Acts 12:1–11

Moreover, at that time, the great king Herod sent. Not at the time of the famine, which historical accounts refer to as happening in the fourth year of Claudius, since Herod died in the third year of the same Claudius, but undoubtedly at the time when the offerings were being carried to Jerusalem. Nor should we think that Herod, who was a tetrarch and later became a king, is designated in this chapter. For Josephus reports that Caius, upon taking the throne, immediately handed the leadership of the Jews to this Herod, son of Aristobulus, whom he nevertheless calls Agrippa, along with the tetrarchies of Philip and Lysanias. And in the fourth, which is the last year of his rule, he similarly bestowed it upon the same Herod. But he condemned that Herod, who had either been the instigator of John's death or had been involved in the passion of the Lord, to perpetual exile after suffering many diseases. Furthermore, this Herod or Agrippa, in the third year of Claudius and the seventh year of his reign, having been struck by an angel, left the kingdom to Agrippa, his son. Aristobulus, however, whom he mentioned, is the one who, along with his brother Alexander, had been killed by the treacherous father, that is, the elder Herod, under whom the Lord was born.

"And at the same time, Herod stretched forth his hands, to afflict some of the church. "King Herod, with wicked presumption, murdered John's brother James, who was preaching the word of the Lord. Seeing that he had pleased the Jews in so doing, he sent Peter to prison as well, setting sixteen soldiers to guard him with great care. Prayer was being incessantly poured out for him throughout the church. On the night before the day appointed for his trial, he is known to have been visited by an angel and freed both from the bonds of chains and from the dangers of guards, all in such a way that, though it was truly happening, he thought it was taking place in a dream. When he came to himself, however, the truth was manifest, and he realized that the Lord had thought fit to free him through his angel. Coming to the house of Mary the mother of John, where a multitude of faithful were praying for him, he knocked at the door repeatedly and finally came in. He then told them how an angel had come to release him from the bonds of custody, and he ordered this to be told to James and to the other brethren.

"At that time," of course meaning the time immediately following: for this is the custom of Scripture. And he well says that Herod "the king" (did this): this was not he of Christ's time. Lo, a different sort of trial - and mark what I said in the beginning, how things are blended, how rest and trouble alternate in the whole texture of the history - not now the Jews, nor the Sanhedrim, but the king. Greater the power, the warfare more severe, the more it was done to obtain favor with the Jews. And he slew James the brother of John with the sword: taking him at random and without selection. But, should any raise a question, why God permitted this, we shall say, that it was for the sake of these Jews themselves: thereby, first, convincing them, that even when slain the Apostles prevail, just as it was in the case of Stephen: secondly, giving them opportunity, after satiating their rage, to recover from their madness; thirdly, showing them that it was by His permission this was done.

Like a wild beast, he attacked all indiscriminately and without consideration. This is what Christ said: "My cup indeed ye shall drink, and with the baptism wherewith I am baptized, shall ye be baptized." And he killed James the brother of John. For there was also another James, the brother of the Lord: therefore to distinguish him, he says, "The brother of John." Do you mark that the sum of affairs rested in these three, especially Peter and James?

That period he says was under Claudius Caesar. Gaius, emperor of the Romans, established Agrippa as king of Judea, Herod being banished to Lugdunum in Gaul on account of the disgracefulness of his life, together with his wife Herodias. This is the one who reigned at the time of the Lord's passion, as Josephus writes in the eighteenth book of the Antiquities of History, and Eusebius in the second book of Ecclesiastical History. Therefore there is a discrepancy of the name in this passage, that Herod is put for Agrippa, and it happened by the writer's slip, as is likely, a scribal error, or was expressed by way of he having two names, since both the time and the actions point to Agrippa under the emperor Claudius, who became emperor after Gaius. [EUSEBIUS]

At what "time" was that? During the reign of Emperor Claudius. For the Roman Emperor Claudius appointed Agrippa as king of the Jews, having banished Herod together with Herodias to Lugdunum, a Galilean city. This is the same Herod under whom John suffered, as Josephus and Eusebius recount. So this discrepancy in the name, that is, Herod being said instead of Agrippa, occurred either because he bore two names, or from a scribal error.

"On some of those belonging to the church." Note that he calls the faithful men and the society composed of them the church.

He killed James, the brother of John, with the sword. Clement of Alexandria reports a certain story about this James, which is worth remembering. And he (Clement says) who had brought him to the judge for martyrdom (namely James), was also moved and confessed himself to be a Christian. They were both led together to punishment. And as they were being led on the road, he asked James to grant him forgiveness. But James, after hesitating a little, said, "Peace be with you." And he kissed him. And thus they were both beheaded together.

James, under pressure to cut off Christ, his true head, was [physically] decapitated, yet the [true] head of every person is Christ according to the apostle and at the same time the head of the entire church.

So that no one may say that 'for this reason they boldly and without fear rush into death, since God is snatching them away,' therefore He also allows the leaders to be killed, persuading those who kill them that even these things do not separate them and hinder them. [CHRYSOSTOM]

That Peter is struck, that Stephen is overwhelmed by stones, that James is slain as is a victim at the altar, that Paul is beheaded has been written in their own blood.

Of the twelve disciples of the Lord, James was the first to suffer. Lest anyone say that the apostles go to meet death so fearlessly and without trembling because God snatches them from its hands, God also permitted that even the foremost among them—Stephen and James—be put to death. By this God shows the murderers themselves that He does not remove them from this either and does not hinder them here. Murder was a pleasing thing for their misplaced passions, and a lawless murder at that. It was necessary to put an end to their impulse, but Herod, like an executioner of the sick rather than their physician, incites them, though he had seen thousands of examples in the lives of his grandfather and his father Herod.

And when he saw that it pleased the Jews. O excessive wickedness! On whose behalf was it, that he gratified them by doing murders thus without plan or reason? "And it was the day of unleavened bread." Again, the idle preciseness of the Jews: to kill indeed they forbade not, but at such a time they did such things!

And how was it he did not kill Peter immediately? It mentions the reason: "it was the day of unleavened bread:" and he wished rather to make a display with the killing of him. "And when he saw it pleased the Jews." For their own part, they now in consequence of Gamaliel's advice, abstained from bloodshedding: and besides, did not even invent accusations; but by means of others they compassed the same results. This counsel of Gamaliel's above all was their condemnation: for the preaching was shown to be no longer a thing of men. "He proceeded further to kill Peter also." In very deed was that fulfilled, "We are accounted as sheep for the slaughter." "Seeing," it says, "it was a pleasing thing to the Jews." A pleasing thing, bloodshed, and unrighteous bloodshed, wickedness, impiety! He ministered to their senseless lusts: for, whereas he ought to have done the contrary, to check their rage, he made them more eager, as if he were an executioner, and not a physician to their diseased minds.

Again the excessive scrupulousness of the Jews is revealed: they did not object to killing him, but they objected to doing it at such a time.

Delivering him to four squads of soldiers. Just as a centurion has a hundred soldiers under him, so does a squad of soldiers have soldiers under him.

Whom having arrested, he put in ward, having delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers. This was done both of rage, and of fear. He slew James the brother of John with the sword. Do you mark their courage? For, that none may say that without danger or fear of danger they brave death, as being sure of God's delivering them, therefore he permits some to be put to death, and chief men too, Stephen and James, thereby convincing their slayers themselves, that not even these things make them fall away, and hinder them.

He feared lest Peter, in consequence of the slaying of James, should withdraw; and wishing to have him in safe keeping, he put him in prison: "and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers": the stricter the custody, the more wondrous the display.

"four squads of four." That is, the total number sixteen; for four times four makes sixteen. Perhaps at each watch, that is, in the third watch, there were four guards. There are four guards called a tri-hour watch, as the twelve hours of the whole night being four watches; in each of which, with four soldiers guarding, all together make the number sixteen. Observe the Jews in the days of Unleavened Bread doing such things. [CHRYSOSTOM]

Let them recall to their minds also how Peter, the chief of the apostles, "was thrown into prison, and delivered to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; "of whom, when he had escaped by night, and had been preserved out of the hand of the Jews by the commandment of the angel of the Lord, it is said, "As soon as it was day, there was no small stir among the soldiers, what was become of Peter. And when Herod had sought for him, and found him not, he examined the keepers, and commanded that they should be put to death," on account of whom no blame is attributed to Peter; for it was in their power, when they saw what was done, to escape.

He commanded four quaternions of soldiers to guard him. This was due both to anger and to fear. The more careful the guard, the more amazing the manifestation of the power of God. And this happened on account of the apostle Peter, who was very well known.

Peter therefore was kept in prison: but prayer was made without ceasing of the Church unto God for him. For the contest was now for life and death: both the slaying of the one made them fearful, and the casting of the other into prison.

Peter therefore was kept in prison. But this was all the better for Peter, who was thereby made more approved, and evinced his own manly courage. And it says, "there was earnest prayer making." It was the prayer of filial affection: it was for a father they asked, a father mild. "There was," it says, "earnest prayer." Hear how they were affected to their teachers. No factions, no perturbation: but they betook them to prayer, to that alliance which is indeed invincible, to this they betook them for refuge. They did not say, "What? I, poor insignificant creature that I am, to pray for him!" for, as they acted of love, they did not give these things a thought. And observe, it was during the feast, that their enemies brought these trials upon them, that their worth might be the more approved.

So Peter was kept in the prison. They, being at large, were at prayer: he, bound, was in sleep.

And again when Simon was bound in prison, it is written that the whole church prayed. And in every place is it written concerning the Apostles that they fasted and prayed, for they also tarried in this service of fasting and abstinence after they had received the Spirit.

This we urge you, by both supplications and tears, to contribute to us—insignificant ones. For the shared sufferings of the church call for shared prayers, just as when Peter, the head of the apostles, was bound in prison by two chains and watched over by guards … "there was made constant prayer by the church to God for him." When this is the case for an apostle, who needs help, and prayers are offered up by the church, how would we, the uninitiated and brood of sin, not all the more beg these prayers to be offered for us by the faithful, those noble limbs of the church and educated to groan with godly and spiritual perception?

Listen to how they interceded for their teachers: they did not revolt, they did not rebel, but turned to the true ally — prayer.

See how Peter slept and was not in anguish or fear. In the very night when he was about to be brought before the court he slept, leaving everything to God. Indeed the multitude becomes powerful when virtue is present. And it had such a power that even though the doors were closed, chains bound the apostle and the jailers slept at both his sides, virtue delivered him and saved him from all those difficulties. So if virtue is present the multitude has great strength, but if vice is present it makes no benefit.

And when Herod would have brought him forth, the same night Peter was sleeping between two soldiers. See Peter sleeping, and not in distress or fear! That same night, after which he was to be brought forth, he slept, having cast all upon God. "Between two soldiers, bound with two chains." Mark, how strict the ward!

And when Herod would have brought him forth, the same night Peter was sleeping between two soldiers, bound with two chains; and the keepers before the door kept the prison. And, behold, the angel of the Lord came upon him, and a light shined in the prison: and he smote Peter on the side, and raised him up, saying, Arise up quickly. And his chains fell off from his hands. In that night He delivered him. "And a light shined in the prison," that he might not deem it fancy: and none saw the light, but he only. For if, notwithstanding this was done, he thought it a fancy, because of its unexpectedness; if this had not been, much more would he have thought this: so prepared was he for death. For his having waited there many days and not being saved caused this. Why then, say you, did He not suffer him to fall into the hands of Herod, and then deliver him? Because that would have brought people into astonishment, whereas this was credible: and they would not even have been thought human beings.

And when Herod would have brought him forth, the same night Peter was sleeping between two soldiers, bound with two chains. See Peter sleeping, and not in distress or fear! That same night, after which he was to be brought forth, he slept, having cast all upon God. "Between two soldiers, bound with two chains." Mark, how strict the ward! "And says, Arise." The guards were asleep with him, and therefore perceived nothing of what was happening. "And a light shined." What was the light for? In order that Peter might see as well as hear, and not imagine it to be all fancy. And the command, "Arise quickly," that he may not be remiss. He also smote him; so deeply did he sleep.

Peter was neither in agony nor in fear, but slept, having cast everything upon the Lord. [CHRYSOSTOM]

Peter was neither confused nor afraid, but on that very night, when they intended to bring him out of the prison, he slept, having entrusted everything to the will of the Lord. Pay attention also to how thorough the guard was: the guards slept with him as well.

And striking the side of Peter, he raised him up. The striking of the side is a commemoration of the passion of Christ, from whose wound our salvation flowed. And to us, too, who are held by the chains of pressures, the apostle Peter himself gives such solace, saying: "Since Christ suffered in the flesh, arm yourselves also with the same intention" (1 Peter 4).

He says that it shone so that they could both see and hear Peter and not think it a vision. The phrase "quickly [ἐν τάχει]" does not mean making a noise, but persuading not to delay. [CHRYSOSTOM]

But why did a light shine in the prison? So that Peter could both see and hear the Angel and so that he would not think it was an imagination. The Angel even struck him — so soundly was he sleeping. As for the expression "striking Peter on the side," it indicates not the Angel's confusion, but an urging not to delay.

Gird yourself and put on your sandals. And we read that prophets and apostles used belts, which Peter had loosened for a moment due to the rigidity of the prison, so that, with his tunic lowered around his feet, he could somewhat temper the cold of the night, providing an example to the weak that, when we are tempted by either bodily discomfort or human injury, it is permissible to relax the rigor of our purpose a little. And because it was said, "Let your loins be girded and your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace," spiritually he is ordered to resume the emblems of virtues and of preaching the word.

Gird yourself, and put on your boots. Instead of boots or sandals, as some manuscripts have, in Greek it says sandals. We read in the Gospel that a type of footwear was permitted to the apostles, not without a symbolic mystical sense. For the apostles' feet were covered neither entirely nor bare to the ground, so they would be reminded that the Gospel is neither to be concealed nor devoted to earthly comforts, so it may be as it is written: How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of those who bring good news!

And the angel said to him, Gird thyself, and bind on thy sandals. Here again it shows, that it was not done of craft: for one that is in haste and wishes to break out of prison, is not so particular as to take his sandals, and gird himself. And he did so. And he said unto him, Put on thy cloak, and follow me.

"Rise," says he, "quickly:" this is not to hurry him but to persuade him not to delay. And immediately his chains fell off from his hands. How? answer me: where are the heretics? - let them answer. And the Angel said unto him, Gird thyself, and bind on thy sandals: by this also convincing him that it is no fancy: to this end he bids him gird himself and put on his shoes, that he may shake off his sleep, and know that it is real.

The Lord having said to the disciples, "Do not acquire gold nor silver, nor two tunics, nor sandals, nor a belt, nor a staff," (Matt. 10:9-10, Mark 6:8, Luke 9:3) how did Peter act contrary to the command, having garments and a belt and sandals? Moreover, whenever Paul gives a charge writing to Timothy, "Bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, bring when you come," (2 Tim. 4:13) behold he had a cloak, and one could not say that he had not another which he wore. Did he then disobey Christ? What then is the matter? Those commands were for a time, and not for always. And that this is true the evangelist Luke bears witness. For he says that Christ spoke to the disciples: "When I sent you without moneybag, and pouch, and belt, and sandals, did you lack anything?" (Luke 22:35) They say to him, "No." He says to them: So then acquire it. But for what purpose did he command this at that time? Wishing to show his power. If then Paul needed to have one tunic, if he needed to be washed, ought he to have been kept at home naked, or to go about naked and behave shamefully when necessity required? It was therefore not necessary that Paul, while accomplishing so many exploits and traveling the inhabited world, remain at home lacking in clothing, and be hindered by such matters. But what if a severe cold set in, and it rained on him or froze him? How could the tunic he wore have been dried? Or should he again have sat naked? And what if the cold contracted his body, it was necessary that he melt and not speak? And what could be more grievous than this? For their bodies were not made of diamonds. What then? Must he be destroyed? By no means. This, however, as has been said, he ordered at that time, wishing to show his power, that they would lack none of the necessities. [CHRYSOSTOM]

How is it that Peter acted contrary to the command not to take "neither gold, nor silver, nor copper in your belts, nor a bag for the journey, nor two tunics, nor sandals, nor a staff" (Matt. 10:9–10)? Yet he had both clothing and sandals, although at that time one was supposed to go without sandals, since the particular need for them arises in winter. But Paul too, having written to Timothy, "Make every effort to come before winter," says to him, "When you come, bring the cloak that I left in Troas with Carpus" (2 Tim. 4:13, 21). No one can say that Paul did not have another garment that he wore. They were not acting contrary to Christ's command—God forbid! On the contrary, they were even very much following the command, because that command was given for a time, not forever. Moreover, Luke also says that Christ told the disciples, "When I sent you without a money bag, without a knapsack, and without sandals, did you lack anything?" They answered, "Nothing." Then He said to them, "But now, whoever has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack" (Luke 22:35–36). Christ gave that command at that time wishing to show His power, for tell me, what great matter was it to have only one garment? So then, what of it? When it needed to be washed, was one supposed to go about naked or sit at home? And when severe cold set in and frost contracted the body, was one supposed to warm oneself and not preach? For their bodies were not of adamantine strength.

And he went out, and followed him; and wist not that it was true which was done by the Angel; but thought he saw a vision. The Lord would have the pleasure come to him all at once, and that he should first be at liberty, and then be sensible of what had happened. The circumstance also of the chains having fallen off from his hands, is a strong argument of his not having fled.

And he wist not that it was true that was done by the Angel, but thought he saw a vision: well he might, by reason of the excessive greatness of the things taking place. Do you mark what a thing it is for a miracle to be excessive? how it amazes the beholder? how it will not let the thing be believed? For if Peter thought he saw a vision, though he had girded himself and put on his shoes, what would have been the case with another?

And he wist not that it was true. If he thought it was true that was happening, he would have been astonished, he would not have remembered all the circumstances: but now, seeming to be in a dream, he was free from perturbation.

This is very natural given the astonishing extraordinariness of what had happened, because the extraordinariness of the signs strikes the beholder. Peter thought he was seeing a vision, yet he was girding himself and putting on his sandals. What else could he have felt but amazement?

They came to the iron gate that leads to the city. Narrow indeed and made of iron was the gate that leads to the heavenly Jerusalem, but it has now been made passable to us by the footsteps of the apostles, who conquered the iron door with their own blood. About this, Arator: "Why is it surprising if iron doors yield to Peter? Whom God appoints as the guardian of the heavenly hall and makes the head of his Church, he commands to overcome Hell."

When they were past the first and the second ward, they came unto the iron gate that leadeth unto the city; which opened to them of its own accord. Behold, a second miracle. And they went out, and passed on through one street; and forthwith the angel departed from him. When the angel departed, then Peter understood.

And when they had passed the first and the second ward, they came to the iron gate, which opened unto them of its own accord: and yet the things that had happened within the prison were more marvellous: but this was now more after the manner of man. And having gone out, they went along one street and immediately the Angel departed from him. When there was no hindrance, then the Angel departed. For Peter would not have gone along, there being so many hindrances.

When they were past the first and the second ward - see also how strong the guard was - they came unto the iron gate.

And Peter, coming to himself. That is, having returned from the height of contemplation to what he was previously in common understanding.

And when Peter was come to himself, he said, Now I know of a surety, that the Lord hath sent His Angel, and hath delivered me out of the hand of Herod, and from all the expectation of the people of the Jews. When the angel departed, then Peter understood: "Now I perceive," says he, not then. But why is this so, and why is Peter not sensible of the things taking place, although he had already experienced a like deliverance when all were released? The Lord would have the pleasure come to him all at once, and that he should first be at liberty, and then be sensible of what had happened. The circumstance also of the chains having fallen off from his hands, is a strong argument of his not having fled.

And when he came to himself: for in very truth, it was indeed an amazement. "Now," saith he, "I know" - now, not then, when I was in the prison - "that the Lord hath sent His Angel, and hath delivered me out of the hand of Herod and from all the expectation of the people of the Jews."

Now know I that the Lord hath sent His Angel. Why is not this effected by themselves? I answer: By this also the Lord honors them, that by the ministry of His Angels he rescues them. Then why was it not so in the case of Paul? There with good reason, because the jailer was to be converted, whereas here, it was only that the Apostle should be released. And God disposes all things in divers ways. And there too, it is beautiful, that Paul sings hymns, while here Peter was asleep.

Now, he says, I knew, "now I see truly," and not then. It was pleasing to the Angel that Peter's heart be filled with joy suddenly and that he understand what had happened only after the deliverance.