Acts 10:44–11:10

While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all who heard the word. Then they asked him to stay with them for some days. Lest it be doubted that baptism should be given to the Gentiles, it was confirmed by the testimony of the Holy Spirit, which customarily sanctifies the waters of the font, in a new order of precedence, which it never happened with the Jews, as occurred once for the testimony of the Gentiles' faith.

He does not say that Peter was astonished, but, "They of the circumcision:" since he knew what was in preparation. And yet they ought to have marvelled at this, how they themselves had believed. When they heard that they had believed, they were not astonished, but when God gave them the Spirit.

Observe God's providential management. He does not suffer the speech to be finished, nor the baptism to take place upon a command of Peter, but, when He has made it evident how admirable their state of mind is, and a beginning is made of the work of teaching, and they have believed that assuredly baptism is the remission of sins, then forthwith comes the Spirit upon them. Now this is done by God's so disposing it as to provide for Peter a mighty ground of justification. And it is not simply that the Spirit came upon them, but, "they spake with tongues:" which was the thing that astonished those who had come together.

When they had believed that by baptism there is altogether the remission of sins, then the Spirit descended upon them. This, however, happened by God's ordaining for the great defense of Peter. Nor did the Spirit come in a common way, but they also spoke in tongues, which put those who had been companions into astonishment; because of which Peter immediately ordered them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Nor did he say: Why is water needed, when the Holy Spirit has come upon them? For he knew that in the water divine signs are accomplished, namely burial and mortification, resurrection and life. Just as it is easy for us to be baptized and to emerge, so it is easy for God to bury the old man and show the new. This, however, is done on the third day, so that we may recognize that by the power of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit this is affected. Some, however, say that the resurrection of Christ made on the third day is shown, which brings this about in us. [SEVERIAN OF GABALA]

Do you want to know that it is not just Jesus alone in his speaking who transmits the Holy Spirit to his hearers, but that everyone who speaks God's word in his name actually hands on the Spirit of God to those who listen? See then, how in the Acts of the Apostles, when Peter is speaking to Cornelius, Cornelius himself and those with him were filled with the Holy Spirit. Hence, if you speak God's word and do so faithfully with a pure conscience, it can come about that while you are speaking the fire of the Holy Spirit will inflame the hearts of your hearers and immediately make them warm and eager to carry out all you are teaching in order to implement what they have learned.

Thereafter He prescribed to fasts a law-that they are to be performed "without sadness: " for why should what is salutary be sad? He taught likewise that fasts are to be the weapons for battling with the more direful demons: for what wonder if the same operation is the instrument of the iniquitous spirit's egress as of the Holy Spirit's ingress? Finally, granting that upon the centurion Cornelius, even before baptism, the honourable gift of the Holy Spirit, together with the gift of prophecy besides, had hastened to descend, we see that his fasts had been heard, I think, moreover, that the apostle too, in the Second of Corinthians, among his labours, and perils, and hardships, after "hunger and thirst," enumerates "fasts" also "very many"

Notice God's economy. God did not allow Peter's speech to be brought to completion or for baptism to be performed by Peter's order; but as soon as He saw that their minds were filled with amazement and a beginning of instruction had been laid, and they fully believed that baptism is the remission of sins, then the Spirit descended.

And the believers from among the circumcised who had come with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out even on the Gentiles. For they were hearing them speaking in tongues, etc. This is similar to that statement by the same apostle Peter, when he was giving an account to the Jews why he had committed the sacraments of baptism to the circumcised. So then, he said, if God gave them the same gift as He gave to us, etc. There are many other testimonies of the Scriptures that consistently attest that the Holy Spirit is the gift of God, insofar as it is given to those who love God through Him. Therefore, it is the gift of God insofar as it is given to those to whom it is given; but it is God Himself, even if it is given to no one, because God was coeternal with the Father and the Son before it was given to anyone; nor because they give, is it given, hence it is not lesser than them. For thus it is given, as a gift of God, so that He gives Himself as God. For the Spirit blows where He wills (John III).

Moreover, they began to speak in various tongues, which amazed those gathered. Meanwhile, God was arranging in advance a great defense for Peter in this matter.

At the beginning of the preaching, when the apostles announced the gospel, those who received holy baptism both spoke with tongues and prophesied in order to prove that they had received the Holy Spirit. When unbelief was at its climax, then, as was necessary, the miracles flourished. Yet, with the faith spread far and wide, there is no need of signs, for what comes from God is not for show but for the salvation, healing and benefit of those who receive.

We have thought it necessary for the arranging of certain matters, dearest brother, and for their investigation by the examination of a common council, to gather together and to hold a council, at which many priests were assembled at once; at which, moreover, many things were brought forward and transacted. But the subject in regard to which we had chiefly to write to you, and to confer with your gravity and wisdom, is one that more especially pertains both to the priestly authority and to the unity, as well as the dignity, of the Catholic Church, arising as these do from the ordination of the divine appointment; to wit, that those who have been dipped abroad outside the Church, and have been stained among heretics and schismatics with the taint of profane water, when they come to us and to the Church which is one, ought to be baptized, for the reason that it is a small matter to "lay hands on them that they may receive the Holy Ghost," unless they receive also the baptism of the Church. For then finally can they be fully sanctified, and be the sons of God, if they be born of each sacrament; since it is written, "Except a man be born again of water, and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." For we find also, in the Acts of the Apostles, that this is maintained by the apostles, and kept in the truth of the saving faith, so that when, in the house of Cornelius the centurion, the Holy Ghost had descended upon the Gentiles who were there, fervent in the warmth of their faith, and believing in the Lord with their whole heart; and when, filled with the Spirit, they blessed God in divers tongues, still none the less the blessed Apostle Peter, mindful of the divine precept and the Gospel, commanded that those same men should be baptized who had already been filled with the Holy Spirit, that nothing might seem to be neglected to the observance by the apostolic instruction in all things of the law of the divine precept and Gospel. But that that is not baptism which the heretics use; and that none of those who oppose Christ can profit by the grace of Christ; has lately been set forth with care in the letter which was written on that subject to Quintus, our colleague, established in Mauritania; as also in a letter which our colleagues previously wrote to our fellow-bishops presiding in Numidia, of both which letters I have subjoined copies.

For since a person is of twofold nature, soul and body, the purification also is twofold, the one incorporeal for the incorporeal part, and the other bodily for the body. The water cleanses the body, and the Spirit seals the soul, that we may draw near to God, "having our heart sprinkled" by the Spirit "and our body washed with pure water." … Neither does he who is baptized with water, but not found worthy of the Spirit, receive the grace in perfection; nor if a person is virtuous in his deeds, but receives not the seal by water, shall he enter into the kingdom of heaven. A bold saying, but not mine, for it is Jesus who has declared it, and here is the proof of the statement from holy Scripture. Cornelius was a just man who was honored with a vision of angels and had set up his prayers and alms deeds as a good memorial before God in heaven. Peter came, and the Spirit was poured out on them that believed, and they spoke with other tongues and prophesied. And after the grace of the Spirit the Scripture says that Peter commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ; in order that, the soul having been born again by faith, the body also might by the water partake of the grace.

Neither, for a like reason, would he have given them baptism so readily, had he not heard them prophesying when the Holy Ghost rested upon them. And therefore did he exclaim, "Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?" He persuaded, at the same time, those that were with him, and pointed out that, unless the Holy Ghost had rested upon them, there might have been some one who would have raised objections to their baptism.

...indicating by these words, that he would not have come to them unless he had been commanded. Neither, for a like reason, would he have given them baptism so readily, had he not heard them prophesying when the Holy Ghost rested upon them. And therefore did he exclaim, "Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?" He persuaded, at the same time, those that were with him, and pointed out that, unless the Holy Ghost had rested upon them, there might have been some one who would have raised objections to their baptism.

That the need of water is absolute and indispensable, you may learn in this way. On one occasion, when the Spirit had been poured out before the water was applied, the apostle did not stay at this point, but, as though the water were necessary and not superfluous, observe what he says: "Can any one forbid water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?"

Peter seizes his advantage, and see the plea he makes of it. "Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?" Mark the issue to which he brings it; how he has been travailing to bring this forth. So entirely was he of this mind! "Can any one," he asks, "forbid water?" It is the language, we may almost say, of one triumphantly pressing his advantage against such as would forbid, such as should say that this ought not to be. The whole thing, he says, is complete, the most essential part of the business, the baptism with which we were baptized.

"Who can forbid water for baptizing these who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" And what need was there for water, when the Holy Spirit had descended upon them? So I will show it and explain to you this hidden mystery. In it the Divine symbols are fully expressed: the tomb and dying, resurrection and life. Just as it is easy for us to be immersed and to emerge, so it is easy for God to bury the old man and to reveal the new. And this happens three times so that you may learn that all this is accomplished by the power of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. And that what has been said is not merely a simple conjecture, listen to Paul, who says: "We were buried with Him through baptism into death" (Rom. 6:4). And again: "Our old man was crucified with Him" (Rom. 6:6). And again: "We have been united with Him in the likeness of His death" (Rom. 6:5).

And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. And the circumcised believers who had come with Peter were amazed because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. Since the rule of the Church is that believers are to be baptized in the name of the Holy Trinity, it is asked how Luke, throughout the entire text of this book, testifies that baptism is given only in the name of Jesus Christ. Blessed Ambrose resolved this by saying that the mystery is fulfilled through the unity of the name. For whether you say Christ, you have designated both God the Father, who anointed the Son, and the very Son who was anointed, and the Spirit by whom he was anointed; for it is written: Jesus of Nazareth, how God anointed him with the Holy Spirit; whether you say Father, and his Son, and Spirit, you indicate equally in the mouth if you even comprehend it in your heart; or if you say Spirit, you name both God the Father, from whom the Spirit proceeds, and the Son, because the Spirit is also of the Son. Hence, that authority may also be joined to reason, Scripture indicates that we can rightly be baptized in the Spirit as well, with the Lord saying: But you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:5). And the Apostle says: For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body (1 Cor. 12:13). Elsewhere: It is particularly fitting for us to be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, since as the Apostle says: For as many of you as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death, etc. (Rom. 6:3).

"And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ." After he has cleared himself, then, and not before, he commands them to be baptized: teaching them by the facts themselves. Such was the dislike the Jews had to it! Therefore it is that he first clears himself, although the very facts cry aloud, and then gives the command. "Then prayed they him" - well might they do so - "to tarry certain days:" and with a good courage thenceforth he does tarry.

"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?

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 did not dwell on this trifle, but based himself on what was of great importance. If, he says, they received the Spirit, then how could one not impart this to them? By this defense he shows that he is in no way at fault, but the author of everything and in all things is God, to Whom he attributes all. Because, he says, He showed the vessel, and I objected to Him. And again He spoke, and I did not obey even then. The Spirit commanded me to go. I went without haste, and did not immediately perform the baptism, but again the Spirit accomplished everything.

"And when he was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him." When Peter was come up to Jerusalem, faithful Jews contended with him as to why he had gone in to men uncircumcised and had eaten with them. But he related truthfully by what vision he had been warned and what injunction he had received from the Divinity. Having heard that, all the people gave thanks to God because the Lord Christ had granted life-giving repentance and the gifts of the Holy Ghost to the Gentiles too.

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!

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).

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."

But not so does Peter frame his defence: for he was wise, or rather it was not his wisdom, but the Spirit that spake the words. And by the matter of his defence, he shows that in no one point was he the author, but in every point God, and upon Him he casts the whole. "The trance," he says - "it was He that caused me to fall into it, for 'I was in Joppa,' etc.: the vessel - it was He that showed it; I objected: again, He spake, and even then I did not hear: the Spirit commanded me to go, and even then though I went, I did not run: I told that God had sent me, and after these things, even then I did not baptize, but again God did the whole. God baptized them, not I."

Observe his freedom from all elation and vainglory. For it says, "But Peter rehearsed the matter from the beginning, and expounded it by order unto them, saying, I was in the city of Joppa, praying:" he does not say why, nor on what occasion: "and in a trance I saw a vision, a certain vessel descend, as it had been a great sheet, let down from heaven by four corners; and it came even to me: upon the which when I had fastened mine eyes, I considered, and saw fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. And I heard a voice saying unto me, Arise, Peter; slay and eat." As much as to say, This of itself was enough to have persuaded me - my having seen the linen sheet: but moreover a Voice was added. "But I said, Not so, Lord: for nothing common or unclean hath at any time entered into my mouth." Do you mark? "I did my part," says he: "I said, that I have never eaten aught common or unclean:" with reference to this that they said, "Thou wentest in, and didst eat with them." But this he does not say to Cornelius: for there was no need to mention it to him. "But the voice answered me again from heaven, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common. And this was done three times: and all were drawn up again into heaven."

Peter did not dwell on this trifle, but based himself on what was of great importance. If, he says, they received the Spirit, then how could one not impart this to them? By this defense he shows that he is in no way at fault, but the author of everything and in all things is God, to Whom he attributes all. Because, he says, He showed the vessel, and I objected to Him. And again He spoke, and I did not obey even then. The Spirit commanded me to go. I went without haste, and did not immediately perform the baptism, but again the Spirit accomplished everything.

And I saw the four-footed animals of the earth, and beasts, and reptiles, and birds of the sky, etc. I am amazed how these things are interpreted concerning certain foods prohibited by the old law but now allowed to be eaten, when neither serpents nor reptiles can be eaten, nor did Peter understand it this way, but that all people are equally called to the Gospel of Christ, and no one is impure by nature. For he was not rebuked for eating beasts but for associating with Gentiles, he explained the mystery of this vision.

"I heard a voice saying to me." The appearance of the sheet alone would have been sufficient to convince him; but to this, however, a voice was also added: "Rise, Peter, kill and eat."

"But I said, Not so, Lord: for nothing common or unclean hath at any time entered into my mouth." Do you mark? "I did my part," says he: "I said, that I have never eaten aught common or unclean:" with reference to this that they said, "Thou wentest in, and didst eat with them." But this he does not say to Cornelius: for there was no need to mention it to him.

"But I said: no, Lord." You see, says Peter, I did my part. This is an apology against what they said: "you went to uncircumcised men and ate with them." And he, nevertheless, defends himself, and does not use the authority of a teacher. Because the more meekly he answers them, the more he calms them.