Atti 11:3 Commento

In this chapter we have, I. Peter's necessary vindication of what he did in receiving Cornelius and his friends into the church, from the censure he lay under for it among the brethren, and their acquiescence in it (v. 1-18). II. The good success of the gospel at Antioch, and the parts adjacent (Act 11:19-21). III. The carrying on of the good work that was begun at Antioch, by the ministry of Barnabas first, and afterwards of Paul in conjunction with him, and the lasting name of Christian first given to the disciples there (Act 11:22-26). IV. A prediction of an approaching famine, and the contribution that was made among the Gentile converts for the relief of the poor saints in Judea, upon that occasion (Act 11:27-30).

And the apostles and brethren that were in Judea,.... The rest of the twelve apostles, and the private members of the churches that were in Judea, for there were in it now more churches than that at Jerusalem, Act 9:31 heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God; as well as Samaria, Act 8:14 the news by some means or other were quickly brought to them, and no doubt but they also heard that they had received the Holy Ghost, his extraordinary gifts, as well as his special grace, though no mention is made of them.

Saying, thou wentest into men uncircumcised,.... Into the houses of such, and lodged with them, and familiarly conversed with them: and didst eat with them; which, according to the traditions of the Jews, were unlawful; See Gill on Act 10:28 they say nothing about his preaching to them, and baptizing them, because these were so manifestly agreeable to the commission of Christ, in Mat 28:19 and yet how these could be without the other, is not easy to say.

Besides, the Lord would not have been censured for partaking of food with Jews, but with heathens, from whose board the Jewish discipline excludes (its disciples).

"And the Apostles and brethren that were in Judea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God. And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him, saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them." After such great things, "they of the circumcision contended:" not the Apostles; God forbid. It means, they took no small offence. And see what they allege. They do not say, Why didst thou preach? but, Why didst thou eat with them? But Peter, not stopping to notice this frigid objection - for frigid indeed it is - takes his stand on that great argument, If they had the Spirit Itself given them, how could one refuse to give them the baptism?

Do you remark how they were not kindly disposed towards him? Saying, "Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them." Do you note what zeal they had for the Law? Not Peter's authority abashed them, not the signs which had taken place, not the success achieved, what a thing it was, the Gentiles having "received the word:" but they contended about those petty things. For if none of those signs had taken place, was not the success itself enough?

For if, when he was blamed by the believers, he had paid regard to the authority which 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 even produced witnesses to defend him from blame, saying, Moreover these six brethren accompanied me. If, then, the pastor of the Church, the Prince of the Apostles, who singularly did signs and miracles, disdained not, in defending himself from blame, humbly to give a reason, how much more ought we sinners, when we are blamed for anything, to pacify those who blame us by giving a reason humbly!

Peter showed in his defense that he had by no means been the cause, but God everywhere. For he said, he himself set me in the excess of mind, he himself pointed out the sheet, and I indeed even contradicted; again the same he himself said, and I did not hear therefore. The Spirit commanded that I should join them, and having joined I did not even run on therefore. They said that God had sent, and I did not so baptize, but again God accomplished the whole matter. God baptized, not I. For while I was yet speaking, the Holy Spirit fell upon those men, and they spoke in tongues. They glorified God loudly, as do we. [CHRYSOSTOM]

You see what zeal they had concerning the law. They were not ashamed before Peter's dignity, nor the miracles that had taken place, nor that wonderful preparation that had been made for the reception of the word, but began to dispute about such trifles. Those of the circumcision disputed, not the apostles. And they do not say "why did you preach?" but "why did you eat?"

Peter returns to Jerusalem, and is accused of having associated with the Gentiles, Rom 8:1-3. He defends himself by relating at large the whole business concerning Cornelius, Rom 8:4-17. His defense is accepted, and the whole Church glorifies God for having granted unto the Gentiles repentance unto life, Rom 8:18. An account of the proceedings of those who were scattered abroad by the persecution that was raised about Stephen; and how they had spread the Gospel among the circumcision, in Phoenice, Cyprus, and Antioch, Rom 8:19-21. The Church at Jerusalem, hearing of this, sends Barnabas to confirm them in the faith, Rom 8:22, Rom 8:23. His character, Rom 8:24. He goes to Tarsus to seek Saul, whom he brings to Antioch, where the disciples are first called Christians, Rom 8:25, Rom 8:26. Certain prophets foretell the dearth which afterwards took place in the reign of the Emperor Claudias, Rom 8:27, Rom 8:28. The disciples send relief to their poor brethren to Judea, by the hands of Barnabas and Saul, Rom 8:29, Rom 8:30.

Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised - In a Jew, this was no small offense; and, as they did not know the reason of St. Peter's conduct, it is no wonder they should call him to account for it, as they considered it to be a positive transgression of the law and custom of the Jews. There is a remarkable addition here in the Codex Bezae, which it will be well to notice. The second verse of the chapter begins thus: - Now Peter had a desire for a considerable time to go to Jerusalem: and having spoken to the brethren, and confirmed them, speaking largely, he taught them through the countries, (i.e. as he passed to Jerusalem), and, as he met them, he spoke to them of the grace of God. But the brethren who were of the circumcision disputed with him, saying, etc.

PETER VINDICATES HIMSELF BEFORE THE CHURCH IN JERUSALEM FOR HIS PROCEDURE TOWARDS THE GENTILES. (Acts 11:1-18) the apostles and brethren . . . in Judea--rather, "throughout Judea."

Thou wentest in . . . But Peter rehearsed the matter, &c.--These objectors scruple not to demand from Peter, though the first among the apostles, an explanation of his conduct; nor is there any insinuation on Peter's part of disrespect towards his authority in that demand--a manifest proof that such authority was unknown both to the complainers and to himself.