" [Acts 23:9] Why did they not plead for him before this? Do you observe, how, when the passions give way, the truth is discovered? Where is the crime, say they, if an angel has spoken to him, or a spirit? Paul gives them no handle against him. "And when there arose a great dissension, the tribune, fearing lest Paul should have been pulled in pieces of them, commanded the soldiers to go down, and to take him by force from among them, and to bring him into the castle." [Acts 23:10] The tribune is afraid of his being pulled in pieces, now that he has said that he is a Roman: and the matter was not without danger. Do you observe that Paul had a right to profess himself a Roman? Else, neither would (the tribune) have been afraid now. So it remains that the soldiers must bear him off by force. But when the wretches saw all to be without avail, they take the whole matter into their own hands, as they would fain have done before, but were prevented: and their wickedness stops nowhere, though it received so many checks: and yet how many things were providentially ordered, on purpose that they might settle down from their rage, and learn those things through which they might possibly recover themselves! But none the less do they set upon him. Sufficient for proof of his innocence was even this, that the man was saved when at the point to be pulled in pieces, and that with these so great dangers about him, he escaped them all. "And the night following the Lord stood by him, and said, Be of good cheer, Paul: for as you have testified of Me in Jerusalem, so must thou bear witness also at Rome. And when it was day, certain of the Jews banded together, and bound themselves under a curse, saying that they would neither eat nor drink till they had killed Paul. And they were more than forty which had made this conspiracy." [Acts 23:11-13] "They bound themselves under a curse," it says. See how vehement and revengeful they are in their malice! What means, "bound under a curse?" Why then those men are accused forever, seeing they did not kill Paul. And forty together. For such is the nature of that nation: when there needs concerting together for a good object, not even two concur with each other: but when it is for an evil object, the entire people does it. And they admit the rulers also as accomplices. "And they came to the chief priests and elders, and said, We have bound ourselves under a great curse that we will eat nothing until we have slain Paul. Now therefore ye with the council signify to the tribune that he bring him down unto you tomorrow, as though ye would enquire something more perfectly concerning him: and we, or ever he come near, are ready to kill him. And when Paul's sister's son heard of their lying in wait, he went and entered into the castle, and told Paul. Then Paul called one of the centurions unto him, and said, Bring this young man unto the tribune: For he has a certain thing to tell him. So he took him, and brought him to the tribune, and said, Paul the prisoner called me unto him, and prayed me to bring this young man unto you, who has something to say unto you. Then the tribune took him by the hand, and went with him aside privately, and asked him, What is that you have to tell me? And he said, the Jews have agreed to desire you that you would bring down Paul tomorrow into the council, as though they would enquire somewhat of him more perfectly. But do not thou yield unto them for there lie in wait for him of them more than forty men, which have bound themselves with an oath, that they will neither eat nor drink till they have killed him: and now are they ready, looking for a promise from you. So the tribune then let the young man depart, and charged him, See thou tell no man that you have showed these things to me." [Acts 23:14-22]. Again he is saved by man's forethought. And observe: Paul lets no man learn this, not even the centurion, that the matter might not become known. And the centurion having come, reported to the tribune. And it is well done of the tribune also, that he bids him keep it secret, that it might not become known: moreover he gives his orders to the centurions only, at the time when the thing was to be done: and so Paul is sent into Cæsarea, that there too he might discourse in a greater theatre and before a more splendid audience: that so the Jews may not be able to say, "If we had seen Paul, we would have believed— if we had heard him teaching." Therefore this excuse too is cut off from them. "And the Lord," it said, "stood by him, and said, Be of good cheer: for as you have testified of Me in Jerusalem, so must thou bear witness also at Rome." (Yet) even after He has appeared to him, He again suffers him to be saved by man's means. And one may well be astonished at Paul; he was not taken aback, neither said, "Why, what is this? Have I then been deceived by Christ?" but he believed: yet, because he believed, he did not therefore sleep: no; what was in his own power by means of human wisdom, he did not abandon. "Bound themselves by a curse:" it was a kind of necessity that those men fastened on themselves by the curse. "That they would neither eat nor drink." Behold fasting the mother of murder! Just as Herod imposed on himself that necessity by his oath, so also do these. For such are the devil's (ways): under the pretext forsooth of piety he sets his traps. "And they came to the chief priests," etc. And yet they ought to have come (to the tribune), ought to have laid a charge, and assembled a court of justice: for these are not the doings for priests, but for captains of banditti, these are not the doings for rulers, but for ruffians. They endeavor also to corrupt the ruler: but it was providentially ordered, to the intent that he also should learn of their plot. For not (only) by their having nothing to say, but also by their secret attempt, they convicted themselves that they were naught. It is likely too that after (Paul had gone) the chief priests came to (the tribune) making their request, and were put to shame. For of course he would not have liked either to deny or to grant their request. How came he to believe (the young man's tale)? He did so in consequence of what had already taken place; because it was likely they would do this also. And observe their wickedness: they as good as laid a necessity on the chief priests also: for if they undertook so great a thing themselves, and engaged themselves in the whole risk, much more ought those to do thus much. Do you observe, how Paul is held innocent by those that are without, as was also Christ by Pilate? See their malice brought to naught: they delivered him up, to kill and condemn him: but the result is just the contrary; he is both saved, and held innocent. For had it not been so, he would have been pulled in pieces: had it not been so, he would have perished, he would have been condemned. And not only does (the tribune) rescue him from the rush (made upon him), but also from much other (violence): see how he becomes a minister to him, insomuch that without risk he is carried off safe with so large a force. "And he called unto him two centurions, saying, Make ready two hundred soldiers to go to Cæsarea, and horsemen threescore and ten, and spearmen two hundred, at the third hour of the night; and provide them beasts, that they may set Paul on, and bring him safe unto Felix the governor. And he wrote a letter after this manner: Claudius Lysias unto the most excellent governor Felix sends greeting. This man was taken of the Jews, and should have been killed of them: then came I with an army, and rescued him, having understood that he was a Roman. And when I would have known the cause wherefore they accused him, I brought him forth into their council: whom I perceived to be accused of questions of their law, but to have nothing laid to his charge worthy of death or of bonds. And when it was told me how that the Jews laid wait for the man, I sent straightway to you, and gave commandment to his accusers also to say before you what they had against him. Fare well." [Acts 23:23-30]. See how the letter speaks for him as a defense — for it says, "I found nothing worthy of death," but as accusation against them (rather) than against him. "About to have been killed of them:" so set upon his death were they. First, "I came with the army, and rescued him:" then also "I brought him down unto them:" and not even so did they find anything to lay to his charge: and when they ought to have been stricken with fear and shame for the former act, they again attempt to kill him, insomuch that again his cause became all the more clear. "And his accusers," he says, "I have sent unto you:" that at the tribunal where these things are more strictly examined, he may be proved guiltless.

(Recapitulation.) Let us look then to what has been said above. "I," he says, "am a Pharisee:" then, that he may not seem to pay court, he adds, "Of the hope and resurrection of the dead it is, that I am called in question." [Acts 23:6] From this charge and calumny he commends himself. "For the Sadducees indeed," etc. The Sadducees have no knowledge of anything incorporeal, perhaps not even God; so gross (παχεἵς) are they: whence neither do they choose to believe that there is a Resurrection. "And the scribes," etc. Look; the tribune also hears that the Pharisees have acquitted him of the charges, and have given sentence (manuscripts and Edd. ἐ ψηφίσατο, "he gave sentence") in his favor, and with greater confidence carries him off by force. Moreover all that was spoken (by Paul) was full of right-mindedness (φιλοσοφίας). "And the night following the Lord stood by him," etc. See what strong consolation! First he praises him, "As you have testified to My cause in Jerusalem;" then He does not leave him to be afraid for the uncertain issue of his journey to Rome: for there also, He says, you shall not depart alone (μόνος, Cat. and Edd. μόνον), but you shall also have all this boldness of speech. Hereby it was made manifest, not (only) that he should be saved, but that (he should be so) in order to great crowns in the great city. But why did He not appear to him before he fell into the danger? Because it is evermore in the afflictions that God comforts us; for He appears more wished-for, while even in the dangers He exercises and trains us. Besides, he was then at ease, when free from bonds; but now great perils were awaiting him. "We have bound ourselves," they say, "under a curse, that we will not eat nor drink." [Acts 23:14] What is all this zeal? "That he may bring him down," it says, "unto you, as though ye would enquire into his case more perfectly." [Acts 23:15] Has he not twice made a speech unto you? Has he not said that he is a Pharisee? What (would you have) over and above this? So reckless were they and afraid of nothing, not tribunals, not laws: such their hardihood which shrunk from nothing. They both declare their purpose, and announce the way of carrying it into effect. "Paul's sister's son heard of it." [Acts 23:16] This was of God's providence, their not perceiving that it would be heard. What then did Paul? He was not alarmed, but perceived that this was God's doing: and casting all upon Him, so he acquits himself (from further concern about it:) "having called one of the centurions," etc. [Acts 23:17] He told of the plot, he was believed; he is saved. If he was acquitted of the charge, why did (the tribune) send the accusers? That the enquiry might be more strict: that the man might be the more entirely cleared.

Such are God's ways of ordering: the very things by which we are hurt, by these same are we benefited. Thus it was with Joseph: his mistress sought to ruin him: and she seemed indeed to be contriving his ruin, but by her contriving she placed him in a state of safety: for the house where that wild beast (of a woman) was kept was a den in comparison with which the prison was gentle. [Genesis 39:1-20] For while he was there, although he was looked up to and courted, he was in constant fear, lest his mistress should set upon him, and worse than any prison was the fear that lay upon him: but after the accusation he was in security and peace, well rid of that beast, of her lewdness and her machinations for his destruction: for it was better for him to keep company with human creatures in miserable plight, than with a maddened mistress. Here he comforted himself, that for chastity's sake he had fallen into it: there he had been in dread, lest he should receive a death-blow to his soul: for nothing in the world is more annoying than a woman in love can be to a young man who will not (meet her advances): nothing more detestable (than a woman in such case), nothing more fell: all the bonds in the world are light to this. So that the fact was not that he got into prison, but that he got out of prison. She made his master his foe, but she made God his friend: brought him into closer relation to Him Who is indeed the true Master; she cast him out of his stewardship in the family, but made him a familiar friend to that Master. Again, his brethren sold him [Genesis 37:18]; but they freed him from having enemies dwelling in the same house with him, from envy and much ill will, and from daily machinations for his ruin: they placed him far aloof from them that hated him. For what can be worse than this, to be compelled to dwell in the same house with brethren that envy one; to be an object of suspicion, to be a mark for evil designs? So that while they and she were severally seeking to compass their own ends, far other were the mighty consequences working out by the Providence of God for that just man. When he was in honor, then was he in danger; when he was in dishonor, then was he in safety. The eunuchs did not remember him, and right well it was that they did not, that the occasion of his deliverance might be more glorious: that the whole might be ascribed, not to man's favor, but to God's Providence [Genesis 40:23]: that at the right moment, Pharaoh, reduced to need, might bring him out; that not as conferring but as receiving a benefit, the king might release him from the prison. [Genesis 41:40] It behooved to be no servile gift, but that the king should be reduced to a necessity of doing this: it behooved that it should be made manifest what wisdom was in him. Therefore it is that the eunuch forgets him, that Egypt might not forget him, that the king might not be ignorant of him. Had he been delivered at that time, it is likely he would have desired to depart to his own country: therefore he is kept back by numberless constraints, first by subjection to a master, secondly by being in prison, thirdly by being over the kingdom, to the end that all this might be brought about by the Providence of God. Like a spirited steed that is eager to bound off to his fellows, did God keep him back there, for causes full of glory. For that he longed to see his father, and free him from his distress, is evident from his calling him there. [Genesis 45:9]

Shall we look at other instances of evil designing, how they turn out to our good, not only by having their reward, but also by their working at the very time precisely what is for our good? This (Joseph's) uncle (Esau) had ill designs against his father (Jacob), and drove him out of his native land: what then? [Genesis 27:41] He too set him (thereby) aloof from the danger; for he too got (thereby) to be in safety. He made him a wiser and a better man (φιλοσοφώτερον); he was the means of his having that dream [Genesis 28:12] But, you will say, he was a slave in a foreign land? Yes, but he arrives among his own kindred, and receives a bride, and appears worthy to his father-in-law. [Genesis 29:23] But he too cheated him? Yes, but this also turned out to his good, that he might be the father of many children. But it was in his mind to design evil against him? True, but even this was for his good, that he might thereupon return to his own country; for if he had been in good circumstances, he would not have so longed for home. But he defrauded him of his hire? Aye, but he got more by the means. [Genesis 31:7] Thus, in every point of these men's history, the more people designed their hurt, the more their affairs flourished. If (Jacob) had not received the elder daughter, he would not soon have been the father of so many children; he would have dragged out a long period in childlessness, he would have mourned as his wife did. For she indeed had reason to mourn, as not having become a mother (ib. 30:1, 2.); but he had his consolation: whence also he gives her a repulse. Again, had not (Laban) defrauded him of his hire, he would not have longed to see his own country; the higher points (φιλοσοφία) of the man's character would not have come to light, (his wives) would not have become more closely attached to him. For see what they say: "With devouring has he devoured us and our money." [Genesis 31:15] So that this became the means of riveting their love to him. After this he had in them not merely wives, but (devoted) slaves; he was beloved by them: a thing that no possession can equal: for nothing, nothing whatever, is more precious than to be thus loved by a wife and to love her. "And a wife," Scripture says, "that agrees with her husband." [Sirach 25:1] "A man and a wife that agree together." E.V.) One thing this, as the Wise Man puts it, of the things for which a man is to be counted happy; for where this is, there all wealth, all prosperity abounds: as also, where it is not, there all besides profits nothing, but all goes wrong, all is mere unpleasantness and confusion. Then let us seek this before all things. He that seeks money, seeks not this. Let us seek those things which can remain fixed. Let us not seek a wife from among the rich, lest the excess of wealth on her side produce arrogance, lest that arrogance be the means of marring all. See you not what God did? How He put the woman in subjection? [Genesis 3:16] Why are you ungrateful, why without perception? The very benefit God has given you by nature, do not thou mar the help it was meant to be. So that it is not for her wealth that we ought to seek a wife: it is that we may receive a partner of our life, for the appointed order of the procreation of children. It was not that she should bring money, that God gave the woman; it was that she might be an helpmate. But she that brings money, becomes, instead of a wife, a setter up of her own will (ἐ πίβουλος), a mistress — it may be a wild beast instead of a wife — while she thinks she has a right to give herself airs upon her wealth. Nothing more shameful than a man who lays himself out to get riches in this way. If wealth itself is full of temptations, what shall we say to wealth so gotten? For you must not look to this, that one or another as a rare and unusual case, and contrary to the reason of the thing, has succeeded: as neither ought we in other matters to fix our regards upon the good which people may enjoy, or their chance successes, out of the common course: but let us look to the reason of the thing as it is in itself, and see whether this thing be not fraught with endless annoyance. Not only you bring yourself into a disreputable position; you also disgrace your children by leaving them poor, if it chance that you depart this life before the wife: and you give her incomparably more occasions for connecting herself with a second bridegroom. Or do you not see that many women make this the excuse for a second marriage — that they may not be despised; that they want to have some man to take the management of their property? Then let us not bring about so great evils for the sake of money; but let us dismiss all (such aims), and seek a beautiful soul, that we may also succeed in obtaining love. This is the exceeding wealth, this the great treasure, this the endless good things: whereunto may we all attain by the grace and loving kindness of our Lord Jesus Christ, with Whom to the Father and the Holy Ghost together be glory, dominion, honor, now and ever, world without end. Amen.

Source: Homily 49 on the Acts of the Apostles

[AD 735] Bede on Acts 23:6

Brothers, I am a Pharisee, etc. Just as the unity of the good is always useful, so the unity of the wicked is always harmful to the good. Therefore, now the Apostle strives to dissociate his persecutors so that they, united, would surround him, but divided, would release him. Thus the Red Sea, which as solid had confined the children of Israel, when divided, freed them from Egypt. But that he attests to being a son of Pharisees, or, according to the Greek, a son of a Pharisee, is what above he glories in, having learned the law and the prophets at the feet of Gamaliel, who is read to be a Pharisee.

Source: Commentary on Acts

[AD 220] Tertullian on Acts 23:8

Of the Sadducees I am silent, who, springing from the root of this error, had the hardihood to adjoin to this heresy the denial likewise of the resurrection of the flesh. The Pharisees I pretermit, who were "divided" from the Jews by their superimposing of certain additaments to the law, which fact likewise made them worthy of receiving this very name; and, together with them, the Herodians likewise, who said that Herod was Christ.

Source: Pseudo-Tertullian Against All Heresies

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 23:8

The Sadducees know of nothing incorporeal, perhaps not even God, so thick-headed are they. Consequently, they are also unwilling to believe that there is a resurrection.

Source: HOMILIES ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 49

[AD 300] Ammonius of Alexandria on Acts 23:9

“What if a spirit or an angel has spoken to him?” These words are obscure or something is missing for the completion of the sentence, which would be, “If a spirit or an angel has told to him what to say in order to avoid dangers, he is being deceptive.” Otherwise, what the Pharisees say must be understood in the sense, “Look! He’s clearly talking about the resurrection, since he’s been taught either this teaching on the resurrection by the Holy Spirit or an angel.”

Source: CATENA ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 23.9

[AD 585] Cassiodorus on Acts 23:10

"And when there arose a great dissension, the tribune fearing lest Paul should be pulled in pieces. "When a great dissension arose between Pharisees and Sadducees, the tribune, fearing lest Paul should be pulled in pieces by the Sadducees, ordered him to be taken back to the castle. In the night, the Lord said to Paul: "Be constant, Paul; for as thou hast testified of me here, so must thou preach my name also in the city of Rome." On the following day, forty Jews made a conspiracy and resolved to kill Paul. Paul's sister's son heard of it and told Paul in the castle. Paul asked the guards to bring the young man to the tribune. When the young man had told the tribune everything in order, the tribune commanded him to let no one know it had been told to him.

Source: Complexiones on the Acts of the Apostles

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Acts 23:11

Scripture says, “Fear not to go down into Egypt,” which means, When you come against “the principalities and powers and rulers of the darkness of this world”10—those figuratively called Egypt—do not fear or recoil. If you wish to know why you should not fear, listen to my promise: “There, I will make of you a great nation, and I shall go down into Egypt with you, and I shall call you back from there in the end.” He is, therefore, not afraid to go down into Egypt. He fears neither the combats of this world nor the trials of demonic adversaries. Hear, then, what the apostle Paul says: “More than those others have I labored, yet not I, but the grace of God with me.” Even in Jerusalem, when a plot had been set in motion against him and he toiled in combat for the word and the preaching of the Lord, beside him the Lord stood and said these same things that are said to Israel: “Fear not, Paul, for just as you have been my witness in Jerusalem, so you must also be my witness in Rome.”

Source: HOMILIES ON GENESIS 15.5

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 23:11

Notice how great is the consolation! First he praises him, “as you have testified about me at Jerusalem”; then, he does not leave him fearful of the uncertainty of his journey to Rome. For not only will you arrive there, he says, but you will also make use of this boldness of speech. From this it is revealed that not only will he be saved but that he will be saved in the great city, honored with great crowns. Why didn’t [Jesus] appear to him before he fell into danger? Because, as always, it is in afflictions that God consoles. For then he appears more desirable, as he trains us even in the midst of dangers.

Source: HOMILIES ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 49

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 23:12

Behold fasting, the mother of murder! Just as Herod imposed that necessity by oath upon himself, likewise do these men. For these are the devil’s ways. Under the pretext of piety itself he sets his traps.

Source: HOMILIES ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 49

[AD 735] Bede on Acts 23:12

And they bound themselves by an oath, saying that they would neither eat nor drink until they had killed Paul. While the Lord says: Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness (Matt. 5), these contrariwise hunger for iniquity, and thirst so greatly for blood that they even renounce food for their body until satisfied by his death. But there is no wisdom nor prudence nor counsel against the Lord. For even though Paul had offered sacrifices above, shaved his head, performed ritual foot washing, made himself a Jew to the Jews, he did not escape the bonds predicted. And here, although they devise plans, bind themselves with vows, set traps, nevertheless the Apostle is preserved, so that he may bear witness to Christ in Rome as it was told him.

Source: Commentary on Acts

[AD 735] Bede on Acts 23:12

And they vowed themselves saying they would neither eat nor drink until they had killed Paul. Vowed signifies cursed. Indeed for this word in Greek it is written ἀνεθεμάτισαν: but in the following, where they said: We have vowed with a vow that we will taste nothing, in Greek it is written, ἀναθέματι ἁνεθεματίσαμεν. The severity of this word knows those who are anathematized by the priestly anathema from the society of Christ and the Church.

Source: Retractions on Acts

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 23:16

Again human forethought is saved. See, Paul allowed nobody to learn of this, not even the centurion, so that the matter might not be divulged. Instead, the centurion took him and brought him to the tribune. The tribune rightly ordered that he be hidden, so that the matter would remain secret. Then he told the centurions what had to be done.

Source: CATENA ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 23.17-21

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 23:17

Even after appearing to him, [Paul] again allows him to be saved by human means. And what happens? Paul was not thrown into confusion; he did not say, “So I have been deceived by Christ.” Instead, he believed. Indeed, because he believed, he did not sleep and did not give up the abilities that human wisdom had given him.

Source: HOMILIES ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 49

[AD 585] Cassiodorus on Acts 23:23

"And on the next day, when Agrippa and Bernice were come with great pomp." On the next day, when Agrippa and Bernice had entered the city's hall of audience together with Festus and a numerous crowd, at Festus' commandment, Paul was brought into the middle, so that Festus might prove by Paul's testimony every detail of what he had told the king in private. Festus declared that Paul had been brought before Agrippa after his appeal so that the truth of the matter might be known and Paul might be sent to Caesar together with an explanation of the case.

Source: Complexiones on the Acts of the Apostles

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 23:30

See how the letter speaks for him as a defence— for it says, I found nothing worthy of death, but as accusation against them (rather) than against him. About to have been killed of them: so set upon his death were they. First, I came with the army, and rescued him: then also I brought him down unto them: and not even so did they find anything to lay to his charge: and when they ought to have been stricken with fear and shame for the former act, they again attempt to kill him, insomuch that again his cause became all the more clear. And his accusers, he says, I have sent unto you: that at the tribunal where these things are more strictly examined, he may be proved guiltless.

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 23:30

See how Paul is reckoned innocent through the vote of the foreigners, like Christ with Pilate. See how their evil intentions are defeated: they handed him over, so that he might be killed and condemned, but the opposite happened, and he was saved and found innocent. If things did not go this way, [Paul] would have been torn into pieces, would have perished, would have been condemned.

Source: CATENA ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 23.28-30