ACC ~ Acts 11 v1 - 12

OVERVIEW:

This passage is another example of Luke’s repetition technique, accenting important events in the story of the church. Peter retells in the first person the turning point narrative recounted by Luke in the first person in the previous chapter and twice (Acts 11:7, 12) announces the fact that the preaching to the Gentiles occurred at the specific direction of the Holy Spirit. Peter’s need to recount and defend his actions introduces a dynamic to the events of Acts 11, and the early Christian authors locate this dynamic in different ways, but much of what they say renders various portraits of Peter. Chrysostom sees the controversy in this chapter as something that Peter would not have entered into had he not been forced. In Chrysostom’s view the problem is not in the belief of the Jewish Christians of Jerusalem that the Gentiles could not be baptized but that Peter should not have eaten with Cornelius and his friend, and so the dispute arises providentially because of the concerns of the Jerusalem Christians and not by Peter’s initiative. Gregory the Great finds Peter’s way of responding to demonstrate humble dialogue proper to one in a position of authority, while Chrysostom shows how Peter’s true authority and persuasiveness comes from his reluctant obedience to God’s initiative, which is a call to holiness that cannot be confined (BEDE). Bede sees the universal nature of this call to perfection reflected in the number of Peter and his companions being seven to recall the sevenfold gifts of the Spirit.

11:3 | Why Did You Go to the Uncircumcised?

PETER ACCUSED SO THAT THEY MIGHT LEARN. CHRYSOSTOM: The question was not “Why did you preach to them?” but “Why did you eat with them?” But Peter does not respond to this frigid (yes, frigid) objection; he relies on this profound argument: if they had received the Spirit, how could one refuse to give them baptism? But why did they not object in the case of the Samaritans? For on the contrary, neither before nor after their baptism was there any controversy, and they did not become angry on that occasion but, on hearing the news, sent the apostles for this very purpose. As a matter of fact, even here they are not complaining of this, for they knew it was of divine grace. What they ask is, “Why did you eat with them?” Besides, the difference between Samaritans and Gentiles is not so great. Surely it was part of the divine plan for Peter to be accused, so that they too might learn. For Peter would not have spoken without cause. HOMILIES ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 24.

PETER WAS A HUMBLE SHEPHERD. GREGORY THE GREAT: For if, when he was blamed by the believers, he had paid regard to the authority that he had received in holy church, he might have replied that the sheep should not dare to find fault with the shepherd to whom they had been committed. But, had he said anything of his own power in answer to the complaint of the believers, he would not have been truly a teacher of gentleness. He pacified them, therefore, by giving a reason humbly, and he even produced witnesses to defend him from blame, saying, “Moreover these six brothers accompanied me.” If, then, the pastor of the church, the prince of the apostles, who singularly did signs and miracles, did not disdain humbly to give a reason in defending himself from blame, how much more ought we sinners, when we are blamed for anything, to pacify those who blame us by giving a reason humbly! LETTER 45.

11:4 | Peter Explained

GOD INITIATED THIS. CHRYSOSTOM: The words were not those of the prudent Peter but of the Spirit. And in his defense he showed God as the absolute author and himself as the author of nothing. He said what he did in his ecstasy, “I was in the city of Joppa, and he showed the vessel, as I have said before; and again he said and I did not hear. The Spirit ordered me to leave, and so, after leaving, I did not run. I said that God had sent me, and so I did not baptize after these things, but again God did everything. God himself baptized, not I.” CATENA ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 11.4.

11:6 | Animals and Beasts of Prey

ALL ARE CALLED TO THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST. BEDE: I am amazed at how some people interpret this as having to do with certain foods that were prohibited by the old law but that are now to be consumed, since neither serpents nor reptiles can be eaten. Nor did Peter himself understand it in this way. Rather [he understood it as meaning that] all people are equally called to the gospel of Christ and nothing is naturally defiled. For when he was reproached, he explained the symbolism of this vision, not [as giving the reason] why he ate beasts but why he associated with Gentiles. COMMENTARY ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 11.6.

11:12 | The Spirit Told Me to Go

AN APPROPRIATE NUMBER. BEDE: It is beautifully appropriate that when the sevenfold gifts of the Holy Spirit were poured out, the witnesses were brothers who were seven in number. Alternatively, because this world was formed in six days, the works accomplished [by Peter] were demonstrated through the six brothers who fittingly accompanied the teacher when, among the words of his exhortation, he described to his hearers the exemplary work that he had accomplished. COMMENTARY ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 11.12.