Bible Verses and Early Church Commentary | Historical Christian Faith

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 24:1-18

"Then the soldiers, as it was commanded them, took Paul, and brought him by night to Antipatris. On the morrow they left the horsemen to go with him, and returned to the castle: who, when they came to Cæsarea, and delivered the epistle to the governor, presented Paul also before him."

Like some king whom his body-guards escort, so did these convey Paul; in such numbers too, and by night, for fear of the wrath of the people. Now then you will say that they have got him out of the city, they desist from their violence? No indeed. But (the tribune) would not have sent him off with such care for his safety, but that while he himself had found nothing amiss in him, he knew the murderous disposition of his adversaries. "And when the governor had read the letter, he asked of what province he was. And when he understood that he was of Cilicia; I will hear you, said he, when your accusers are also come." Already Lysias has spoken for his exculpation; (but the Jews seek to) gain the hearer beforehand. "And he ordered him to be kept in custody in Herod's prætorium" (v. 34, 35): again Paul is put in bonds. "And after five days came down the high priest Ananias with the elders." See how for all this they do not desist; hindered as they were by obstacles without number, nevertheless they come, only to be put to shame here also. "And with an orator, one Tertullus." And what need was there of "an orator? Which (persons) also informed the governor against Paul." [Acts 24:1] See how this man also from the very outset (b) with his praises seeks to gain the judge beforehand. "And when he was called forth, Tertullus began to accuse him, saying, Seeing that by you we enjoy great quietness, and that very worthy deeds are done unto this nation by your providence, we accept it always, and in all places, most noble Felix, with all thankfulness." (v. 2, 3.) Then as having much to say, he passes by the rest: "Notwithstanding, that I be not further tedious unto you, I pray you that you would hear us of your clemency a few words. For we have found this man a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world." (a) As a revolutionary and seditious person he wishes to deliver him up. And yet, it might be answered, it is ye that have done this. (c) And see how he would put up the judge to a desire of punishing, seeing he had here an opportunity to coerce the man that turned the world upside down! As if they had achieved a meritorious action, they make much of it: "Having found this fellow," etc., "a mover of sedition," say they, "among all the Jews throughout the world." (Had he been such), they would have proclaimed him as a benefactor and saviour of the nation! "And a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes." (v. 4, 5.) They thought this likely to tell as a reproach — "of the Nazarenes:" and by this also they seek to damage him — for Nazareth was a mean place. And, "we have found him," say they: see how maliciously they calumniate him: (found him), as if he had been always giving them the slip, and with difficulty they had succeeded in getting him: though he had been seven days in the Temple! "Who also has gone about to profane the temple; whom we took, [and would have judged according to our law."] [Acts 24:6] See how they insult even the Law; it was so like the Law, forsooth, to beat, to kill, to lie in wait! And then the accusation against Lysias: though he had no right, say they, to interfere, in the excess of his confidence he snatched him from us: ["But the tribune Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands, commanding his accusers to come unto you]: by examining of whom yourself may take knowledge of all these things, where of we accuse him. And the Jews also assented, saying that these things were so." [Acts 24:7-9]. What then says Paul? "Then Paul; after that the governor had beckoned unto him to speak, answered, Forasmuch as I know that you have been of many years a just judge unto this nation, I do the more cheerfully answer for myself." [Acts 24:10] This is not the language of flattery, his testifying to the judge's justice: no, the adulation was rather in that speech of the orator, "By you we enjoy great quietness." If so, then why are you seditious? What Paul sought was justice. "Knowing you to be a just judge, I cheerfully," says he, "answer for myself." Then also he enforces this by the length of time: that (he had been judge) "of many years. Because that you may understand, that there are yet but twelve days since I went up to Jerusalem for to worship." [Acts 24:11] And what is this? (It means), "that I could not immediately have raised a commotion." Because the accuser had nothing to show (as done) in Jerusalem, observe what he said: "among all the Jews throughout the world." Therefore it is that Paul here forcibly attracts him — "to worship," he says, "I came up," so far am I from raising sedition — and lays a stress upon this point of justices being the strong point. "And they neither found me in the Temple disputing with any man, neither raising up the people, neither in the synagogues, nor in the city" [Acts 24:12]; which in fact was the truth. And the accusers indeed use the term "ringleader," as if it were a case of fighting and insurrection; but see how mildly Paul here answers. "But this I confess unto you, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the Law and the Prophets: and have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust." (v. 14, 15.) The accusers were separating him (as an alien), but he identifies himself with the Law, as one of themselves. "And in this," says he, "do I exercise myself, to have always a conscience void of offense toward God and toward men. Now after many years I came to bring alms to my nation, and offerings. In which they found me purified in the temple, not with multitude, neither with tumult." (v. 16, 17, 18.) Why then did you come up? What brought you here? To worship, says he; to do alms. This was not the act of a factious person. Then also he casts out their person: "but," says he, (they that found me, were) "certain Jews from Asia, who ought to have been here before you, and object, if they had ought against me. Or else let these same here say, if they have found any evil doing in me while I stood before the council, except it be for this one voice, that I cried, standing among them, Touching the resurrection of the dead I am called in question by you this day." (v. 19, 20, 21.) For this is justification in superabundance, not to flee from his accusers, but to be ready to give account to all. "Of the resurrection of the dead," says he, "am I this day called in question." And not a word said he of what he had to say, how they had conspired against him, had violently kept him, had laid wait for him — for these matters are course spoken of by the tribune — but by Paul, though there was danger, not so: no, he is silent, and only defends himself, though he had very much to say. (b) "In which" (alms), says he, "they found me in course of purifying in the Temple." Then how did he profane it? For it was not the part of the same man both to purify himself and worship and come for this purpose, and then to profane it. This has with it a surmise of the justice of his cause, that he does not fall into a long discourse. And he gratifies the judge, I suppose, by that also (namely, by), making his defense compendious: (d) seeing that Tertullus before him did make a long harangue. (f) And this too is a proof of mildness, that when one has much to say, in order not to be troublesome one says but few words. (c) But let us look again at what has been said.

(Recapitulation.) "Then the soldiers," etc. [Acts 23:31-33] (a) This also made Paul famous in Cæsarea, his coming with so large a force.— "But," says Tertullus, "that I be not further tedious," (e) showing that (Felix) does find him tedious (ἐ γκόπτεται): "I beseech you," he does not say, Hear the matter, but, "hear us of your clemency." [Acts 24:4] Probably it is to pay court, that he thus lays out his speech. (g) "For having found this man, a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world" [Acts 24:5]: how then, it might be said, if he did this elsewhere (and not here)? No, says he; among us also he has profaned the Temple; "attempted," says he, "to profane it:" but the how, he leaves untold. "Whom also we took." etc. "But the tribune," etc. And while he thus exaggerates what relates to the tribune, see how he extenuates the part of the accusers themselves. "We took him," he says, "and would have judged him according to our Law." [Acts 24:6] He shows that it is a hardship to them that they have to come to foreign tribunals, and that they would not have troubled him had not the tribune compelled them, and that he, having no concern in the matter, had seized the man by force: for in fact the wrongs done were against us, and with us the tribunal ought to have been. For that this is the meaning, see what follows: "with great violence" [Acts 24:7], he says. For this conduct is violence. "From whom you may know." He neither dares to accuse him (the tribune)— for the man was indulgent (forsooth)— nor does he wholly pass it by. Then again, lest he should seem to be lying, he adduces Paul himself as his own accuser. "From whom, by examining him, you may take knowledge of all these things." [Acts 24:8] Next, as witnesses also of the things spoken, the accusers, the same persons themselves both witnesses and accusers: "And the Jews also assented," etc. [Acts 24:9] But Paul, "Forasmuch as I know that you have been of many years a just judge." [Acts 24:10] Why then, he is no stranger or alien or revolutionary person, seeing he had known the judge for many years. And he does well to add the epithet "just," that he (Felix) might not look to the chief priest, nor to the people, nor the accuser. See, how he did not let himself be carried away into abuse, although there was strong provocation. "Believing," he says, "that there will be a resurrection:" now a man who believed a resurrection, would never have done such things — "which" (resurrection) "they themselves also allow." [Acts 24:15] He does not say it of them, that they believe "all things written in the Prophets:" it was he that believed them all, not they: but how "all," it would require a long discourse to show. And he nowhere makes mention of Christ. Here by saying, "Believing," he does (virtually) introduce what relates to Christ; for the present he dwells on the subject of the resurrection, which doctrine was common to them also, and removed the suspicion of any sedition. And for the cause of his going up, "I came," he says, "to bring alms to my nation and offerings." [Acts 24:17] How then should I have troubled those, for the bringing offerings to whom I had come so long a journey? "Neither with multitude, nor with tumult." [Acts 24:18] Everywhere he does away the charge of sedition. And he also does well to challenge his accusers who were from Asia, "Who ought to accuse before you," etc., but he does well also not to reject this either; "or else," says he, "let these same here say. Touching the resurrection of the dead," etc. (v. 19, 20, 21): for in fact it was on this account they were sore troubled from the first, because he preached the Resurrection. This being proved, the things relating to Christ also were easily introduced, that He was risen. "What evil doing," he says, "they found in me. In the council" [Acts 4:2] he says: the examination not having taken place in private. That these things which I say are true, those witness who bring this charge against me. "Having," he says, "a conscience void of offense both toward God, and toward men." [Acts 24:16] This is the perfection of virtue, when even to men we give no handle against us, and are careful to be void of offense with God. "That I cried," he says, "in the council." He also shows their violence. They have it not to say, Thou did these things under the pretext of alms: for (it was) "not with multitude, nor with tumult:" especially as upon enquiry made concerning this thing, nothing further was found. Do you observe his moderation, though there were dangers? Do you observe how he keeps his tongue from evil-speaking, how he seeks only one thing, to free himself from the charges against himself, not that he may criminate them, except so far as he might be obliged to do so while defending himself? Just as Christ also said: "I have not a devil, but I honor My Father: but you do dishonor Me." [John 8:49]

Let us imitate him, since he also was an imitator of Christ. If he, with enemies, who went even to the length of murder and slaughter, said nothing offensive to them, what pardon shall we deserve, who in reviling and abuse become infuriated, calling our enemies villains, detestable wretches? What pardon shall we deserve, for having enemies at all? Hear you not, that to honor (another) is to honor one's self? So it is: but we disgrace ourselves. You accuse (some one) that he has abused you: then why do you bring yourself under the same accusation? Why inflict a blow on yourself? Keep free from passion, keep unwounded: do not, by wishing to smite another, bring the hurt upon yourself. What, is the other tumult of our soul not enough for us, the tumult that is stirred up, though there be none to stir it up — for example, its outrageous lusts, its griefs and sorrows, and such like — but we must needs heap up a pile of others also? And how, you will say, is it possible, when one is insulted and abused, to bear this? And how is it not possible, I ask? Is a wound got from words; or do words inflict bruises on our bodies? Then where is the hurt to us? So that, if we will, we can bear it. Let us lay down for ourselves a law not to grieve, and we shall bear it: let us say to ourselves, "It is not from enmity; it is from infirmity" — for it is indeed owing to an infirmity, since, for proof that it comes not from enmity nor from malignity of disposition, but from infirmity, the other also would fain have restrained (his anger), although he had suffered numberless wrongs. If we only have this thought in our minds, that it is from infirmity, we shall bear it, and while we forgive the offending person, we shall try not to fall into it ourselves. For I ask all you who are present: would you have wished to be able to exercise such a philosophic temper, as to bear with those who insult you? I think so. Well, then, he insulted unwillingly; he would rather not have done so, but he did it, forced by his passion: refrain yourself. Do you not see (how it is with) the demoniacs (in their fits)? Just then as it is with them, so with him: it is not so much from enmity, as from infirmity (that he behaves as he does): endure it. And as for us — it is not so much from the insults as they are in themselves that we are moved, as from our own selves: else how is it that when madmen offer us the same insults, we bear it? Again, if those who insult us be our friends, in that case too we bear it: or also our superiors, in that case also we bear it: how then is it not absurd, that in the case of these three, friends, madmen, and superiors, we bear it, but where they are of the same rank or our inferiors, we do not bear it? I have oftentimes said: It is but an impulse of the moment, something that hurries us away on the sudden: let us endure it for a little, and we shall bear the whole thing. The greater the insults, the more weak the offender. Do you know when it behooves us to grieve? When we have insulted another, and he keeps silence: for then he is strong, and we weak: but if the contrary be the case, you must even rejoice: you are crowned, you are proclaimed conqueror, without having even entered into the contest, without having borne the annoyance of sun, and heat, and dust, without having grappled with an antagonist and let him close with you; nothing but a mere wish on your part, sitting or standing, and you have got a mighty crown: a crown far greater than those (combatants earn): for to throw an enemy standing to the encounter, is nothing like so great as to overcome the darts of anger. You have conquered, without having even let him close with you, you have thrown down the passion that was in you, have slain the beast that was roused, have quelled the anger that was raging, like some excellent herdsman. The fight was like to have been an intestine one, the war a civil war. For, as those who sit down to besiege from without (endeavor to), embroil (the besieged) in civil discords, and then overcome them; so he that insults, unless he rouse the passion within us, will not be able to overcome us: unless we kindle the flame in ourselves, he has no power. Let the spark of anger be within us, so as to be ready for lighting at the right moment, not against ourselves, nor so as to involve us in numberless evils. See ye not how the fire in houses is kept apart, and not thrown about at random everywhere, neither among straw, nor among the linen, nor just where it may chance, that so there may not be danger, if a wind blow on it, of its kindling a flame: but whether a maid-servant have a lamp, or the cook light a fire, there is many an injunction given, not to do this in the draught of the wind, nor near a wooden panel, nor in the night-time: but when the night has come on, we extinguish the fire, fearing lest perchance while we are asleep and there is none to help, it set fire, and burn us all. Let this also be done with regard to anger; let it not be scattered everywhere up and down in our thoughts, but let it be in some deep recess of the mind, that the wind arising from the words of him who is opposing us may not easily reach to it, but that it receive the wind (which is to rouse it) from ourselves, who know how to rouse it in due measure and with safety. If it receive the wind from without, it knows no moderation; it will set everything on fire: oftentimes when we are asleep this wind will come upon it, and will burn up all. Let it therefore be with us (in safe keeping) in such sort as only to kindle a light: for anger does kindle a light when it is managed as it ought to be: and let us have torches against those who wrong others, against the devil. Let not the spark lie anywhere as it may chance, nor be thrown about; let us keep it safe under ashes: in lowly thoughts let us keep it slumbering. We do not want it at all times, but when there is need to subdue and to make tender, to mollify obduracy, and convict the soul. What evils have angry and wrathful passions wrought! And what makes it grievous indeed is, that when we have parted asunder, we have no longer the power to come together again, but we wait for others (to do this): each is ashamed, and blushes to come back himself and reconcile the other. See, he is not ashamed to part asunder and to be separated; no, he takes the lead as author of the evil: but to come forward and patch that which is rent, this he is ashamed to do: and the case is just the same, as if a man should not shrink from cutting off a limb, but should be ashamed to join it together again. What do you say, O man? Have you committed great injuries, and yourself been the cause of the quarrel? Why, then, you would justly be the first to go and be reconciled, as having yourself furnished the cause. But he did the wrong, he is the cause of the enmity? Why then, for this reason also you must do it, that men may the more admire you, that in addition to the former, you may get the first prize in the latter also: as you were not the cause of the enmity, so neither of its being extended further. Perhaps also the other, as conscious within himself of numberless evils, is ashamed and blushes. But he is haughty? On this account above all, do not hesitate to run and meet him: for if the ailment in him be twofold, both haughtiness and anger, in this you have mentioned the very reason why you ought to be the first to go to him, you that are the one in sound health, the one who is able to see: as for him, he is in darkness: for such is anger and false pride. But do you, who art free from these and in sound health, go to him — you the physician, go to the sick. Does any of the physicians say, Because such an one is sick, I do not go to him? No, this is the very reason above all why they do go, when they see that he is not able to come to them. For of those who are able (to come) they think less, as of persons not extremely ill, but not so of those who lie at home sick. Or are not pride and anger, think you, worse than any illness? Is not the one like a sharp fever, the other like a body swollen with inflammation? Think what a thing it is to have a fever and inflammation: go to him, extinguish the fire, for by the grace of God you can, go, assuage the heat as it were with water. "But," you will say, "how if he is only the more set up by my doing this very thing?" This is nothing to you: you have done your part, let him take account for himself: let not our conscience condemn us, that this thing happens in consequence of any omission of what ought to have been done on our part. "In so doing," says the Scripture, "you shall heap coals of fire on his head." [Romans 12:20, cf. Hom. in l. xxii. §3 And yet, for all that this is the consequence, it bids us go and be reconciled and do good offices — not that we may heap coals of fire, but that (our enemy) knowing that future consequence, may be assuaged by the present kindness, that he may tremble, that he may fear our good offices rather than our hostilities, and our friendships rather than our ill designs. For one does not so hurt his hater by showing his resentment as an enemy, as by doing him good and showing kindness. For by his resentment, he has hurt both himself and perhaps the other also in some little degree: but by doing good offices, he has heaped coals of fire on his head. "Why then," you will say, "for fear of thus heaping coals one ought not to do this (b) but to carry on the enmity to greater lengths." By no means: it is not you that cause this, but he with his brutish disposition. For if, when you are doing him good, and honoring him, and offering to be reconciled, he persists in keeping up the enmity, it is he has kindled the fire for himself, he has set his own head on fire; you are guiltless. Do not want to be more merciful than God (b), or rather, if you wish it, you will not be able, not even in the least degree. How should you? "As far as the heaven is from the earth," Scripture says, "so far are My counsels from your counsels" [Isaiah 45:8]: and again, "If you," He says, "being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more your heavenly Father" [Matthew 7:11]? But in fact this talk is mere pretext and subterfuge. Let us not prevaricate with God's commandments. "And how do we prevaricate," you will say? He has said, "In so doing, you will heap coals of fire on his head:" and you say, I do not like to do this. (a) But are you willing to heap coals after another fashion, that is upon your own head? For in fact this is what resentment does: (c) since you shall suffer evils without number. (e) You say, "I am afraid for my enemy, because he has done me great injuries:" in reality is it this you say? But how came you to have an enemy? But how came you to hate your enemy? You fear for him that has injured you, but do you not fear yourself? Would that you had a care for yourself! Do not act (the kindness) with such an aim as this: or rather do it, though it be but with such an aim. But you do it not at all. I say not to you, "you will heap coals of fire:" no, I say another and a greater thing: only do it. For Paul says this only by way of summoning you (if only), in hope of the vengeance, to put an end to the enmity. Because we are savage as wild beasts in disposition, and would not otherwise endure to love our enemy, unless we expected some revenge, he offers this as a cake, so to say, to a wild beast. For to the Apostles (the Lord) says not this, but what says He? "That ye may be like to your Father which is in heaven." [Matthew 5:45] And besides, it is not possible that the benefactor and the benefited should remain in enmity. This is why Paul has put it in this way. Why, affecting a high and generous principle in your words, why in your deeds do you not even observe (common) moderation? (It sounds) well; you do not feed him, for fear of thereby heaping upon him coals of fire: well then, you spare him? Well then, you love him, you act with this object in view? God knows, whether you have this object in so speaking, and are not palming this talk upon us as a mere pretence and subterfuge. You have a care for your enemy, you fear lest he be punished, then would you not have extinguished your anger? For he that loves to that degree that he overlooks his own interest for the sake of the other's advantage, that man has no enemy. (Then indeed) you might say this. How long shall we trifle in matters that are not to be trifled with, and that admit of no excuse? Wherefore I beseech you, let us cut off these pretexts; let us not despise God's laws: that we may be enabled with well-pleasing to the Lord to pass this life present, and attain unto the good things promised, through the grace and mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ, with Whom to the Father and the Holy Ghost together be glory, might, honor, now and ever, world without end. Amen.

Source: Homily 50 on the Acts of the Apostles

[AD 585] Cassiodorus on Acts 24:1

"And after five days the high priest Ananias came down," etc. After five days, the Jews came to the judge Felix against Paul, with the orator Tertullus […] Then, the parties having been presented, the orator Tertullus, overconfident in human eloquence, began maliciously to attack Paul: the latter, he said, wanted to cause disorder among peaceful Jews around the world with new preachings. They had arrested him and wanted immediately to punish that great crime according to their law; but Lysias the tribune, as they all knew, had taken him away and sent him to be judged by Felix. The rest of the Jews testified in a dreadful-sounding voice that the things just said were so.

Source: Complexiones on the Acts of the Apostles

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 24:3

See how [Tertullus] approaches the judge with praises from the start and wants to hand Paul over as a revolutionary and a rebel. Then, notice how he hastens as if he has many things to say.

Source: CATENA ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 24.2-3

[AD 735] Bede on Acts 24:5

And the author of the sedition of the sect of the Nazarenes. At that time Christians were called Nazarenes as a reproach; later indeed among the Jews a heresy arose called that of the Nazarenes, who believe in Christ, the Son of God, born of the virgin Mary, and say he who suffered under Pontius Pilate and rose again, in whom we also believe. But since they wish to be both Jews and Christians, they are neither Jews nor Christians.

Source: Commentary on Acts

[AD 735] Bede on Acts 24:6-8

Whom we also apprehended. From whom you will be able, by judging all these things, to know. In this place, some of our Codices have several verses which read in Greek as follows: Whom we also apprehended, and according to our law wished to judge. But Lysias the tribune, coming with many, took him by force from our hands, ordering his accusers to come before you, hence you may be able yourself, by judging all these things, to know, etc.

Source: Commentary on Acts

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 24:7

Then comes the accusation against Lysias. “It was not right for him,” he says, “to drag him away with great violence.” … “He tried,” he says, “to profane the temple,” but [Tertullus] does not say how. He also magnified what concerned Paul, but see how he diminished what concerned him. “We seized him,” he says, “and would have judged him according to our law.” He claims that it was unpleasant to them to come to foreign courts and that they would have not given trouble to [Felix], if he had not forced them, and that it was not right for Lysias to take Paul away. “These,” he says, “were in fact offenses against us, because the trial ought to have taken place among us.” See now the rest as a confirmation that things were so, “with great violence,” he says. That, indeed, was violence. “From him,” he says, “you will be able to learn.” … He puts Paul in the position to become his own accuser. “From him,” he says, “you will be able to know by judging.” And the very witnesses of the things that were said, they are the accusers—they are the witnesses and the accusers.

Source: CATENA ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 24.7-9

[AD 585] Cassiodorus on Acts 24:10

"Then Paul answered (the governor making a sign to him), saying." When the orator Tertullus had made the claims he wanted, Paul, after first saying things that might win him the goodwill of the judge, responded thus: when he had come to Jerusalem following the custom of his nation to adore the Lord and bring alms to his nation, he had neither gathered a multitude nor caused any tumult; but, while held by centurions, he had cried to the people: "It is concerning the resurrection of the dead, which ye too believe in, that I today stand to be judged." And he affirmed that they could not prove anything like what they, with wicked intentions, had invented about him. By all means, since they were present, they should say if they remembered any other thing done by him that conduced to disorder in the city. The judge Felix put off their hearing until the tribune Lysias should be present, commanding a centurion that Paul, while kept in custody, should be easy, and that he should not prohibit anyone to minister unto him what might contribute to comforting him.

Source: Complexiones on the Acts of the Apostles

[AD 735] Bede on Acts 24:14

But I confess this to you, that according to the sect which they call a heresy, so I serve my Father God. It is better read in Greek: That according to the way which they call a heresy, so I serve the Father God. For what consistency is there for him who spoke Greek, to say: According to the sect which they call a heresy, since the same in Latin, sect, means heresy in Greek? But he said: So I serve the Father God, according namely to that way which the unbelievers call a heresy, that is, a sect, as if it has more persistence in its following than in the diligence of rightly discerning.

Source: Commentary on Acts

[AD 325] Lucius Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius on Acts 24:15

And the force of this is not that it altogether annihilates.
For they who have not known God, since sentence cannot be passed upon them for their acquittal, are already judged and condemned, since the Holy Scriptures testify that the wicked shall not arise to judgment.

[AD 735] Bede on Acts 24:17

However, after many years, I came to my nation to give alms and make offerings and vows. Alms pertain to those things which he had brought for the use of the saints, of which he makes frequent mention in his Epistles; offerings and vows, however, to those things which, at the urging of James and the elders, he offered to God in the temple. Although in Greek, vows are not added. Even though Luke in the order of the history did not say that Paul came to Jerusalem from Greece with the alms for the poor of Christ, from the words, however, which he reports Paul said, he shows that he had done this.

Source: Retractions on Acts

[AD 735] Bede on Acts 24:19

But some Jews from Asia. Join this to the preceding, that is, these are the ones who found me in the temple.

Source: Commentary on Acts

[AD 585] Cassiodorus on Acts 24:21

"And after some days, Drusilla, Felix's wife, who was a Jew." After some days, Felix, at the request of his wife Drusilla, had Paul brought before her. As Paul discussed much about faith in the Lord and about justice, and chastity, and about the judgement to come, Felix, moved by the truth of his preaching, said to him: "For this time, go thy way; and when I have a convenient time, I will make sure thou art present." And he summoned him frequently, believing that he could take money from him as was done in secular matters. Meanwhile, when two years were ended, Felix had for successor Portius Festus; and, to please the Jews, Felix left Paul in bonds. Then, when Festus came to Caesarea, both Paul and the Jews who persecuted him were presented before him, and he sat in the judgement seat. Paul declared that he had done harm to no one, wondering why he was suffering such hate and persecution; and he therefore proclaimed that he should be sent to Caesar. Festus briefly replied: "Since thou hast appealed to Caesar, thou shalt go to Caesar".

Source: Complexiones on the Acts of the Apostles

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 24:22-27

"And when Felix heard these things, having more perfect knowledge of that way, he deferred them and said, When Lysias the tribune shall come down, I will know the uttermost of your matter. And he commanded a centurion to keep Paul, and to let him have liberty, and that he should forbid none of his acquaintance to minister or come unto him."

See how much close investigation is made by the many in a long course of time, that it should not be said that the trial was hurried over. For, as the orator had made mention of Lysias, that he took "him away with violence, Felix," he says, "deferred them. Having knowledge of that way:" that is, he put them off on purpose: not because he wanted to learn, but as wishing to get rid of the Jews. On their account, he did not like to let him go: to punish him was not possible; that would have been (too) barefaced. "And to let him have liberty, and to forbid none of his acquaintance to minister to him." So entirely did he too acquit him of the charges. Howbeit, to gratify them, he detained him, and besides, expecting to receive money, he called for Paul. "And after certain days, when Felix came with his wife Drusilla, which was a Jewess, he sent for Paul, and heard him concerning the faith in Christ. And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance (i.e. self-control or chastity), and judgment to come, Felix trembled, and answered, Go your way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for you. He hoped also that money should have been given him of Paul, that he might loose him; wherefore he sent for him the oftener, and communed with him. But after two years Porcius Festus came into Felix's room: and Felix, willing to show the Jews a pleasure, left Paul bound." [Acts 24:24-27] See how close to the truth are the things written. But he sent for him frequently, not that he admired him, nor that he praised the things spoken, nor that he wished to believe, but why? "Expecting," it says, "that money should have been given him." Observe how he does not hide here the mind of the judge. "Wherefore he sent for him," etc. And yet if he had condemned him, he would not have done this, nor have wished to hear a man, condemned and of evil character. And observe Paul, how, though reasoning with a ruler, he says nothing of the sort that was likely to amuse and entertain, but ("he reasoned," it says,) "of righteousness, and of the coming judgment," and of the resurrection. And such was the force of his words, that they even terrified the governor. This man is succeeded in his office by another, and he leaves Paul a prisoner: and yet he ought not to have done this; he ought to have put an end to the business: but he leaves him, by way of gratifying them. They however were so urgent, that they again besought the judge. Yet against none of the Apostles had they set themselves thus pertinaciously; there, when they had attacked, anon they desisted. So providentially is he removed from Jerusalem, having to do with such wild beasts. And they nevertheless request that he might be brought again there to be tried. "Now when Festus had come into the province, after three days he ascended from Cæsarea to Jerusalem. Then the high priest and the chief of the Jews informed him against Paul, and besought him, and desired favor against him, that he would send for him to Jerusalem, laying wait in the way to kill him." [Acts 25:1-3] Here now God's providence interposed, not permitting the governor to do this: for it was natural that he having just come to the government would wish to gratify them: but God suffered him not. "But Festus answered, that Paul should be kept at Cæsarea, and that he himself would depart shortly there. Let them therefore, said he, which among you are able, go down with me, and accuse this man, if there be any wickedness in him. And when he had tarried among them more than ten days, he went down unto Cæsarea; and the next day sitting on the judgment seat commanded Paul to be brought." [Acts 25:4-6] But after they came down, they immediately made their accusations shamelessly and with more vehemence: and not having been able to convict him on grounds relating to the Law, they again according to their custom stirred the question about Cæsar, being just what they did in Christ's case. For that they had recourse to this is manifest by the fact, that Paul defends himself on the score of offenses against Cæsar. "And when he had come, the Jews which came down from Jerusalem stood round about, and laid many and grievous complaints against Paul, which they could not prove. While he answered for himself, Neither against the law of the Jews, neither against the temple, nor yet against Cæsar, have I offended anything at all. But Festus, willing to do the Jews a pleasure, answered Paul, and said, Will you go up to Jerusalem, and there be judged of these things before me"? [Acts 25:7-9] Wherefore he too gratifies the Jews, the whole people, and the city. Such being the case, Paul terrifies him also, using a human weapon for his defense. "Then said Paul, I stand at Cæsar's judgment seat, where I ought to be judged; to the Jews have I done no wrong, as you very well know. For if I be an offender, or have committed anything worthy of death, I refuse not to die: but if there be none of these things whereof these accuse me, no man may deliver me unto them. I appeal unto Cæsar." (v. 10, 11.) Some one might say, How is it, that having been told, "You must also bear witness of Me in Rome," [Acts 23:11], he, as if unbelieving, did this? God forbid: nay, he did it, because he so strongly believed. For it would have been a tempting of God to be bold on account of that declaration, and to cast himself into numberless dangers, and to say: "Let us see if God is able even thus to deliver me." But not so does Paul; no, he does his part, all that in him lies, committing the whole to God. Quietly also he reproves the governor: for, "If, says he, I am an offender, you do well: but if not, why do you give me up?" "No man," he says, "may sacrifice me." He put him in fear, so that even if he wished, he could not sacrifice him to them; while also as an excuse to them he had Paul's appeal to allege. "Then Festus, when he had conferred with the council, answered, Have you appealed unto Cæsar? Unto Cæsar shall you go. And after certain days king Agrippa and Bernice came unto Cæsarea to salute Festus." (v. 12, 13.) Observe, he communicates the matter to Agrippa, so that there should be other hearers once more, both the king, and the army, and Bernice. Thereupon a speech in his exculpation. "And when they had been there many days, Festus declared Paul's cause unto the king, saying, There is a certain man left in bonds by Felix: about whom, when I was at Jerusalem, the chief priests and the elders of the Jews informed me, desiring to have judgment against him. To whom I answered, It is not the manner of the Romans to deliver any man to die, before that he which is accused have the accusers face to face, and have license to answer for himself concerning the crime laid against him. Therefore, when they had come hither, without any delay on the morrow I sat on the judgment seat, and commanded the man to be brought forth. Against whom when the accusers stood up, they brought none accusation of such things as I supposed: but had certain questions against him of their own superstition, and of one Jesus, which was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive. And because I doubted of such manner of questions, I asked him whether he would go to Jerusalem, and there be judged of these matters. But when Paul had appealed to be reserved unto the hearing of Augustus, I commanded him to be kept till I might send him to Cæsar. Then Agrippa said to Festus, I would also hear the man myself. Tomorrow, said he, you shall hear him." [Acts 25:14-22] And observe a crimination of the Jews, not from Paul, but also from the governor. "Desiring," he says, "to have judgment against him." To whom I said, to their shame, that "it is not the manner of the Romans," before giving an opportunity to speak for himself, "to sacrifice a man." But I did give him (such opportunity), and I found no fault in him. "Because I doubted," says he, of "such manner of questions:" he casts a veil also over his own wrong. Then the other desires to see him. (b) But let us look again at what has been said.

(Recapitulation.) "And when Felix," etc. [Acts 24:22] Observe on all occasions how the governors try to keep off from themselves the annoyance of the Jews, and are often compelled to act contrary to justice, and seek pretexts for deferring: for of course it was not from ignorance that he deferred the cause, but knowing it. And his wife also hears, together with the governor. [Acts 24:24] This seems to me to show great honor. For he would not have brought his wife to be present with him at the hearing, but that he thought great things of him. It seems to me that she also longed for this. And observe how Paul immediately discourses not only about faith, nor about remission of sins, but also about practical points of duty. "Go your way," he says, "for this time: when I have a convenient season, I will call for you." [Acts 24:25] Observe his hardness of heart: hearing such things, "he hoped that he should receive money from him!" [Acts 24:26] And not only so, but even after conversing with him — for it was towards the end of his government — he left him bound, "willing to show the Jews a pleasure" [Acts 24:27]: so that he not only coveted money, but also glory. How, O wretch, can you look for money from a man who preaches the contrary? But that he did not get it, is evident from his leaving him bound; he would have loosed him, had he received it. "Of temperance," it says, he reasoned; but the other was hankering to receive money from him who discoursed these things! And to ask indeed he did not dare: for such is wickedness: but he hoped it. "And when two years were completed," etc., so that it was but natural that he showed them a pleasure, as he had been so long governor there. "Now when Festus had come into the province," etc. ch. 25:1, 2 At the very beginning, the priests came to him, who would not have hesitated to go even to Cæsarea, unless he had been seen immediately coming up, since immediately on his arrival they come to him. And he spends ten days, in order, I suppose, to be open to those who wished to corrupt him with bribes. But Paul was in the prison. "They besought him," it says, "that he would send for him:" why did they desire it as a favor, if he was deserving of death? But thus their plotting became evident even to him, so that discoursing of it (to Agrippa), he says, "desiring to have judgment against him." They wanted to induce him to pass sentence now immediately, being afraid of Paul's tongue. What are you afraid of? What are you in such a hurry? In fact, that expression, "that he should be kept" [Acts 25:4], shows this. Does he want to escape? "Let them therefore," he says, "which among you are able, accuse him." [Acts 25:5] Again accusers, again at Cæsarea, again Paul is brought forth. And having come, immediately "he sat on the judgment-seat" [Acts 25:6]; with all his haste: they so drove, so hurried him. While as yet he had not got acquainted with the Jews, nor experienced the honor paid to him by them, he answered rightly: but now that he had been in Jerusalem ten days, he too wants to pleasure them (by sacrificing Paul to them): then, also to receive Paul, "Will you," says he, "be judged there of these things by me?" [Acts 25:9] I am not giving you up to them — but this was the fact — and he leaves the point to his own choice, that by this mark of respect he might get him to yield: since his was the sentence, and it would have been too barefaced, when he had been convicted of nothing here, to take him back there. "But Paul said, At Cæsar's tribunal am I standing," etc. [Acts 25:10]: he did not say, I will not, lest he should make the judge more vehement, but (here) again is his great boldness: They cast me out once for all, themselves, and by this they think to condemn me, by their showing that I have offended against Cæsar: at his bar I choose to be judged, at the bar of the injured person himself. "To the Jews have I done no wrong, as thou also very well know." Here now he reproved him, that he too wished to sacrifice him to the Jews: then, on the other hand, he relaxes (the sternness of) his speech: "if then I be an offender, or have committed anything worthy of death, I refuse not to die." I utter sentence against myself. For along with boldness of speech there must be also justness of cause, so as to abash (the hearer). "But if there be nothing in the things whereof these accuse me, no man" — however he may wish it — "no man may sacrifice me to please them." He said, not, I am not worthy of death, nor, I am worthy to be acquitted, but, I am ready to take my trial before Cæsar. At the same time too, remembering the dream, he was the more confident to appeal. [Acts 23:11] And he said not, Thou (may not), but, neither any other man may sacrifice me, that it might be no affront to him. "Then Festus, when he had conferred with the council" — do you observe how he seeks to gratify them? For this is favor — "having conferred," it says, "with the council, he said, Have you appealed unto Cæsar? Unto Cæsar shall you go." [Acts 25:12] See how his trial is again lengthened out, and how the plot against him becomes an occasion for the preaching: so that with ease and in safe custody he should be taken away to Rome, with none to plot evil against him: for it was not the same thing his simply coming there, and his coming on such a cause. For, in fact this was what made the Jews come together there. [Acts 28:17] Then again, some time passes while he tarries at Jerusalem, that you may learn, that, though some time passed, the evil design against him prevails nothing, God not permitting it. But this king Agrippa, who was also a Herod, was a different Agrippa, after him of James' time, so that this is the fourth (Herod). See how his enemies coöperate with him against their will. To make the audience large, Agrippa falls into a desire of hearing: and he does not simply hear, but with much parade. And see what a vindication (απολογιαν)! So writes Festus, and the ruthlessness of the Jews is openly made a show of: for when it is the governor that says these things, he is a witness above all suspicion: so that the Jews are condemned by him also. For, when all had pronounced sentence against them, then, and not sooner, God brings upon them the punishment. But observe: Lysias gave it against them, Felix against them, Festus against them — although he wished to gratify them — Agrippa against them. What further? The Pharisees— even they gave it against themselves. No evil, says Festus, "of such things as I supposed: no accusation did they bring against him." [Acts 25:18] And yet they did bring it: true, but they did not prove it: for their evil design and daring plot against him gave cause to surmise this, but the examination brought out nothing of the kind. "And of one Jesus," he says, "which was dead." [Acts 25:19] He says naturally enough, "of one" (Jesus), as being a man in office, and not caring for these things. "And not knowing, for my part, what to make of the enquiry concerning these things" [Acts 25:20]— of course, it went beyond a judge's hearing, the examining into these matters. If you are at a loss, why do you drag him to Jerusalem? But the other would not deign this: no, "To Cæsar" (says he); as in fact it was touching Cæsar that they accused him. Do you hear the appeal? Hear the plotting of the Jews? Hear their factious spirit? All these things provoked him to a desire (of hearing him): and he gives them the gratification and Paul becomes more renowned. For such as I said, are the ill designs (of enemies). Had not these things been so, none of these rulers would have deigned to hear him, none would have heard with such quietness and silence. And he seems indeed to be teaching, he seems to be making a defense; but he rather makes a public harangue with much orderliness. Then let us not think that ill designs against us are a grievous thing. So long as we do not make ill designs against ourselves, no one will be able to have ill designs against us: or rather, people may do this, but they do us no hurt; nay, even benefit us in the highest degree: for it rests with ourselves, whether we shall suffer evil, or not suffer evil. Lo! I testify, and proclaim with a loud voice, more piercing even than the sound of a trumpet — and were it possible to ascend on high and cry aloud, I would not shrink from doing it — him that is a Christian, none of all the human beings that inhabit the earth will have power to hurt. And why do I say, human beings? Not even the Evil Spirit himself, the tyrant, the Devil, can do this, unless the man injure himself; be what it may that any one works, in vain he works it. For even as no human being could hurt an angel, if he were on earth, so neither can one human being hurt another human being. But neither again will he himself be able to hurt another, so long as he is good. What then can be equal to this, when neither to be hurt is possible, nor to hurt another? For this thing is not less than the former, the not wishing to hurt another. Why, that man is a kind of angel, yea, like God. For such is God; only, He indeed (is such) by nature, but this man, by moral choice: neither to be hurt is possible (for either), nor to hurt another. But this thing, this "not possible," think not that it is for any want of power — for the contrary to this is want of power — no, I speak of the morally incompatible (τὸ ἀνενδεκτόν). For the (Divine) Nature is neither Itself susceptible of hurt, nor capable of hurting another: since this very thing in itself is a hurt. For in no other way do we hurt ourselves, than by hurting another, and our greatest sins become such from our doing injury to ourselves. So that for this reason also the Christian cannot be hurt, namely, because neither can he hurt. But how in hurting others we hurt ourselves, come, let us take this saying in hand for examination in detail. Let a man wrong another, insult, overreach; whom then has he hurt? Is it not himself first? This is plain to every one. For to the one, the damage is in money, to himself, it is in the soul; to destruction, and to punishment. Again, let another be envious: is it not himself he has injured? For such is the nature of injustice: to its own author first it does incalculable hurt. "Yes, but to another also?" True, but nothing worth considering: or rather, not even a little — nay, it even benefits him. For let there be — as the whole matter lies most in these examples — let there be some poor man, having but little property and (barely) provided with necessary food, and another rich and wealthy, and having much power, and then let him take the poor man's property, and strip him naked, and give him up to starvation, while he shall luxuriate in what he has unjustly taken from the other: not only has he not hurt that man at all — he has even benefited him, while himself he has not only not benefited, but even hurt. For how should it be otherwise? In the first place, harassed by an evil conscience, and day by day condemning himself and being condemned by all men: and then, secondly, in the judgment to come. But the other, how is he benefited? Because to suffer ill and bear it nobly, is great gain: for it is a doing away of sins, this suffering of ill, it is a training to philosophy, it is a discipline of virtue. Let us see which of the two is in evil case, this man or that. For the one, if he be a man of well-ordered mind, will bear it nobly: the other will be every day in a constant tremor and misgiving: which then is hurt, this man or that? "You talk idly," say you: "for when a man has nothing to eat, and is forced to bewail himself and to feel himself very wretched, or comes and begs, and gets nothing, is not that a ruining of both soul and body?" No, it is you that talk idly: for I show facts in proof. For say, does none of the rich feel himself wretched? What then? Is poverty the cause of his wretchedness? "But he does not starve." And what of that? The greater is the punishment, when having riches he does this. For neither does wealth make a man strong-minded, nor poverty make him weak: otherwise none of those living in wealth would pass a wretched life, nor would any of those in poverty (not) curse his fate. But that yours is indeed the idle talk, I will make manifest to you from hence. Was Paul in poverty or in wealth? Did he suffer hunger, or did he not? You may hear himself saying, "In hunger and thirst." [2 Corinthians 11:27] Did the prophets suffer hunger, or did they not? They too had a hard time of it. "Again, you fetch up Paul to me, again the prophets, some ten or twenty men." But whence shall I bring examples? "Show me from the many some who bear ills nobly." But the rare is ever such: however, if you will, let us examine the matter as it is in itself. Let us see whose is the greater and sharper care, whose the more easy to be borne. The one is solicitous about his necessary food, the other about numberless matters, freed from that care. The rich man is not afraid on the score of hunger, but he is afraid about other things: oftentimes for his very life. The poor man is not free from anxiety about food, but he is free from other anxieties, he has safety, has quietness, has security.

If to injure another is not an evil, but a good, wherefore are we ashamed? Wherefore do we cover our faces? Wherefore, being reproached, are we vexed and disconcerted? If the being injured is not a good thing, wherefore do we pride ourselves, and glory in the thing, and justify ourselves on its account? Would you learn how this is better than that? Observe those who are in the one condition, and those who are in the other. Wherefore are laws? Wherefore are courts of justice? Wherefore punishments? Is it not, on account of those men, as being diseased and unsound? But the pleasure lies great, you will say. Let us not speak of the future: let us look into the present. What is worse than a man who is under such a suspicion as this? What more precarious? What more unsound? Is he not always in a state of shipwreck? Even if he do any just thing, he is not credited, condemned as he is by all on account of his power (of injuring): for in all who dwell with him he has accusers: he cannot enjoy friendship: for none would readily choose to become the friend of a man who has such a character, for fear of becoming implicated with him in the opinion held of him. As if he were a wild beast, all men turn away from him; as from a pest, a foe, a man-slayer, and an enemy of nature, so they shrink from the unjust man. If he who has wronged another happen to be brought into a court of justice, he does not even need an accuser, his character condemns him in place of any accuser. Not so he who is injured; he has all men to take his part, to condole with him, to stretch out the hand of help: he stands on safe ground. If to injure another be a good and a safe thing, let any one confess that he is unjust: but if he dares not do this, why then does he pursue it as a good thing? But let us see in our own persons, if his same be done there, what evils come of it: (I mean,) if any of the parts or functions within us having overstepped its proper bounds, grasp at the office of some other. For let the spleen, if it will, have left its proper place, and seize on the part belonging to some other organ along with its own, is not this disease? The moisture within us, let it fill every place, is it not dropsy and gout? is not this to ruin itself, along with the other? Again, let the bile seek for a wide room, and let the blood be diffused throughout every part. But how is it in the soul with anger, lust, and all the rest, if the food exceed its proper measure? Again in the body, if the eye wish to take in more, or to see more than is allotted to it, or admit a greater light than is proper. But if, when the light is good, yet the eye is ruined, if it choose to see more than is right: consider what it must be in the case of an evil thing. If the ear take in a (too) loud voice, the sense is stunned: the mind, if it reason about things above itself, it is overpowered: and whatever is in excess, mars all. For this is πλεονεξία, the wanting to have more than what is marked off and allotted. So too in respect of money; when we will needs put upon (us) more burdens (than is meet), although we do not perceive it, to our sore hurt we are nourishing within ourselves a wild beast; much having, yet much wanting, numberless the cares we entangle ourselves withal, many the handles we furnish the devil against ourselves. In the case of the rich, however, the devil has not even need of labor, so surely do their very concerns of business of themselves ruin them. Wherefore I beseech you to abstain from the lust of these things, that we may be enabled to escape the snares of the evil one, and having taken hold of virtue, to attain unto the good things eternal, through the grace and mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ, with Whom to the Father and the Holy Ghost together be glory forever. Amen.

Source: Homily 51 on the Acts of the Apostles

[AD 220] Tertullian on Acts 24:26

When did Onesimus, or Aquila, or Stephen, give them aid of this kind when they were persecuted? Paul indeed, when Felix the governor hoped that he should receive money for him from the disciples, about which matter he also dealt with the apostle in private, certainly neither paid it himself, nor did the disciples for him.

Source: On Flight in Persecution

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Acts 24:26

And not only so, but even after conversing with him— for it was towards the end of his government— he left him bound, willing to show the Jews a pleasure

[AD 735] Bede on Acts 24:27

After two years were completed, Felix receives his successor Porcius Festus. He refers to the two years of Paul's stay in Caesarea, not Felix's procuratorship. For it is said above that he was a judge for that nation for many years. Especially since the histories recount that in the second year of Nero, the Apostle was sent to Rome, and that Claudius Caesar, at the time when he made Agrippa, the son of Herod, whom the angel struck down in Caesarea, king of the Jews, he also sent Felix as procurator of the whole province of Samaria and Galilee, and the region called across the Jordan.

Source: Commentary on Acts