ACC ~ Acts 16 v1 - 5

OVERVIEW:

Here begins the second missionary journey, a major journey that takes Paul into Europe and that begins from and ends in Antioch at Acts 18:22. Modern commentators, as well as the ancients, see in the circumcision of Timothy a reflection of 1 Corinthians 9:20 (“to Jews I became as a Jew in order to win Jews”). Paul’s choice of Timothy is surprising, since Paul knew that his continued preaching among the Jews could be hindered by having an uncircumcised companion (CHRYSOSTOM). Paul wisely does what is needed and circumcises Timothy (CHRYSOSTOM). From this it is clear that although he in no way saw the observance of the law as salvific, Paul did not condemn the customs of the Jews, which prepared the way for Christ (AUGUSTINE). Paul’s actions are in conformity with God’s gradual revelation to us of the fullness of truth in Christ (GREGORY OF NAZIANZUS). So even though Paul, and the church as well, had come to see the law as a figure that prepared for Christ, he acted according to the figure as needed for the benefit of those who had yet to see this (ORIGEN, CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA). For there was the possibility that too abrupt a change would drive away the Jews (BEDE). In this event Clement of Alexandria sees that whoever takes on the responsibility to teach others the truth about God realizes that he must eventually pass on to others truths they might not be ready for and thus accommodates himself to his listeners, even to the extent of deceiving another for his own good. Paul not only acted in this way himself but even taught Timothy to live in this way, and so to appear to the Jews to be preserving the law when in fact they were loosening it (CHRYSOSTOM). The various opinions of the Fathers show the same ambiguity regarding Jewish observance that we wrestle with today: is it still lawful and profitable for Jews to continue their ancient practices once they have become Christian?

16:3 | Paul Circumcised Timothy

NOT ACCORDING TO HIS OWN PREFERENCES. CHRYSOSTOM: The wisdom of Paul is indeed amazing. He, who fought so many battles against circumcision, who moved everything for this, who did not give up until he had carried his point, once the decision was confirmed, he circumcised his disciple. Not only did he not forbid others, but he himself did this. “Timothy,” it says, “he wanted as his companion.” It is surprising that he even brought him along. “Because of the Jews,” it says, “that were in those places.” This is the reason for the circumcision. For they would not have endured to hear the Word from one uncircumcised. Nothing could be wiser. So in all things he looked to what was advantageous. He did nothing at all according to his own preference. And what was the result? Look at his success. He circumcised to take away circumcision. For he preached the decisions of the apostles. HOMILIES ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 34.

PAUL DID NOT FORSAKE MOSES. AUGUSTINE: As to Paul’s circumcising of Timothy, performing a vow at Cenchrea and undertaking on the suggestion of James at Jerusalem to share the performance of the appointed rites with some who had made a vow, it is manifest that Paul’s design in these things was not to give to others the impression that he thought that by these observances salvation is given under the Christian dispensation. [His intent was] to prevent people from believing that he condemned, as no better than heathen idolatrous worship, those rites that God had appointed in the former dispensation as suitable to it and as shadows of things to come. For this is what James said to him, that the report had gone abroad concerning him that he taught people “to forsake Moses.” This would be by all means wrong for those who believe in Christ, to forsake him who prophesied of Christ, as if they detested and condemned the teaching of him of whom Christ said, “If you had believed Moses, you would have believed me, for he wrote of me.” LETTER 82.8 TO JEROME.

A GRADUAL FOLLOWING OF THE GOSPEL. GREGORY OF NAZIANZUS: There have been in the whole period of the duration of the world two conspicuous changes of people’s lives, which are also called two Testaments, or, on account of the wide fame of the matter, two earthquakes; the one from idols to the law, the other from the law to the gospel. And we are taught in the Gospel of a third earthquake, namely, from this earth to that which cannot be shaken or moved. Now the two Testaments are alike in this respect, that the change was not made on a sudden or at the first movement of the endeavor. Why not (for this is a point on which we must have information)? That no violence might be done to us but that we might be moved by persuasion. For nothing that is involuntary is durable; like streams or trees that are kept back by force. But that which is voluntary is more durable and safe. The former is due to one who uses force, the latter is ours; the one is due to the gentleness of God, the other to a tyrannical authority. Therefore God did not think it behooved him to benefit the unwilling but to do good to the willing. And therefore like a tutor or physician he partly removes and partly condones ancestral habits, conceding some little of what tended to pleasure, just as doctors do with their patients, that their medicine may be taken, being artfully blended with what is nice. For it is no very easy matter to change from those habits that custom and use have made honorable. For instance, the first cut off the idol but left the sacrifices; the second, while it destroyed the sacrifices did not forbid circumcision. Then, when once men had submitted to the curtailment, they also yielded that which had been conceded to them; in the first instance the sacrifices, in the second circumcision; and became instead of Gentiles, Jews, and instead of Jews, Christians, being beguiled into the gospel by gradual changes. Paul is a proof of this; for having at one time administered circumcision and submitted to legal purification, he advanced till he could say, and I, brothers, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution? His former conduct belonged to the temporary dispensation, his latter to maturity. ON THE HOLY SPIRIT, THEOLOGICAL ORATION 5 (31).25.

HE ACCOMMODATED THE SYMBOL. ORIGEN: [But] perhaps it has been recorded at some time or other with good reason that even the true worshiper who worships in spirit and truth performs certain symbolic acts so that, by acting in a most accommodating manner, he might free those who are enslaved to the symbol and bring them to the truth that the symbols represent. Paul appears to have done this in the case of Timothy, and perhaps also in Cenchrea and Jerusalem, as it is written in the Acts of the Apostles. COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 13.111.

ON ACCOUNT OF THE JEWS. BEDE: [It was] not because he believed that the symbolic actions of the law could provide anything of use now that the truth of the gospel was shining forth. [Paul did this] instead so that the Jewish [Christians] would not fall away from the faith because of the pretext of the Gentiles. Nevertheless, the old trace [of the law of circumcision] was to be gradually removed for them, just as the depravity of their ancient ways was to be removed in the case of the Gentiles, as has been said above. For these traces of the law were used from time to time by the apostles, as if they were at one time established by the Lord, in order to avert lack of belief on the part of the Jewish [Christians]. The saints, however, never had anything to do with the practices of the Gentiles, inasmuch as they were acquired from Satan. COMMENTARY ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 16.3.

ACCOMMODATING ONESELF FOR ANOTHER’S GOOD. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA: Whatever … [the gnostic] has in his mind, he bears on his tongue, to those who are worthy to hear, speaking as well as living from assent and inclination. For he both thinks and speaks the truth; unless at any time, medicinally, as a physician for the safety of the sick, he may deceive or tell an untruth, according to the Sophists. To illustrate: the noble apostle circumcised Timothy, though loudly declaring and writing that circumcision made with hands profits nothing. But that he might not, by dragging all at once away from the law to the circumcision of the heart through faith those of the Hebrews who were reluctant listeners, compel them to break away from the synagogue, he, “accommodating himself to the Jews, became a Jew that he might gain all.” He, then, who submits to accommodate himself merely for the benefit of his neighbors, for the salvation of those for whose sake he accommodates himself, not partaking in any dissimulation through the peril impending over the just from those who envy them, such a one by no means acts with compulsion. But for the benefit of his neighbors alone, he will do things that would not have been done by him primarily, if he did not do them on their account. Such a one gives himself: for the church; for the disciples whom he has begotten in faith; for an example to those who are capable of receiving the supreme economy of the philanthropic and God-loving instructor, for confirmation of the truth of his words, for the exercise of love to the Lord. Such a one is unenslaved by fear, true in word, enduring in labor, never willing to lie by uttered word and in it always securing sinlessness; since falsehood, being spoken with a certain deceit, is not an inert word but operates to mischief. STROMATEIS 7.9.

CIRCUMCISING TO END CIRCUMCISION. CHRYSOSTOM: Before blessed Paul, who himself had received circumcision, sent Timothy to teach the Jews, he first circumcised him in order that Timothy, as teacher, might be more acceptable to his audience. So Paul [actually] engaged in circumcision in order to abolish it. He knew why he had circumcised Timothy but chose not to disclose his reasons to the disciples. In fact, if they had known that he had circumcised him with the intention of abolishing circumcision, they would have not listened to anything Timothy had to say, and all the progress he had achieved would have been lost. Indeed, their ignorance was quite useful. As long as they believed that he circumcised Timothy in order to preserve the law, they generously received him and his doctrine. Therefore, by receiving [that doctrine] little by little, and by being taught, they abandoned their old customs. However, this would never have happened if they had known the reason from the beginning. In fact, if they had known, they would have opposed the circumcision and by opposing it they would have remained in their previous error. CATENA ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 16.1-3.