¹ St. Chrys. had made the same complaint at Antioch in the Homilies (a.d. 387) in Principium Actorum, etc. t. iii. p. 54. "We are about to set before you a strange and new dish. ...strange, I say, and not strange. Not strange; for it belongs to the order of Holy Scripture: and yet strange; because peradventure your ears are not accustomed to such a subject. Certainly, there are many to whom this Book is not even known (polloij goun to biblion touto oude gnwrimon eoti) and many again think it so plain, that they slight it: thus to some men their knowledge, to some their ignorance, is the cause of their neglect. . ...We are to enquire then who wrote it, and when, and on what subject: and why it is ordered (nenomoqethtai) to be read at this festival. For peradventure you do not hear this Book read [at other times] from year's end to year's end."

² The two reasons which Chrysostom urges for the study of the Acts are also the two chief grounds upon which modern criticism depends for establishing not only the general trust-worthiness of the book, but also its authorship by Luke. They are in substance, (1) The continuity of the history as connected with the gospels and, particularly, coincidences of style, matter and diction with the third gospel, and (2) The remarkable undesigned coincidences of statement between the Acts and Pauline Epistles which exclude the possibility of inter-dependence. From Col. 1. 11Col. 1. 14; Philem. 24; 2 Tim. iv. 11, we learn that Luke was a close companion of Paul. In the part of the Book of Acts which treats especially of the work of Paul, the writer frequently refers to himself in the use of the first person plural as an associate of the apostle (vid. xvi, 10; xx. 6 sq.; xxi. 1 sq.; xxvii. 1). These considerations demonstrate the fitness of Luke to prepare such a treatise as the Acts and render the supposition of his authorship plausible. When they are combined with those mentioned under (1) and when the dedication of both books to a certain Theophilus is considered, the argument becomes very cogent and complete. -G. B. S.

³ The reference in the Text of the expression: "the Gospel which ye received," (1 Cor. xv. 1) to Luke's "gospel" is, of course, groundless. Paul speaks of it as the gospel which he preached unto them. It is "his gospel" as in Rom. ii. 16; Rom. xvi. 25; Gal. i. 11, etc. The use of euaggelion to denote a book is post apostolic.- G. B. S.

⁴ Hom. in Princip. Act. p. 54. "First we must see who wrote the Book. ...whether a man, or God: and if man, let us reject it; for, `Call no man master upon earth: but if God, let us receive it.0' "

⁵ Hom. cur in Pentec. Acta legantur, t. iii. p. 89. E. "The demonstration of the Resurrection is, the Apostolic miracles: and of the Apostolic miracles this Book is the school."

⁶ The statement that the Acts is a "Demonstration of the Resurrection" has a certain profound truth, but is incorrect if intending to assert that such was the conscious purpose of the author. The resurrection of Jesus is a prominent theme in the Apostolic discourses but the book is no mre designed primarily to prove the resurrection than are the Epistles to the Romans and Corinthians. The immediate purpose of the book is to record the labors and triumphs of the Apostolic Church as supplementary to the narrative of the teaching and work of Jesus (i. 1. 2). The events narrated presuppose the resurrection and would have been impossible without it.-G. B. S.

⁷ Chrys. states too confidently that "the brother" whose praise is referred to in 2 Cor. viii. 18, is Luke. It cannot be determined who this "brother" was. See Meyer in loco. Other conjectures are: Barnabas, Mark, Erastus, and an actual brother of Titus.-G. B. S.

⁸ Ms. C. has oiktirmonaj, merciful; the rest, akthmonaj, without possessions, which is certainly the true reading. Thus in the Sermon de futurae Vitae deliciis, where Chrys. discourses largely on the harmony of Christ's teaching and actions, he says, Palin akthmosunhn paideuwn, ora pwj dia twn ergwn authn epideiknutai, legwn, Ai alwpekej, k. t. l.

⁹ "He taught them to be poor." Here we have a tinge of asceticism. Even if we suppose that the beatitude of the poor refers to literal poverty (Luke vi. 20) as well as to poverty in spirit (Matt. v. 3), it is still incorrect to say that Jesus taught his disciples that poverty was in itself a virtue. The ascetic principle is of heathen, not of Christian origin. It is noticeable that Chrys. quotes no passage to sustain his statement.-G. B. S.

¹⁰ The latter is doubtless the correct interpretation. (So Meyer, Hackett). Cf. Matt. xii. 28; John iii. 34; Luke iv. 1.-G. B. S.

¹¹ 1. e. as Oecumenius explains in l. ina mh tij nomish eterou ounamei touto genesqai, lest any should suppose this to have been done by the power of another, he adds, to show that it was His own act, To whom also, etc.

¹² It is more than doubtful whether the mention of the resurrection is introduced (i. 3 sq.) for the purpose of meeting sceptical objections. The writer will rather make it the point of departure for his subsequent narrative. He has mentioned the ascension; the resurrection is the other great event and he will introduce a resume of the more important circumstances which happened during the period between these two events and which have an important bearing upon the history about to be related. -G. B. S.

¹³ Chrys, seems to overlook the appearance "to above five hundred brethren at once," 1 Cor. xv. 6.-G. B. S.

¹⁴ Peripeirousi, Ms. C. and Cat. (see 1 Tim. vi, 9, pierced themselves through with many sorrows), and in this sense Hom. in Matt. 455 B. 463 A. The word is used as here, ibid. 831 C. where several mss. have pantaxou h planh eauthn peripeirei, for eauth peripiptei.

¹⁵ Sunalizomenoj. In the margin of E. V. "Eating together with them." The Catena here and below, had pr. man. the other reading, sunaulizomenoj, but corrected in both places. St. Chrys. so takes the word, Hom. in Princip. Act. §11.767 E. in Joann. 522 D. Oecumen. in 1. explains it, toutesti koinwnwnalwn, koinwnwn trapezhj, "Partaking of the salt, partaking of the table."

¹⁶ Chrys. here follows the interpretation which derives sunalizenoj (i. 4) from sun and alj (salt) hence, eating together. So several ancient authorities as Vulgate (convesceus) and even modern, as Meyer. But the preferable derivation is from sun and alhj (crowded), hence to be assembled, to meet with (sc. autoij). So Olshausen, Hackett, Lechler, Thayer's Lex. and most modern authorities.-G. B. S.

¹⁷ So mss. C. F. D. and the Catena. The others have monou antou, "of him (John) alone," not of his testimony.

¹⁸ 'Ean gar mh oikeiwqwmen proj to didomenon. Erasm. Nisi rei datae addicti fuerimus.

¹⁹ Oi thn alourgida baptontej. <\=85_ina mh ecithlon genhtai to anqoj. Comp. Plat. Republ. iv. vol. i. p. 289. Stallb. Oukoun oisqa, hn d egw, oti oi bafeij, epeidan boulhqwsi bayai eria wst einai alourga, prwton men eklegontai ek tosoutwn xrwmatwn mian fusin thn twn leukwn, epeita proparaskeuazousi ouk oligh para: skeuh qerapeusantej opwj decetai oti malista to anqoj, kai outw dh baptousi.

²⁰ The question, fully expressed, is, `Why do we baptize, not at Pentecost, but on Easter Eve?0' And the answer is, `Because the lenten fast forms a meet preparation for the reception of baptism. And moreover, there is a reason which weighed with our fathers, in respect of this season of the fifty days, the time of the Church's great festivity. The baptism newly received would restrain the neophytes from giving loose to carnal lusts; having prepared them to keep the feast with a holy and awful gladness.0' It should be borne in mind, that these Homilies were commenced during the Penthkosth, i.e. the period of fifty days between Easter and Pentecost; at which season the Book of Acts was usually read in the Churches.

²¹ This view, that baptism cleansed from all sin, and that, therefore, sin after baptism was far more heinous and hard to be forgiven, held wide sway in the early church and operated as a powerful motive for the delay of baptism. The reception of the grace of baptism involves this increased liability to deadlier sin. For this reason Tertullian had urged its postponement. "And so according to the circumstances and disposition, and even age, of each individual, the delay of baptism is preferable; principally, however, in the case of little children." "If any understand the weighty import of baptism, they will fear its reception more than its delay," etc. De Baptismo, xviii. Chrys. did not carry the idea to this length.-G. B. S.

²² Ti oun dn kataciwqeij fhsin apeleusetai palin kenoj katorqwmatwn, Cod. C, and so A, but with apeleush In the latter recension this sentence is omitted, and instead of it, we have, Ti de tauta kata thj seautou swthriaj proballh; `But why dost thou put forth such pretences against thine own salvation?0' Chrys. had just said, apelqwn amoiroj thj xaritoj apairaithton ecei thn timwrion. The objector (with the usual prevaricating formula, ti oun ean to kai to; Hom. in Matt. 229 D.) says: ti oun an kataciwqeij, sc. thj xaritoj apelqh; to which Chrys. answers: 'Apeleusetai palin kenoj katorqwmatwn: He will depart as empty of good works as he was before his baptism: adding, For it is, I think, utterly impossible that such an one [though he should live ever so long after baptism] would have wrought out his own salvation.

²³ Meta akribeiaj mustagwgeisqai: alluding to the kathxhsij mustagwgikh, i.e. the course of instruction by which the catechumens were prepared for baptism. See the Catechetical Discourses of St. Cyril of Jerusalem.

²⁴ Ta rhmata ekeina: i.e. not (as Ben seems to interpret) "Buried with Christ; "as if this were part of the form of words put into the mouth of the person to be baptized; but the words, "I renounce thee, O Satan, and all thy angels, and all thy service, and all thy pomp: and I enlist myself with Thee, O Christ." St. Chrysost. Serm. ad pop. Antioch, xxi. p. 244. The words, "buried with Him," serve to show more clearly the absurdity of such delay: "we are `buried with Christ in His death,0' that we may rise again to newness of life, not that we should pass at once from the spiritual burial to the literal."

²⁵ The catechumens were allowed to be present at the first part of the service (Missa catechumenorum); and were dismissed after the Sermon, before the proper Prayers of the Church, or Missa Fidelium.

²⁶ Kathciwqhsan thj xaritoj, as above, p. 8, note 1, ti oun an kataciwqeij;

²⁷ The Holy Communion, administered immediately after baptism.

¹ The emphatic position of en tw xronw toutw as well as the answer of Jesus shows that the disciples' earnest hope and expectation were that their Lord should, during their life-time, personally organize a kingdom on the basis of the Jewish theocracy. Chrys. is explicit in pointing out their incorrect conception of the kingdom of Christ, but does not here explain the specifically Jewish character of that conception. In the early disciples we behold the constant struggle of the Christian spirit to break away from the forms of Jewish nationalism.-G. B. S.

² Cod. C. omits this sentence here, and inserts it below (p. 12), where it is evidently out of place. The passage referred to seems to be Ecclus. 51, 8.

³ The connection must be supplied: e.g. It was not that this point of knowledge was too high for them; for, as has been shown, they knew already, or were soon to know, things much higher than this, and which their hearers would find much harder to believe. For tell me, etc.

⁴ Here C. has the sentence: "Also the wise Solomon saith, etc." p. ii, note 1.

⁵ Kai deiknuntwn hmwn, C. the modern text has mh.

⁶ These illustrations, which seem to admit a half deceptive element in our Lord's conversations, are as little justified by the passage in hand as by the character of Jesus. What Jesus promises, viz.: the Holy spirit, is not promised in order to "divert" the disciples from their desire, but to assure to them a greater blessing than they then knew how to anticipate. The disciples wish a temporal kingdom with personal prerogatives; Jesus promises them the Spirit of Truth and opens before them the life of spiritual growth and usefulness. The illustration would have been more appropriate, had Chrys. said: "The child persists in his crying, but Jesus quiets him by giving him something far better than he had asked."-G. B. S.

⁷ Alla meta to deicai (as above, kai deknuntwn hmwn, sc. gumnaj taj xeiraj), touto pepoihken, sc. fobei. The mss. except and A, and the Edd. have o before pepoihken, which gives no sense.

⁸ Chrys. therefore explains these sayings of our Lord (polemically against the Arians) as oikomia: i.e. the thing said is not objectively true, but the morality of all actions depends on the subjective condition of the proairesij or purpose (parathn twn xrwmenwn proairesin gignetai faulon h kalon, de Sacerdot. 1. 8.), so that where this is right and good, a deception is lawful. This lax view of the morality of Truth was very general in the Greek Church: not so in the early Latin Church. See the two Treatises of St. Augustine, De Mendacio ("Lib. of Father," Seventeen Short Treatises of St. Aug.) The stricter doctrine however is maintained by St. Basil, who in his shorter Monastic Rule peremptorily condemns all oikonmia, and pious fraud (officiosium mendacium) of every description, on. the ground that all falsehood is from Satan, John v. 44. and that our Lord has made no distinction between one sort of lying and another. Again, the monk Johannes of Lycopolis in Egypt: "All falsehood is foreign from Christ and Christian men, be it in a small or in a great matter: yea, though a good end be served by it, it is never to be allowed, for the Saviour hath declared, that all lying is from the Wicked One." Pallad, Hist. Lausiac in Bibl. Patr. t. xiii. p. 965.

⁹ Porrwqen gar ouk enhn idontaj gnwnai; i. e. had they but seen the Ascension from a distance, and not been conversing with the Lord at the moment of His Assumption. Cod. E. transoses the clause to the end of the sentence; meaning that they could not by mere sight have been cognizant of the fact of His ascension into heaven.

¹⁰ Ps. civ. 3. o tiqeij nefei thn epibasin autou: "Who maketh on a cloud His stepping," or, "going."

¹¹ At first sight it looks as if this sentence were out of place here. But the connection may be thus explained: this circumstance, of the cloud, is not idle, but very significant; and the minds of the disciples were alive to its import, as betokening His Godhead. True, might it not also be said of Moses on the mount Sinai, that a cloud received him out of their sight? For "Moses entered into the darkness," Exod. xx. 21. But the cloud there was because of Him, "where God was," not because of Moses.

¹² i.e. the Angels had before used the phrase of assumption: but this does not express the whole matter; therefore, to show that it is the act of His own Divine power, they now say, going and afterwards express it that He will come, not that He will be sent. He ascended, as He descended, by His own Divine power. So again it is said, "A cloud received Him:" but in this He was not passive. as God He stepped upon the cloud: epebh alluding to the expression in the Psalm above cited, tiqeij thn epibasin.

¹³ All the Editions and the Latin Versions connect with this the following sentence: "Much more would they have said now, Dost Thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" But it is evident, that at this point begins the recapitulation, or renewed exposition. It is in fact a peculiarity of these Discourses, that Chrys. having gone through the exposition of the text, often, as here, goes over the same ground again, usually with some such formula as, "But let us look through what has been said from the beginning."

¹⁴ The reference here must be to such parables as: "The Sower," "The Leaven," "The Grain of Mustard Seed." (Matt. xiii. 1-43), and the parable of the Growing Seed (Mark iv. 26-29), all of which seem to represent the progress of his truth as a long and slow development. To these might be added such expressions as ewj thj sunteleiaj tou aiwnoj (Matt. xxviii. 20) and ewj esxatou thj ghj (Acts i. 8).-G. B. S.

¹⁵ This sentence is from the later recension.

¹⁶ The text of these Homilies is often greatly confused by the omission, especially in the recapitulations, of the words on which Chrys. is commenting.

¹⁷ Here Erasmus has followed another reading (of E.), the very reverse in sense; "And if indeed the Prophets did not foretell this, be not astonished, for it was superfluous to say any thing individually about this, being necessarily involved in the idea of the resurrection, (th anastasei sunnooumenhj)."

¹⁸ In the later recension it is added: "but is declaratory of His love towards them, and of their election, and that He will not leave those whom He has chosen."

¹⁹ John ii. 19; egw egerw auton, Chrys. adding the pronoun for emphasis.

²⁰ The emphasis of the outwj and on tropon is better preserved if we interpret them to mean visibly, or with the accompaniment of a cloud, in reference to the nefelh (9), rather than merely (as Chrys.) "with a body." They had not raised the question as to his coming with or without a body. What they wanted to know was whether he was coming in such a way that they could recognize him.-G. B. S.

²¹ The text in both classes of manuscripts, and in the Edd., needs reformation. The argument is, If good and evil be, as the Manichaeans say, both self-subsistent, then evil must subsist for ever. For if, as they affirm, God cannot create out of nothing, neither can He change a thing into its opposite; nay, much less, for this is harder than that. In E. (the text of the Edd.) the reading is, to fusei kakon kalon kalon poihsai (ei ge ti esti kaq' umaj gar legw: fusei gar ouden espi poihsai kakon kalou sunergon) h to ec ouk ontwn: which as usual in this Ms. is an attempt to explain the meaning, but is not what the context requires. in C. A. (the original text) to fudei kakon poihsai (ei ge ti esti: kaq' umaj gar legw: fusei gar ouden esti poihsai kakon h kalon koi kalou sunergon) h to !ouk. A.@ ec ouk ontwn. Read, to fusei kakon (ei ge ti esti: kaq' umaj gar legw: fusei gar ouden esti kakon) poihsai h kalon h kai kalou sunergon.

²² #Wste anagkh h mhden tou Qeou einai ei mh tauta: h kai Qeon einai. For so it seems the passage should be read, for which the mss. have h ei tauta, and then in the older text, h kai Qeo/ einai, for which the modern recension, D. E. F. and Edd. have h kai Qeon mh einai.

²³ thn enswmatwsin tou Qeou. Edd. metenswmatwsin. But the Manichees affirmed a metenswmatwsin of the particle of the Divine Substance, the human soul; viz. the more polluted soul transmigrates into other men, and animals (Archelai et Manet. Disput. §. ix. Routh, Rell. Sacc. iv. 161.), but in the last stage of the process of its purgation, into vegetable substances less attached to the earth by roots, such as gourds, etc. in which the Divine particle is self-conscious and intelligent (see the following note), whereas in animal substances it is brutified. In this sense it is said above, h metenj. ekbainei eij sikuouj k. t. l. What they denied was, an enswmatwsij Qeou by Incarnation.

²⁴ 'All' ouk aisxron\ pwj gar\ oper (om. A.) an eij hmaj genhtai: to de son ontwj aisxron. Edd. all' ouk aisxron\ pwj\ oper gar an eij hmaj genhtai ontwj aisxron. Erasmus; An non hoc turpe est? Quomodo non turpe sit in Deum, quod, si no-bis contingat, revera turpe futurum sit? Ben. Quandoquidem si in nobis fiat, vere turtle est. i.e. For, that same which, if it take place in us. is indeed shocking [how should it not be so in God?]. The exclamation, Eidete surfeton asebeias' seems to imply either that ontwj aisxron is part of the Manichaean's reply, or that something is omitted. Perhaps the reporter wrote, to de j. ontwj aisxron, meaning: swma: "But the body, etc." sAn eij hmaj genhtai can hardly be, as taken by Erasm., quad si nobis contingat, i.e. that our substance should migrate into plants, etc. but rather, if it be into us that this (embodying of the Divine Substance) takes place. For illustration of the Manichaean tenets here alluded to, comp. Euod. de Fid. adv. Manich. §35. (Opp. St. Augustin., Append. t. viii. Ben.) Non Deus Manichaei luctum pateretur de partis suae abscissione vel amissione; quam partem dicunt quum in fructibus vel in herbis fuerit, id est, in melone, vel beta, vel talibus rebus, et principium suum et medietatem et finem nosse, cum autem ad carnem venerit omnem intelligentiam amittere; ut propterea magister hominibus missus sit, quia stulta in illis facta est pars Dei, etc. "Then the God of the Manichaean would not suffer grief in consequence of the cutting off or loss of part of his substance; which part, they say, if it be in fruits or in herbs, as in the melon or beet or such-like, knows its beginning and middle and end; but when it comes to flesh, loses all intelligence: so that the reason why the Teacher was sent to men was, because in them the particle of God was stultified, etc." And Commonitor, de recip. Manich. Art. 3. (ibd.) ut credatur pars Dei polluta teneri in cucumeribus et melonibus et radicu-list et parris et quibusque vilissimis herbulis, etc.

²⁵ to culon enqa prosedeqh kai emastigwqh. The `Pillar of Flagellation0' is exhibited in the Latin Choir of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.

¹ This must be taken as a hasty remark, unless (which is not likely) a sabbath extraordinary is meant.

² The meaning seems to be, "he is not content to mention only James and John with Peter, but gives the full list of the Apostles."

³ The meaning of 'Ioudaj 'Iakwbou (1. 13, cf. Luke vi. 16) is a disputed point. Whether the genitive denotes the relation of orother or son has never been decided. The interpretation of the English translators is allowed to stand because it is, probably, the more common one and has many able modern exegetes in its favor among whom are Buttmann, Gram. N. T. Gk. (Eng. Trans.) p. 94. and, more doubtfully, Winer, N. T. Gram. (Eng. Trans., p. 190. It is, however, certain that usage is strongly in favor, of supplying uioj. The former view identifies this Judas with the author of the Epistle (Jud. i. 1) and is that of our older English Trans. The latter understands this Judas to be the son of an unknown James and is favored by Thayer's Lex., Meyer and the Revised Vs. To me this view seems probably correct.-G. B. S.

⁴ Palin de sunagagwn autouj outwj kathlqen. So the older text: i. e. When they were scattered every man to his own home, that disciple had taken her eij ta idia. But after the Resurrection Christ had gathered them together, and so (with all assembled) had returned to the usual place or mode of living.

⁵ Protimoteroj, b.c.: protimwmenoj A. and Catena: tou xorou prwtoj, E. D. F. Comp. Hom. in Matt. liv. t. ii. 107. "What then saith the mouth of the Apostles Peter ? He, the ever ardent, the coryphaeus of the choir of the Apostles."

⁶ Chrys. seems to have read on to the end of the chapter. The rest of the citation being omitted in the mss. the remodeller of the text makes alterations, and adds matter of his own, to make the exposition run smoother. "Why did he not ask Christ, alone, to give him some one in the place of Judas? And why of their own selves do they not make the election?" Then instead of beltion gegone loipon prwto/ men gar, k. t. l. he has, beltiwn loipon hn gegonwj o Petroj autoj eautou, k. t. l. "Peter has now become a better man than he was. So much for this point. But as to their request to have their body filled p not simply, but by revelation, we will mention two reasons; first." etc.

⁷ Edd. "Wherefore he uses this address, they all being present." But the old text has simply pantwn parontwn, i.e., all, both men and women. Chrys. is commenting on the address andrej adelfoi as including the women also who were before said to be present. Comp. Hom. in Matt. lxxiii. p. 712, B. on the separation of men and women in the Churches.

⁸ lanqanontwj legei thn aitian, paideutikhn ousan: i.e. "in speaking of the wages of Judas, he indicates, that the Jews, by whom he was hired, were the authors of the wickedness: but because this carried reproof, he does it covertly, by implication." In the next sentence, he goes on to another point of the exposition, Kai ou legei, k. t. l. i.e. "And observe also, that with the same wise forbearance, he says it not of the Jews, but of Judas, that a piece of ground was all that was gotten by this wickedness: now, in fact, not Judas earned this, but the Jews." The modern text has ou legei gar.

⁹ Touto paramnqian ekeinoij efere. Something seems to be omitted here.

¹⁰ Here also Chrys. seems to be imperfectly reported. His meaning may be gathered from what is said further on, in the recapitulation: i.e. in giving the field that name, "because it was the price of blood" (Matt. xxvii. 8), they unconsciously prophesied; for indeed the reward of their iniquity was this, that their place became an Aceldama.

¹¹ So A. b.c. and the Catena. The other text has ez hmwn, which is less apposite.

¹² #Allwj de kai metabolhj biou ioswj de kai proairesewj hn h onomasia. i. e. St. Luke gives both the names Joseph (or Joses) and Justus, perhaps for the sake of distinction. The name (as Latin) may have been given in consequence of a change of life (viz. of circumstances), and (as meaning `the Just0') perhaps also from a change of character (proairesij.)-Or, proairesij (Bion) may be opposed to metabolh bion and then the meaning would be, that the name may have related to a change, i.e. reformation of life, or perhaps to his original choice or moral purpose of life. But iswj de kai seems best to suit the former explanation.

¹³ This clause of the text is added, though wanting in our mss. The comment is, wste mhde makran badizousin odon fobn tina genesqai tremousin eti kai dedoikosin autoij: i.e. "so that not being a long way for them walking, it was not, etc.," which construction being somewhat obscure, the modern text has, touto fhsin, ina deich oti makran ou badizousin odon, wj fobon tina mh genesqoi tremousin eti kai dedoikosin autoij.

¹⁴ Here again, as usual, in the renewed exposition, the text is omitted.

¹⁵ 'H mhthr sou kai oi adelfoi sou ezhtoumen de. A. C. o pathr sou k. t. l. B. For ezht. we must read zhtousin. The passage referred to is Matt. xiii. 47, where however it is not Mary that speaks, but "A certain person said unto Him, Behold, Thy mother and Thy brethren stand without seeking to speak with Thee. "In the Homily on that passage, Chrys. interprets that Mary presented herself on that occasion ouden oudepw peri autou mega fantazomenh, "having as yet no high idea of His Person," and that both she and His brethren, wj anqrwpw proseixon wilw "looked upon Him as mere man." In the same way he adverts tomhthr that incident here, for contrast with the higher faith of Joseph; but as the statement, "His mother said," is not accurate, the modern text substitutes the passage, Luke ii. 48, and reads, h mhthr elegen, 'Egw kai o pathp sou odunwmenoi ezhtoumen se. It seems that Chrys. cited this passage also (hence our mss. have ezhtoumen for zhtousi). meaning, that it was not Joseph who said this, but Mary.-Oecumenius, however, gives a different turn to this passage of St. Chrys. "And if Joseph had been alive, he too would have been present; especially as he never, like his sons (oi ec autou viz. the adelfoi), entertained a doubt of the mystery of the Incarnation. But it is manifest that he was long dead; since even on the occasion when, as Jesus was teaching, His kinsfolk demanded to see Him, Joseph was not present. For what says the Gospel? "Thy mother and thy brethren without see: thee ; but not also, Thy father."

¹⁶ 'Epi to auto: a comment on v. 15.

¹⁷ Kaitoige isotupon apasi/ eixe thn katastasin which Erasm. justly renders, Quanquam habebta jus constituendi por omnibus: i. e. the ordination by St. Peter singly, would have been as valid as the ordination by the whole body. D. F. have kaitoi oude, i.e. and yet he possessed a power of ordaining, in which they were not all upon a par with him: which reading is accepted by Morel. Sav. and Ben., and is rendered by the last, Quanquam non pari forma apud atones ejus vigebat auctoritas. This reading originated in a mistake as to the meaning of the other, as if that asserted only that St. Peter had the same power of ordaining as any of the rest.

¹⁸ kurioj erhmwsewj megalhj. Something perhaps is wanting between kur. and er. m. Indeed the text seems to consist o little more than a few rough notes.

¹⁹ Tafoj gegonen h polij twn cenwn, twn stratiwtwn. In the defective state of the text it is not easy to conjecture what this can mean. Perhaps, alluding to the words in St. Matthew, "a place to bury strangers in." St. Chrys, may have explained, that the strangers were not heathen (ekinouj gar oud an eiasan tafhnai, they would not have allowed such to be buried in or by the Holy City, much less have provided a place of burial for them), but foreign Jews: and if in tafoj gegonen h polij he alludes to the description in Josephus, B. J. v. 12. 3. and 13. 7. this explanation of the term "strangers" would be the more apposite, as the myriads who perished in the siege were assembled from all parts of the world. The `soldiers0' seem to be the mercenaries on the side of the Jews: five thousand Idu-maeans are mentioned, B. J. v. 6. 1.

²⁰ The requirement for the apostolic office is here clearly indicated. The candidate must have associated with Christ and his apostles during the period from John's baptism to the Lord's ascension, i. e. during His public ministry, The character of the apostolate is also significantly implied in the term martuj thj anastasewj autou. The resurrection was the great central theme of apostolic teaching and preaching (vid. Acts iv. 2, Acts iv. 33; Acts xvii. 18, Acts xvii. 32).-G. B. S.

²¹ Here the Edd. have hmeij: poqen dhlon\ ez wn qaumatourgoumen. "ourselves: how is this proved? by the miracles we work." C. has not these words, which are not needed, but rather disturb the sense.

²² The words of the text (v. 23) Kai esthsan duo are better rendered "put forward" (Rev. Vs.) than "appointed." (A.Y.) The meaning is that the company chose two persons as candidates, leaving the decision between them to the lot.-G. B. S.

²³ Oux aplwj de prostiqhsin, D. and E. have oux aplwj de ou protiqhsin ekeinon, according to which the sense would be the same: "Not without reason does he avoid putting Mat-thias first."

²⁴ Here the Edd. add, ouxi twn ecwqen, "not by those without:" but these words are not found in our mss. of either text, nor in the Catena.

²⁵ So, except E. all our mss. and the Catena: and Morel. Ben. But Sav. and Par. "they did not yet think themselves worthy to make the election by themselves: wherefore they desire to be informed by some sign." An unnecessary alteration; for the sign means some miraculous token. So Oecumen.

²⁶ mss. and Edd. pollw mallon entauqa eplhrwse ton, xoron, aphrtise thn tacin. The Catena adds o anadexqeij (anadexqteij), which we have adopted.

²⁷ Edd. Panu ge. Ou gar episkopou. legeij ergon. Read Panu ge (ou gar\) episk. leg. ergon.

²⁸ Qumbainei tina klhron diadecasqai andrwn moxqhrwn. The expression below, oti moxqhoj tij esti shows that the and. mocq., `ill-conditioned men,0' are clerks. The offences meant seem to have been before ordination: and the difficulty is, How to deal with a clerk who ought not to have been ordained at all? You cannot cut him off from the order of clergy, there being no present actual delinquency to justify such a step. Then suppose you do not call him to account for the past, on the ground that the bishop who ordained him must be answerable: what are you to do, when this man should in the regular course be advanced to a higher order of the ministry? To refuse to ordain him, would be to publish his unworthiness, and call attention to the scandal of his having been ordained in the first instance: to advance him, would be even worse.

²⁹ Here the Edd. add antisthson thn geennan, "put in the other balance-hell :" which, however, is not found in any of our mss.

³⁰ ina en amarth amarthua monon ekolazeto pikrwj. On this peculiar construction, see Field, Adnotat, in Hom, in Matt. p. 404. E.-In the next sentence St. Chrys. in applying the term iereuj to Moses, does not mean that Moses was a Priest, but that he held a station similar in some regards to that of Bishops afterwards. Aaron was properly the High Priest, but Moses was a type of Christian Bishops, considered as Chief Pastors and Rulers.

³¹ Mallon de nun oude meta to ekbhnai dhloj toij polloij: ou gar estin autoij polemoj: alla kata touj poimenaj ekeinouj, k. t. l. Perhaps Chryss. is not fully reported here. The meaning seems to be: "The proverb, glukuj o polemoj apeiroij, may well be applied here; it is a fine thing to be a bishop, to those who have not tried it. Little do people think what this war is, before they have entered into it. But in our times, not only pro tou embhnai, but even meta to ekbhnai, after a good bishop has gone through with it, the generality of people do not see that there has been any war in the case. We bishops, in their view, are like Ezekiel's shepherds. And no marvel, for many among us are such." The author of the modern text has given a different turn to the sentiment. Here it is: "The same may well be said in the present case; or rather, we do say it before we have entered into the contest; but after we have embarked in it, we become not even visible to the generality. For to us now there is no war, against those who oppress the poor, nor do we endure to battle in defence of the flock; but like those shepherds, etc."

³² Vigils were celebrated in C.'s time with much pomp. A grand ceremonial of this kind was held in the first year of his episcopate, at the translation of the relics.

³³ Poiw gar suneidopi an (l. kan) genh spoudasaj h, k. t. l. The meaning is strangely mistaken by the Lat. transl. Erasm. has, Quem enim conscium adibis si vel, etc. Ben. Quo uteris conscio si ambias vel, etc. The ofqalmoij following might have shown the meaning, not to mention the ungrammatical rendering of an genh spoudasaj.

³⁴ See de Sacerdot, lib. iv. in the opening, where this question is considered at length.

³⁵ Paraxwrhsw thj didaskaliaj imin: I will cede the teaching to you; let it be yours to teach by your actions, which is the more potent teaching.

³⁶ Ta gar para filwn legomena, Kan ubrij h, forhta. Apparently a quotation.

³⁷ Edd. apuloimhn ei mh: "May I perish if, etc." but none ofour mss. have this word.

¹ i.e. in reference to the harvest. The modern text has, "therefore He calls this the harvest:" missing the author's meaning, i.e. the allusion to the parable of the sower.

² toutesti, proj th penthkosth peri authn wj eipein. Proj, as in the phrase, einai v. ginesqai proj tini. Hom. in Matt. 289. B. Field, not. and similarly peri as in einai peri ti. Only Oecumen. has preserved the true reading, in his comment proj th p.\ peri authn hdh thn eorthn. A, B, C, read, pro thj penthkosthj peri authn wj eipein: so Cat. but with peri for pro. The others, ou pro thj p., alla peri authn, wj eipein.

³ In the mss. and Edd. the order of the following sentences is confused. It is here restored by bringing the clause, kai pantaj ekei sunhgagen into what appears to be its proper connection, and supplying the text to the comment pollhn thn rumhn legei tou Pneumatoj.

⁴ i.e. if the gift descended only upon the Twelve, there would have been specific and distinctive mention of them in this narrative, as there was in the former chapter; and with much more reason here than there. The writer would not have said merely, They were all together: it sat upon each one of them: they were all filled: if he had meant that the Spirit came only upon the Apostles.

⁵ i.e. Mark how the enumeration, "Parthians,' and Medes," etc., goes from east to west. This comment having been trans posed to the end of v. 12, was misunderstood: and E. has in stead of it, "Do you see how it was, that, as if they had wings, they sped their way through the whole world?"

⁶ Ta gar toiauta nhfouswn men yuxwn prospiptonta, ou polu exei ton qorubon: otan de mequswsin tote men outwj, toij profh taij de eterwj. In the modern text, which here also is followed by Erasm. and Edd. it is, alla tote men outwj ekeinoij, toij profhtaij de eterwj. "But here indeed it is on this wise with them (the disciples), but with the Prophets otherwise." -The expression "uninebriated" relates to the Old Testament: no such fire there, no mighty rushing wind, no vehement commotion: this comes of "the new wine" of the Spirit; otan mequswsin, with allusion to John ii. 10.

⁷ So de Sancta Pentecoste, Hom. i. t. ii. 465. "Why does Ezekiel receive the gift of prophecy not by the likeness of fire, but by a book, while the Apostles receive the gifts by fire? For concerning him we read, that one gave him in his mouth a roll of a book, etc.: but concerning the Apostles not so, but "there appeared unto them tongues as of fire." Why is it a book and writing there, here tongue and fire? Because there the Prophet went his way to accuse sins, and to bewail Jewish calamities: whereas these went forth to consume the sins of the whole world: therefore he received a writing, to call to mind the coming calamities: these fire, to burn up the sins of the world, and utterly abolish them. For as fire falling among thorns will with ease destroy them, even so the grace of the Spirit consumed the sins of men."

⁸ This, which we have marked as parenthesis, seems to be out of its place: it interrupts what is said about Ezekiel, and besides is not relevant to the matter immediately in hand, 'Entauqa de auto Pn. to #A. k. t. l. would come in more suitably after the mention of the fire in the bush, in which God appeared to Moses. And so Oecumenius seems to have taken it. "But it is in the likeness of fire, because the Spirit also is God, and to prove by this also that the Spirit is of one Nature (omofuej) with the Father, Who appears in this manner to Moses at the bush."

⁹ #Oti touto ekeino esti: i.e. The Spirit here given to, the disciples, is the same that was given to those: but more intense in operation; therefore it appears not merely under the emblem of cloven tongues, but as tongues of fire.

¹⁰ Chrys. seems to understand by diamerizomenai (v. 3), divided, distributed among the members of the company, rather than of a cloven form, a forked appearance, as indicating the shape of the fire-like tongues. The former is the preferable interpretation. (So the Rev. Vets. vs. A. V.). The latter view cannot explain the singular verb which follows, ekaqisen. - G. B. S.

¹¹ ina deixqh autou gumnh h pistij. Not, "ut palam fieret fides ejus, fides ejus, Ben. but, quo ipsius nuda simplexque fides declararetur," Erasm. The meaning seems to be: David after the victory over Goliath, when the hearts of the people were turned to him, and he might have taken possession of the kingdom to which he was anointed, yet did not seek worldly greatness, but chose rather to suffer persecutions, etc.: as developed in the Homilies de Davide et Saule, t. iv. 752. Below, for anatrefomenon ("Samuel brought up in the temple,") A. has anstrefomenon, which we have adopted.

¹² So C and Cat. B. transposes Elisha and Ezekiel, A. omits the clause. Chrys. elsewhere makes it a special praise of Ezekiel, that he chose rather to accompany his people into captivity, than to remain in his own land: Interp. in Isai. i. t. 1. 2. and ad Stagyr. ii. t. ii. 228. In this manner then (he would say here), Ez. "left all," and having thus given proof of his worth, received the gift of prophecy. The modern text reads: "Ezekiel again. And that the case was thus, is manifest from what followed. For indeed these also forsook all that they had. Therefore they then received the Spirit, when they had given proof of their own virtue." -By these (outoi) We must understand the Old Test. saints just mentioned. It should rather have been ekeinoi, but Chrys. is negligent in the use of these pronouns. See Hom. in Matt. Field. Adnot. p. 709, B.

¹³ 'Hlattouto. Alluding to Numb. xi. 17. "I will take of the Spirit that is upon thee, and will put it upon them."

¹⁴ #Ina de ech. (Cat. ina deich.) Oecumen. ina exwsi, "that they may have it in their power, according to the law of their fathers, to appear thrice in the year, etc." The modern text has, epei echn <\=85_dia touto. "Because it was permitted ...therefore."

¹⁵ 'Ekei de en aixmalwsia hsan polloi h kai ekei diesparto ta eqnh ta twn dogmatwn. A. b.c. N. As ta twn d taken as apposition to ta equh yields no satisfactory sense, we adopt from the modern text proj before ta efnh, and make, as there, ta twn d. the nom. to diesparto. And as in the next sentence Chrys. distinguishes citizens, foreign (Jews), and proselytes, and there is no mention of the last, unless it be in the clause h kai ekei diesparto, we infer that ta twn d. means the Law of Moses. "Or also in those countries (Parthia, Media, etc. in consequence of the dispersion of the Jews) the Law and its religion ad been disseminated among the Gentiles. So that from all quarters, etc." Thus it is explained how there came to be present at Jerusalem "devout men" from Parthia and those other countries: there were many Jews there in captivity, and also proselytes of the Law from among the Gentiles.-In the modenn text the passage is thus altered: "But, in, much as the Jews were in captivity, it is likely that there were then present with them many of the Gentiles: h oti kai proj ta eqnh ta twn dogmatwn hoh katesparto, kai dia touto polloi kai ec autwn parhsan ekei. Or, because ta twn d. had become disseminated among the Gentiles also, and therefore many also of them were there present, kata mnhmhn. wn hkousan. Here ta twn dogmatw/ is taken to mean `the doctrines of the Christian Faith:0' as Erasmus renders the passage, Sive quod ad gentes quoque fidei dogmata seminars fuerint, et hanc ob causam complures ex iis aderant ut memorarent qua audierant. It can hardly be supposed that St. Chryostom meant to represent that some of these Parthians, Medes, etc. were Gentiles who had heard in their own country the tidings of the Faith of Christ, and therefore were present at Jerusalem: yet this is what he is made to say in this text.

¹⁶ It is impossible to gain from this language any clear view of the author's opinion of the gift of tongues. The uncertainty of the text here still further embarrasses the subject. That the narrative means that they received at Pentecost a miraculous gift of speaking foreign languages, is now almost unanimously maintained by modern scholars. The difficult question as to the gift of tongues as referred to in 1 Cor. xiv. should not lead to a weakening or explaining away of such unmistakable expressions as eteraij glwssaij hmeteraij glwssaij (4), hmeteraij glwssaij (II) and th idia dialektw (6, 8). Cf. Mark xvi, 17.-G. B. S.

¹⁷ Panu ge (ou gar\) anqwpoi k. t. l. See above, p. 47. note u. and 66, note c. The modern text has, Panu ge: oti anqrwpoi k. t. l. Below, "Since this was improbable, therefore, to impose upon the hearers, and show that the men are drunken, they ascribe, etc." But in the old text it is, oti ouk an emequsqhsan, meaning, "because [so early in the day] they would not have been drinking much," (this is the force of the tense mequsqhnai as in John ii. 10) "therefore they ascribe all to the quality (of the wine);" because as Oecumen. says, explaining is remark of Chrys., the fumes of gleukoj mount more quickly to the brain, etc. Erasmus, seemingly referring this to memestwmenoi, translates hebetudini crapulaeque rem totam ascribunt: Ben. even more strangely, 'agendi et loquendi modo totum ascribunt.

¹⁸ 'Ekei: referring to ch. i. as expounded in Hom. iii. So Oecumen, in loc. #Anw men thn khdemonian epideiknutai, en oij tw plhqei epitrepei thn eklogh/ k. t. l..

¹⁹ Here the modern text (Edd.) enlarges by the additions "to account the wonder of the tongues the work of drunkenness? But not a whir did this annoy the Apostles; nor did it make them less bold at hearing such scoffing. By the presence of the Spirit they were now transformed, and were become superior to all bodily considerations."

²⁰ The change of subject (from the Jews to the Apostles) is not expressed in the original. To remedy the confusion occasioned by this negligence, the modern text (Edd.) transposes this part: viz. after the sentence ending, "so great a multitude:" it has, "For tell me: did they not fight-in a picture? ' And then, "What? I pray you; did they not exhaust, etc." Clearly the other is the original order. It is shown, first, how the Jews were utterly worsted, and how awfully the whole posture of affairs was reversed for them; and then, how victoriously the preachers of the new Faith maintained their ground against the whole world.

²¹ Edd. "Were they not subjected to the ridicule and mockery of those present? For in their case both these befel together: for some derided them, others mocked." Which is weak enough; but the original text could not be retained, because on the supposition that all this relates to the Jews then present, the mention of "wrath" and "punishment" would be irrelevant.

²² Euqumiaij, i.e. "bursts of self-complacent mirth" (e.g. at Athens), opposed to qumoij "explosions of wrath," Ben. without specifying the authority, notes a various reading aqumiaij, which is found in none of the Paris copies, and is quite unmeaning. Edd. uaniaij.

²³ Ben. interprets: "So unlooked for were these trials. that the Apostles seemed to themselves to be dreaming or beholding these things in a picture." But when the true order of the text is restored, no such far-fetched comment is needed.

²⁴ The text is defective here, arxontwn foboi, oplwn isxuj: polesi kai teixesin oxuroij. The text of the Edd. has: "And the wonder is, that with bare body they took the field against armed men. against rulers having power over them: without experience," etc.

²⁵ St. Chrysostom's habitual use of the term philosophy is thus explained in the index of Mr. Field's edition of the Com. on St. Matt. "Philosophy, according to the custom of Chrys. is not Christian piety, not the exercise of any virtue, not a pious and chaste life, not virtue in general, but that part of virtue, which consists in subduing the carnal appetites and affections. Thus to Christian philosophy are to be referred: forbearance and long suffering; humblemindedness; contempt of wealth; an austere and monastic life; every other mortification (apaqeia). Its contraries are: emulation (zhlotupia see below), envy and vainglory, and all other passions."

²⁶ kai filosofa, fhsin, ina: "And `philosophical,0' forsooth:" but perhaps it should be kai efilosofhsen ina: "this was the upshot of his philosophizing." 'H tou filosofou yuxh: "the soul of the philosopher himself (A tou didaskalou), viz. equally with the souls of other men, becomes, for instance, a fly," etc. Comp. infra: "our soul passes into flies and dogs," etc. and Hom. in Ev. Joann. t. viii. 8. D. "they say that the souls of men become flies, gnats, shrubs." -Edd. "For what is the benefit from learning that the soul of the philosopher," etc. The next sentence (ontwj muia-ouk eij muian metepipten (sc. h yuxh), all epebaine (sc. muia th en Plat. oikoush) yuxh seems to mean, `He talks of the soul becoming a fly: and truly the soul in Plato might be claimed by a fly:0' epeb. thy. as e.g. is epibainein th eparxia to step into possession of, etc. Poiaj gar tauta ou muiaj; Edd. mutaiologiaj; adding, Pofen dh toiauta lhrein epebaleto; "What could put it into his head to rave in this fashion?"

²⁷ The author's depreciation of Plato contrasts unfavorably with the more generous estimates of a long line of Church Fathers from Justin to Augustin.-G. B. S.

²⁸ 'Epei ekeino ge kai anhrei. Erasmus translates, Quandoquidem et illud quod Plato docuit, sustulit: whence Ben. Nam illud Platonis hic (Petrus) sustulit: i.e. for Peter's doctrine (of chastity) has made an end of that lewd dogma of Plato's. But the following sentence rather implies that the meaning is as above given.

²⁹ Di' autwn, Ben. per illas, which they seem to refer to gunaikej. Erasm. per illos, which is doubtless right: by means of the philosophers, as below, en taij ekeinwn yucaij.

³⁰ Kai zhloi par autoij o kuwn kata Platwna. Edd. have this after "polity and laws," where it is clearly out of place, whatever it means.

³¹ Edd. Sfodra ge. on gar frenoj baqdraj. Read Sfodra ge (on gar)\fr. b. as above, p. 22, note 1, and 28, note 2.

¹ The ekeinoi, if the old text be correct, are the mockers, but these are not "the devout men out of every nation under heaven," therefore onj cenouj eipen anwterw can hardly be meant to refer to the following clause, entaiqa proj ekeinouj k. t. l. The omission of the text-words, and the seeming antithesis of anwtew and entauqa, caused a confusion which the modern text attempts to remedy by transposing touj diaxl. to the place of toutouj. "Whom the writer above called strangers, to those Peter here directs his speech, and he seems indeed to discourse with those, but corrects the mockers." This just inverts Chrysostom's meaning, which is clear enough from the following context. He says: "The `dwellers in Jerusalem0' are especially the devout men out of every nation mentioned above, and to instruct these (toutouj) is the real aim of the discourse, which however is addressed in the first instance to the others (ekeinouj), whose mockery gave occasion to it. St. Peter stands up apparently for the purpose of defending himself and his brethren: but this is in fact quite a secondary object, and the apology becomes a sermon of doctrine."

² Kai to en 9I. oikein. Below he explains andrej 'Ioudaioi to mean, "dwellers in Judea:" therefore the kai seems to mean, "to be not only such, but dwellers in Jerusalem also."

³ Here our leading Ms. after ou gar wj umeij, has apoplhroutai, fhsi, kai upolambanetai oti mequousin. "For not as ye."-It is fulfilled (he says) and it is supposed that they are drunken!" which may have been said by Chrys., but certainly not in this place.

⁴ There is no reason to doubt that the company who witnessed the scenes at Pentecost really supposed the Christians to be intoxicated. To this opinion they were, of course, the more readily inclined because of their prejudice against the new sect. The force of Peter's refutation of the charge of drunkenness: "Seeing it is but the third hour, etc.," lies partly in the fact that 9 a. m. was too early for any such general intoxication, and still more in the fact that the third hour was the first hour of prayer, at which time it would have been sacrilege to drink to excess.-G. B. S.

⁵ Here the innovator, again mistaking his author's meaning, as if it were -Peter did not say, "These are not drunk," but what he did say was, "They speak by the Spirit"-finds it necessary to add, Kai oux aplwj, And not merely so, but, etc.

⁶ apologian, as in 2 Cor. vii. 11. "Yea, what clearing of yourselves."

⁷ i.e. The brightness of the miraculous fire appears at a time when there would be many to see it, people not being engaged in their works, nor within their houses at their noontide meal. Oecumenius evidently had the old text before him, for he gives the same sense with the slightest verbal alterations. In the Catena the sense is altered by omission of the negatives. "When people are about their work, when about their dinner, etc. The innovator (followed by Edd.) makes it "For when the brightness of the light is shown, then men are not occupied in the business of dinner (ou peri erga ...ta peri arioton), then the day is cheerful faidra, the brisk and stirring time of day), then all are in the market." By to lampron tou fwtoj he seems to mean bright daylight.

⁸ Here, after eij deuteran, C. has 'Oldan (marg. gr. kai Lobnan. oion deb. kai. Lobnan. B. after Deb. kai 'Oldan adds h Lobnan) It does not appear who is meant by this Lobna, unless it originates in some strange misconception of 2 Kings xxiii. 31, "daughter of Jeremiah of Libnah," LXX. Q. 9I. ek Lobna. Clem. Alex. Str. i. §. 136. has no such name in his list of Old Testament prophetesses.

⁹ Edd. "For it was not expedient, because this also was obscure. I will show, etc. For it frightened them more, being obscure. But if he had interpreted, it would even have offended them more."

¹⁰ What follows in the edited text is obscure and perplexed. The original text seems to labor under some defects, besides the omission of the passages commented upon.

¹¹ Something seems wanting here: e. g. as above, "There were signs in heaven, as Josephus relates. This however, in the full sense, has never been fulfilled." And then, a reference to the Babylonian compared with the Roman judgment.

¹² First blood, i. e. the taking and slaughter of the inhabitants: then, fire, etc., i. e. the burning of the city.

¹³ As B. has this sentence, which is in fact necessary to the sense, the omission of it in C. A. may be referred to the homoeoteleuton, elenqeroj.

¹⁴ kai (=kaiper, or ei kai>\/) foberon to thj kolasewj. i. e. he alleviates the severity of his discourse by speaking of the effects of faith, at the same time that he shows the fearfulness of the punishment. Edd. kai ou fob. kruptwn to thj kolasewj, i. e. light ...and not fearful, by withdrawing out of sight what relates to the punishment: which however Ben. renders as if it were ou to fob. And not concealing the fearfulness, etc."

¹⁵ It is extremely doubtful if Peter understood by "the great and terrible day of the Lord" (20) the destruction of Jerusalem. (Chrys.) It probably refers to the Parousia which is thought of as imminent. The "last days" then would be the days preceding the Messianic age which is to begin at the Parousia. This view harmonizes with the Jewish conception and with the Christian expectation that the then existing period (aiwn outoj) was soon to pass into a new age (aiwn mellwn). The scenes of Pentecost were thought to be the harbingers of this consummation and were so significant both of the joys and woes of the impending crisis, that the bold imagery of the prophet Joel is applied to them. Cf. the prophetic terms in which the destruction of Jerusalem is foretold-an event closely associated with the personal return of our Lord in Matt. xxiv.-G. B. S.

¹⁶ wj otan legh en ampelwni pempein ta strateumata autou. Chrys. is misreported here, for the sending forth of the armies belongs to the parable of the marriage of the king's son.

¹⁷ Something must have been omitted here: viz. a brief exposition of the parable here referred to. The innovator endeavors to mend the text, by leaving out the following sentence.

¹⁸ Wn ouden wmoteron gegonen, agaphtoi, twn tote pepragmenwn pragmatwn. This may be explained as a negligent construction, but perhaps some words are omitted. The next sentence, Kai autoj apefhnato (which phrase is repeated below), refers to Matt. xxiv. 21. "There shall be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world to this time."

¹⁹ 'Obgiskoij (dagger-blades, or spear-heads, or spits) autouj diepran. In Hom. vi. p. 43. infra, we have the phrase tinej obeliskoi pepurwmenoi diepeiran swma. It is evident that something is omitted, and no more probable supposition presents itself, than that Chrys. here read out from Josephus or Eusebius the description of the famine among the besieged (which the reporter of the sermon omitted at the time, intending to insert it at his leisure); and that the short sentence in the text is the preacher's own parenthetical explanation of some part of the description. Thus, B. J. vi. 3. 3. speaking of the cruelties practised upon dying wretches suspected of having food concealed about their persons, Josephus says: 'Alla kai touj ekpneontaj oi lhstai dihreunwn, mhtij upo kolpon exwn trofhn skhptoito ton fanaton autn. Perhaps obeliskoij autouj diepeiran is C.'s comment upon dihreunwn.-Or, in like manner, it may refer to the description in B. J. v. 12. 3. how the lhstai, after ransacking the bodies of the dead, tried the edges of their swords upon them, etc. Taj te akmaj twn cifwn edokimazon en toij ptwmasi, kai tinaj twn errimmenwn eti zwntaj dihlaunon epi peira tou sidhrou. Perhaps, however, the expression may be taken in a metaphorical sense as in the phrase above cited: "they pierced themselves (eautouj for autouj) as with spits or lancets."

²⁰ Against the Marcionites, he says: You say that the God of the Old Testament is a cruel God; whereas Christ, the good God, is all mildness. Yet was not the Roman judgment upon the Jews inflicted by Him? And was it not beyond comparison more ruthless (wmoteron, above) than the Babylonian or any former judgment, inflicted, as you say, by the God of the Old Testament?

²¹ Pwj oun fhsin, i. e. as it is said in the text, "Every one that calleth on the name of the Lord shall be saved." The question is the same as was put in the beginning of this section: "What? do you speak of salvation for them after crucifying the Lord? And this, when you have shown us how fearfully that sin was visited?" This question, as a very simple one, he leaves the hearers to answer for themselves, by distinguishing between believers and unbelievers, the penitent and the hardened.-The innovator quite alters the sense; "How then say some that Christ remitted them their sin?" which makes the next sentence idle.

²² Plhn otan kakeinoj eij ekeinhn metasth thn tacin The meaning is obscure: for it may be either, that he is displaced from office (metasthnai, metastasij are common in this sense), and makes one of the stasiazontej; or, that he lays aside the magistrate and demeans himself to take part in their excesses. (Tacij is the expression for the attendants of any high official, and may perhaps be taken in that sense here). Erasmus goes wide of the text: nec exultant eo quod et ille ad hoc opus ordinatus est: and so Montf. nec exultantes quod ille ad hoc officium sit constitutus.

²³ meta ton Qeon, omitted in the modern text.

²⁴ Hom. in Matt. lxxi. p. 699. C. Chrys. describes kenodocia (vainglory) in almsgiving, as the thief that runs away with the treasure laid up in heaven. And something of this sort seems to have been in his thoughts here, where however his meaning is evidently very imperfectly expressed. The texts cited show that ekei, ekeifen, refer to something more than, as above, good laws and government in general; for here he speaks of the Gospel discipline of the inner man. "Where this restraint is, no dissipation of our temporal or spiritual wealth has place: for God, as common Father, has raised a wall to keep out all robbers both seen and unseen, from all our possessions: from the former He guards us, by law and good government; from the latter, by the Gospel prohibition of all vainglory: "Take heed that ye do not your alms," etc.

²⁵ Manfanei yuxh enteufen, opp. to ekeifen as in the following sentences: ekeifen swfrosunhn manfanei, enteufen akolasian-ek. epieikeian, ent. tufon-ek. kosmiothta, ent. asxhmosunhn. Therefore either something is wanting: e. g. pleonecian: ekeifen, or for ent. we must read ekeiqen.

²⁶ The old text kai ebouleto ekeinoj o analiskwn kai thn oikeian eupragian mikran proj thn ekeinou, evidently requires correction, and the emendation assumed in the translation is, kai eb. ekeinoj einai (o anal. may perhaps be rejected as a gloss) kai thn oikeian eupr. m. orwn p. t. ekeinou. Thus the whole passage, from kai o men idiwthj, refers to the id. or person feasted, and ekeinou throughout is the entertainer. The edited text has: 'Ekeinoj de o anal. kai thn oikeian eupr. mikran oran edokei p. t. ekeinou: of which Erasm. makes, Ille autem qui sumptus impendit et suam felicitatem parvam cum ea quam ex sumptu habebat conspicere putabat. But even if this sense lay in the words, it is not easy to see the connection of the following sentence, Dia touto, etc., Montf. translates, Qui vero sumptus fecit, suam proe illius felicitate parvam putabat, as if ekeinoj and ekeinou in the same sentence referred to two different and contrasted persons. The meaning of the passage is, As, on the day before, the entertainer had to pleon thj eufumiaj, it is but fair that on the following day to pleon thj afumiaj should be transferred to him. This is expressed by Dia touto th ust. antididoasin: which however, Erasmus renders, Ideireo sequenti die reddunt sibi vestes iterum: Montf. redduntur vestes. (Perhaps there is an allusion to the legal phrase antidosij. v. Isocrat. peri antid).

²⁷ Eij anafhmata oude eij, krubdhn. The modern text has eij aconaj oude eij, kurbeij, alluding to the peculiar form of tables on which the laws of Athens were written. On critical grounds we retain the reading of the old text, which, as being the more difficult one, is not likely to have been substituted for the other. Ouk eij anafhmata; "not on public monuments for display." Laws of an Emperor, for instance, engraved on handsome monuments, may be called anafhmata. Oude eij krubdhn, (also an unusual expression), `nor yet where no one would see them.0'

¹ tou propatoroj, A. C. F. D. and Cat. but tou Dauid eukairwj, B. E. Edd. Oecumenius fell into the same mistake and has tou propatoroj Dauid. But it is evident that Chrys. is commenting on the address !Andrej 'Israhlitai.

² #Ora, poion hn touto mega, to eipein k. t. l. i.e. "He says as yet oudn mega, nothing great, concerning Christ: nothing even that would be great if said of an ordinary Prophet. For, observe: poion mega, what sort of great thing was it, to say that Christ was sent from God?" In the following sentences Chrys. seems to have been scarcely understood by his reporter. His meaning may be thus represented: "And yet, so It is: everywhere in the Scriptures we find examples of this remarkable meiwsij: "Christ was sent from God," seems to be the point most studiously inculcated (to spoudazomenon): nay, we find it carried to the utmost (meq' uperbolhj) in some of Christ's own expressions. And so here: when Peter stands up-he, the leader of the Apostles, the lover of Christ, the good shepherd, the man entrusted with the keys of the kingdom of heaven. the man who has received the deposit of the Wisdom of the Spirit-after he has subdued the audience by the terrors of the coming judgments, has shown that he and his company have received wonderful gifts as foretold by the Prophet, and has made it felt that they have a right to be believed: you may well expect after all this that his first word about Christ will be something great; that he will certainly launch out boldly into the declaration, He is risen! Only think, though, what boldness to say this in the midst of the murderers!-Nothing of the kind. He begins with, "Jesus the Nazarene, a man proved to be from God unto you by signs, etc. which-(He did? no, but) God did by Him, etc. Wait awhile, however: the Orator will say all that needs to be said in due time."

³ Ei gar kai wrismenon hn, fhsin, omwj androfonoi hsan. b.c. after apall. tou egklhmatoj, and before the text. As the sentence so placed seemed to make Chrys. contradict himself, the other mss. and Edd. before Ben. omit it. Something is wanting, which perhaps may be supplied from Oecumen. 'Alla kai apallasswn ouk afihsin autouj panth tou egklhmatoj. 'Epagei gar, oti dia xeirwn anomwn aneilete.

⁴ In v. 23, the preferable reading is dia xeiroj anomwn, "through the hand of lawless men," instead of dia xeirwn anomwn of the Text. Recep. So A, B, C, D, Tisch. W. and H., Lach. Treg. R. V. This reading is also to be preferred in accordance with Bengel's first rule of text-criticism-Lectio difficilior principatum tenet.-G. B. S.

⁵ The confusion may be cleared up by supposing that Chrys. here commented upon the words dia xeirwn anomwn as admitting of a double connection: viz.: with ekdoton labontej and with prosp. aneilete. In the former, it refers to Judas: while at the same time, it is shown that of themselves they had no power against Him. He was delivered up by the predestination and will of God, by means of the wicked hands of Judas; upon whom (already gone to his doom) the evil is shifted entire. But again, as ekdoton is not put simply and without addition (aplwj), so neither (oude) is aneilete: but "by wicked hands ye slew," i. e. by the soldiers.

⁶ The text seems to be corrupt: kai auto didontoj estin ti: deiknusin oti. B. omits estin ti. Perhaps kai auto is derived from an abbreviation of krateisqai auton: and didontoj estin ti: may be, "is (the expression) of one assigning something. i.e. some special prerogative to Him:" or, possibly, "For the expression, Kaqoti ouk hn dunaton even of itself implies the granting of something (in His case):" viz. as a postulate. E. kai auton didonta emfainei katasxein: kai oti, i.e. "that it Was even He that gave death the power to hold Him:" this, which is adopted by Edd. is, however, not a various reading, but only an attempt to restore the passage. Oecumen. gives no assistance: he has only, dia de tou, kaqoti ouk hn dun. auton krat., to megaleion autou paristhsi, kai oti ouketi apoqnhskei. In the next sentence E. and Edd. have: "For by `pains of death0' Scripture is everywhere wont to express `danger:0'" but Oecumen. and Cat. agree with the old reading, h Palaia. Possibly the meaning of the whole passage may be somewhat as follows. "It is something great and sublime that Peter has darkly hinted in saying, `it was not possible that He should be holden of it.0' And the very expression kaqoti implies that there is something to be thought of (comp. Caren. in 1). Then, in the Old. Test., the expression wdinej qanatou means pains in which death is the agent; but here they are the pangs inflicted upon death itself, travailing in birth with Christ `the first-begotten from the dead.0' It shows then both that death could not endure to hold Him, and, that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more. For the assertion, etc. But then, without giving them time to ponder upon the meaning of what he has darkly hinted, he goes off to the Prophet," etc.-On the expression wdinaj luein Mr. Field, Index to Hom. in Matt. s. v., remarks, that "it is said sometimes of the childbearing woman herself, as p. 118. B., sometimes of the child born, as p. 375. A., sometimes of the person aiding in the delivery, as Job xxxix, 2. Hence the obscure passage Acts ii, 34 is to be explained. See Theophylact in 1."

⁷ It is noteworthy that this interpretation of wdinaj tou qanatou (24) is exactly that of Meyer who explains thus: "Death travailed in birth-throes even until the dead was raised again. With this event these pangs ceased, they were loosed; and because God had made Christ alive, God has loosed the pangs of death." Other interpretations are: (1) The snares or bands of death, on the ground that wdinej is used in the lxx. to translate the Hebrew lbx

(e. g. Ps. xviii. 5), which has this meaning. So Olsh. (2) That the pains of Jesus connected with the whole experience of death are meant. He is popularly conceived as enduring these pains until the resurrection when God loosed them, the conception being that he was under their power and constraint. We prefer this view. So Lechler, Gloag, Hackett.-G. B. S.

⁸ i. e. The former part of the passage cited, down to, "Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell," as far as the words go, is no more than David might say in reference to himself, or any other saint: viz. he set God always before his face, etc. therefore (dia touto, referring to v. 26. dia touto eufr.) death was not in the number of things that cause grief. And St. Peter instead of going at once to that in the prophecy which is peculiar to Christ, with wise management begins with what is less exalted, ate eisagwgikwterwn logwn deomenoij, Oecumen.-For dia touto ou twn lupountwn o fanatoj, E. and Edd. have ina deich, oti ou ..."to show that death," etc.

⁹ tewj manfanwmen kai hmeij outw katexein. As the text stands, this can only mean, "And here by the bye let us also learn how to hold fast Christ; not to hold Him withpain, like one in travail-pangs, who therefore cannot hold fast, but is in haste to be delivered," etc. But this can hardly have been St. Chrysostom's meaning. Something seems to be omitted after kai hmeij or outw.-Edd. tewj de manfanomen kai hmeij dia twn eirhmenwn ti esti to katexein. If this is: "What is the meaning of the expression katexein, the emphatic kai hmeij is superfluous; and besides, the word katexein does not occur in the text commented upon. Oecum. and the Catena give no help.

¹⁰ Edd. kai gumnhn tifhsi dhlwn pwj. "And gives it bare (of comment), showing." Montf. mistranslates gumnhn tif, nudam exponat, and notices the old reading (A. b.c.) with the remark, Unus Codex prof. ou gumnhn. Minus recte. But Chrys. is now commenting on v. 30, 31. "Above, St. Peter gave the prophecy by itself: now he adds his own exposition and reasoning, "Being therefore a Prophet." etc.

¹¹ 'Ecexee, fhsin, ouk aciwma zhtwn, kai oux aplwj. Edd. 'Ec., f. 'Entaufa to aciwma emfainei, kai oti oux aplwj. "Here he intimates the dignity: and that," etc. But the meaning is, "He poured it forth, not requiring merit: i.e. not giving here and there to the most deserving, but as the phrase implies, with unsparing liberality." meta dayileiaj. N. meq uperbolhj.

¹² pofen touto; Edd. "Wherefore also to prove this very thing, he adds what follows." The connection is, "He has shed forth. How so? It must be He; for not David ascended," etc.

¹³ Here five of our mss. have mef' uperbolhj, "hyperbolically:" but the reading of E. mef' upostolhj is attested by Oecumen. and the Catena.

¹⁴ i. e. the expression "Lord" is derived from David's, "My Lord:" the expression "Christ," or rather kai Xriston o Qeoj epoihj en, is from the Psalm: meaning perhaps the second Psalm. Edd. have, "this he says from David and from the Psalm," after the text.

¹⁵ The two Old Test. pp. (Joel ii. 28-32; Ps. xvi. 8-11) which occur in this chapter are quoted from the lxx., the former freely, the latter with great exactness. The following peculiarities of phraseology are noticeable in the first passage. (1) "In the last days," more definite expression for the Heb. and lxx. "afterward." (2) The partitive expression: "I will pour out of my Spirit," is after the lxx. vs. the original which reads: "I will pour out my spirit." (3) The phrases: "saith God" and "they shall prophesy" (17, 18) are added to both Heb. and lxx. (4) "Vapor" is from lxx. for Heb. "columns." (5) If we read kai epifanh at the end of v. 20 (as Mey., W. and H.) it is from the lxx. an inaccurate trans. of Hebrew for "fearful," occasioned by misunderstanding on the part of the Seventy of the derivation of the Heb. word. The second pp. follows the lxx. exactly and in several deviations from the original.-G. B. S.

¹⁶ Alluding to the Psalm above cited, "Until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool."

¹⁷ In the modern text the connection is supplied, and the thought expanded. "And yet neither is it any ordinary being that promises it: but One who is beyond comparison greater than the Kingdom itself. Now when the promise is a Kingdom, and God the Giver thereof, it is a great thing, the very receiving from such a Giver.

¹⁸ In the original the pronouns are ekeinoj (God), outoj (the Devil; for which however our mss. have ou ta and auta): then inversely, ekeinoj (the Devil), outoj (God). The modern text reduces the antithesis to regularity by transposing the first and second clause, with ekeinoj, outoj, in each member. Mr. Field, however, Hom. in Matt. 709 B. not. has remarked, that St. Chrys. is negligent in his use of these pronouns, and this passage may be added to those cited.

¹⁹ !Idwmen ti xrhsimwteron, ti dai (de, A. N.) wfelimwteron. (Here N. adds: Mh touto dwmen ti xrhsimwtero/n ti de wfelimwteron\) Mh touto fhsin eiph=j all' ennohson oti diaboloj esti/n malista men an ekeino deixfh/ dei kai ponouj uposthnai kai palin, k. t. l. The addition in N. is perhaps the result of unintentional repetition. If meant for emendation, it supposes an antithesis of xrhj. and wfelimwteron: "let us grant which is more serviceable (to others): but (the question is) which is more profitable (to one's self)." This, however, is not what the context requires. Rather it seems that something is omitted after eiphj: e.g. all' idwmen ti eukolwteron, "But let us see which is more easy." In the following sentence, it is not clear whether malista men belongs to dei kai p. u. "of course, if the former appear to be the case, it is necessary," etc. or, to the preceding clause, as in the translation: "above all (consider that it is the devil who gives the bidding), if that appear to be the case (i.e. that it is the easier of the two): it is needful," etc.-Edd. "But not only this, but bethink you that he indeed is the devil: for above all if that be shown, again the prize of victory shall be greater."

²⁰ dia touto, i. e. by enjoining ta sumferonta, although fortika, are fathers and masters shown to he truly such, whereas kidnappers who steal away children, seduce them by promising pleasure, and lumewnej, masters who ruin their servants, let them have their own way.-Morel. Ben. 'Ekeinoi de andrap. kai lum. kai panta ta enantia: "but the others are kidnappers and destroyers, and all that is contrary (to fathers and masters)." Savil. as above.

²¹ Plhn oti kai hdonhn exei, dhlon ekeifen. We have supplied the interpretation in the translation. 'Ekeifen, i.e. from that saying, "Come unto Me," etc. D. has enteufen: i.e. "is manifest from the following consideration."

²² Here is another instance of the negligent use of the pronouns ekeinoj and outoj noticed above (note 1). In the modern text this is altered, besides other changes intended as improvements upon the ornate description following. We have retained the original text throughout.

²³ Ou th fea de monon oude th oyei terpei (Sav. terpoito an) tote o toioutoj, alla kai (en b.c.) tw swmati autw tou proj ton leimwna orwntoj, (tou p. t. l. o. om. Sav. with full stop at autw., ekeinon (gar add. B. Sav.) mallon anihsi k. t. l. Savile's reading, adopted by Ben. rests on the sole authority of the New College ms. and is manifestly a correction, as the Paris Editor remarks. (This ms. has the clause tou. <\=85_orwntoj, but dotted for correction or omission, and the gar is added by §later hand.) But the passage seems to be incurably corrupt and only so much of the sense can be guessed at, that the delight is said not only to affect the eye, but to be felt through the whole frame of the beholder.

²⁴ alla yuxaj anihsin fermainomenh kai zeousa. (feousa A.) The latter words, "heated and glowing," as manifestly unsuitable to aura are omitted in the modern text. They seem to be a fragment of a sentence, describing the heat of fever, or of passion.

²⁵ plhn ei mh eij ecin eauton tina toiauthn katasthseie. Edd. apac eij ecin .<\=85_ katasthsaj: "having settled himself down into some such habit." But the old reading is preferable. "You may pacify him again and again, but the fit is subdued for the time, not the temper changed. There will be a fresh outbreak by and bye, unless indeed by self-discipline (eauton kat.) he bring himself into a habit," etc.

¹ This is strangely rendered by Ben. At alioquin, post-quam illos sic appellare dignati fuerant, et dixerant. Erasmus rightly, Et aliter: quoniam illi eos primum ita appellare dignati fuerunt. Oecumen. "And because Peter in the beginning of his discourse had so addressed them, hence they themselves had a handle for so addressing the Apostles."

² Touto gar en tw baptismati parelabon. St. Chrysostom cannot mean to say that they received the gift of faith in baptism, not having it before: (see Mark xvi. 16, Acts viii. 37.) But the meaning seems to be, with allusion to the traditio symboli in baptism, "He does not as yet say, "Believe:" the question, "Dost thou believe?" would be put to them in their baptism, when the Creed was delivered to them. So that the injunction "Believe" is in fact included in the "Be baptized."

³ We adopt the reading of A. N. The other mss. have kai twn parntwn kai twn mellontwn apallattei kakwn, "both from present and from future evils." Below, v. 42, omofumadon, which Chrys. seems to have had in his copy, was probably derived into this verse after proskart. from proskart. omof. v. 46.

⁴ The exact force of koinwnia here has been much disputed. By many it is thought to mean communication (to the needy) in the having all things common (koina), Ols., Lechler, et al. By others it is understood to refer to the Lord's Supper, but against this view is the fact that koinwnia did not become a name for the sacrament until the third or fourth century. Others render: fellowship understanding either the participation in common meals (agapai) or the enjoyment of mutual sympathy, helpfulness and encouragement-the fellowship of Christian friendship. So Bengel, Mey., Hack., Gloag. This view is the preferable one.-G. B. S.

⁵ Of our mss. N. E. have the true reading, pepurwto, which is attested by the Catena: the rest, pepwrwto. "were hardened."

⁶ This citation from v. 44. is not misplaced: it refers to the words epi to auto with which in Chrysostom's copy and many considerable authorities, this verse ended. (9O Kurioj prose. t. swz. kaq0 hmeran epi to auto. Petroj de kai 9I. anebainon k. t. l. Lachm.)-In the opening of the next paragraph, the modern text has: "And with many other words he testified. This he says, showing that what had been said," etc. But it is evident that the recapitulation begins here, with v. 37. and ta lexqenta, and ekeina, mean the preceding discourse, v. 14-36.; tauta, not "the many other words," v. 40. but, "Repent and be baptized."

⁷ The main lines of the picture which Luke here draws of the Apostolic community are: (1) Constant teaching and exhortation on the part of the Apostles. (2) Christian fellowship, with prayer and the regular observance of the Lord's Supper. (3) The doing of miracles. (4) The contribution of all to the common fund-not all at once, but gradually and as occasion required-as the imperfects and kaqoti an tij xreian eixen (v. 44) show. (5) The confident hope and exultant joy with which the work of the new kingdom was carried forward in the conviction that the gospel was for all (v. 39). The pasin toij eij makran must, we think, refer to the heathen (Calv., Beng., Lech., De W., Lange, Alf., Hack., Gl.) and not merely to distant members of the Jewish nation (Baumg., Mey.).-G. B. S.

⁸ In the old text (mss. and Catena) after twn pleionwn logwn to kefalaion comes the clause touto esti, fhsin, h dwrea tou 9A. Pn. where it is clearly misplaced: for to eukolon k. t. l. is, "Be baptized, and ye shall receive," etc., and tote epi ton bion agei refers to v. 40.: "And with many other words," of which pleionwn logwn the kefalaion is, "Save yourselves," etc. Hence the clause must belong to v. 39. and accordingly the Catena gives the whole passage from 9Aciopistoj o logoj to epi to bapt. ecerxontai. as the comment on v. 30, 39. We have restored the proper order, and supplied the omitted citations.-The modern text after to kefalaion, has kai touto prostiqhsi, deiknuj, oti h dwrea tou 0A. IIn. "Since the hearer, etc. this also he adds, showing that it is the gift of the Holy Ghost."-But the "hearer" is the person hearing or reading the narrative.

⁹ Here E. strangely inserts the formula of recapitulation, 0All0 idwmen anwqen ta legomena: received by Sav., Ben. but bracketted by Morel.

¹⁰ Here the mss. have: "And fear came," etc., v. 43, with its comment, which we have restored to its proper place.

¹¹ Ouxi omou de, all omoqumadon hsan. !kaq hmeran te fhsin, proskart. omoqum. en tw ierw,@ toutesti, mia yuxh. b.c. F. D. St. Chrys. here returns to v. 42. in which he read in his copy the word omoqumadon. Commenting on that expression, he refers to v. 46 (as his remark on that verse above was that they were taught, thj didaskaliaj apelauon, in the Temple). Or perhaps this clause may have been added by the scribe, because he did not find proskart. omoq. in v. 42, but did find it in v. 46.-E. "But he says not omou, but omoq since it is possible to be omou yet not omoq., when people are divided in opinion. And with words he exhorted. And here again," etc. So Edd.

¹² 'Epi touto, epi to pasi metadounai b.c. D. F. N. Cat. on v. 46, but on v. 45, Cat. has epi to auto, which is doubtless the true reading: for which the innovator. not understanding it, has 'epi to ta autwn pasi diadounai. On epi to auto compare the comment on ch. iv. 32. in Hom. xi. §1.

¹³ ama thj toutwn (N. and Cat. tou Pneumatoj) parrhsiaj (parousiaj B.) pollhj oushj, kaq hmeran te k. t. l. b.c. D. F. N. Cat. We have adopted the reading preserved by N. and the Catena.-E. and Edd. "Who also with boldness, seeing there was great boldness now, daily went up and continued in the Temple."

¹⁴ kai auth (l. auth de h timh eij ton topon diebaine to en tw oikw esqiein. poiw oikw; en tw ierw b.c. D. F. Cat. This "eating in the house" refers to the clause klwntej te kat oikon arton. If the passage be sound, Chrys. here represents that the Temple was honored by the breaking of bread (the Holy Eucharist?), there-Edd. from E. kai auth de h eij ton topon timh diebaine proj ton tou ierou Despothn. "And the honor itself paid to the place passed over to the Lord of the Temple."

¹⁵ Edd. add, to yuxron rhma, "That cold expression."

¹⁶ Despotika, i. e. of Christ their common Master. But Erasm. Erant enim ut dominorum, and so Ben.

¹⁷ kai tauta en mesoij kindunoij embeblhkotwn autwn. Erasm. omits the two last words: Ben. in media pericula conjectis. The meaning is: "Not even in the midst of dangers, which they themselves had boldly charged, or, invaded."

¹⁸ Although he speaks below of Joseph the Patriarch, it seems that the husband of Mary is meant here.

¹⁹ Monoj gar, fhsin, antlhsei ta kaka. A. omits this and the next clause: E. substitutes, "so is he even to himself an enemy. Of such an one the soul is," etc. so Edd.

²⁰ We adopt the reading preserved by A. N. (what is also contained in the modern text with additions meant for explanation.) #Ti poihswmen&Eaxute\@ hrwtwn ekeinoi. 9Hmeij de to enantion. Ti poihsomen&Eaxute\ #Aper edei genesqai epoioun. 9Hmeij de tounantion. The modern text, after hr. ekeinoi, inserts, apoginwskontej eautwn. "despairing of themselves:" and, after the second question, legomen, epideiknumenoi proj touj parontaj, kai mega fronountej ef eautoij. "Say (we), showing off ourselves to those present, and thinking great things of ourselves." b.c. omit, perhaps by oversight, the clauses between, Ti poihswmen. (B. ti poihsomen); and, #Aper edei. In the following sentences, the force of the verbs kategnwsan, apegnwsan, egnwsan might be rendered thus: "They knew themselves guilty, knew that in them was no power to save themselves-knew what a gift they received."

²¹ proj andra mainomenon exwn, pur pneonta. E. F. D. and Edd. omit these words.

²² mh gar amfhrista ta pragmato; Erasm. negligently, non sunt aeque amabiles illae res: Ben. num res sunt mutuo comparabiles?

¹ Oecumen, has preserved the true reading: af ou pantej ekinhqhsan. mss. and Cat. ekinhsen. (N. in the margin, by a later hand, enikhse.) E. and Edd. o de tollhn eixe thn ekplhcin kai pantaj ecenise, touto legei.

² There is no evidence that Peter and John attended upon the Jewish worshipsimply "for expediency." There is much to the contrary. The early Christians had no idea of ceasing to be Jews. Peter at this time supposed it to be necessary for the Gentile converts to be circumcised (Gal. ii.). It was incident to the gradual separation of Christianity from Judaism that those who had been zealous adherents of the latter should suppose that its forms were still to be the moulds of the new system. They were not for this reason less honestly and genuinely Christian, but had not yet apprehended the principle of Christian liberty as Paul afterward expounded it. The point of difficulty was not so much the entrance of the Gentiles into the Kingdom of God as the question whether they should enter through the gate of Judaism-G. B. S.

³ kai oion shmein hsan poihsantej. E. "And a miracle such as they had not yet wrought." So Edd.

⁴ Oecumen. "That he leaped was either because he was incredulous of what had happened, or, by way of trying his power of stepping more surely and firmly, or, the man did not know how to walk."

⁵ E. and Edd. "But let us look over again what has been said. `They went up,0' he says, 'at the hour of prayer, the `ninth hour.0' Perhaps just at that time they carried and laid the lame man, when people," etc. In the old text the clause auton bastazontej aphnegkan (which should be oi oi bast. auton) seems meant to explain kaq hmeran: they bore him daily, and the same persons carried him away.

⁶ E. and Edd. toioutoi tinej hsan kai 'Ioudaioi (for oi 'I.) xwleuontej <\=85_oi de (for autoi) mallon xrhmata aitousi <\=85_oi kai dia touto ..."Such sort of people were also [the] Jews, being lame (i e. like many beggars among ourselves): even when they have only to ask for health, yet they rather ask for money ...who even for this reason beset the temple," etc. But the meaning seems rather to be: "See here an emblem of the Jews. Lame, and needing but," etc.

⁷ outw pasi gnwrimoj hn oti epeginwskon, A. b.c. D. F. Sav. Morel. Ben. But Commelin. and Ed. Par. Ben. 2. after Erasm. adopt the reading of E. ou mhn pasi gnwrimoj hn oqen kai: because of the following comment on epeginwskon. But the meaning is: They were all acquainted with him (it could not be otherwise): but seeing him walking and leaping, they found it difficult to believe that it was he, and yet they could not doubt it. This is well denoted by epeginskon: for we use this word, epi twn molij gnwrizomenwn: strange as it was, they were satisfied that it was he, the man whom they all knew so well.

⁸ #Edei pisteuqhnai dioto, b.c. di oti A. This seems to be the comment on the remaining clause of v. 10, which we have supplied: but the meaning is obscure. The modern text has edei goun p. oti.

⁹ oude gar an eyeusato, oud an ep allouj tinaj hlqen. It is not clear who are the alloi tinesj: and something is wanting. In fact, this part of the Homily is very defective. The next sentence seems to refer to the mention of the porch called Solomon's, but evidently supposes something preceding: e. g. "The miracle was performed at the Beautiful Gate, beside which was the Porch called Solomon's."

¹⁰ E. and Edd. Kornhlioj alla nhsteuwn huxeto, kai alla oea. "Cornelius prayed with fasting, for one object: and sees a vision of something other than he thought for."

¹¹ It can hardly be imagined that St. Chrysostom's meaning is correctly reported here. 'En arxh tou dihghmatoj, can only mean, In the beginning of the narrative (of this miracle). It seems that the case of this man, who at first lies at the gate of the temple, unable to stir, and in the end, enters with the Apostles walking and leaping and praising God, furnished the theme for the ethical part of the discourse. "There is the like cure for our souls: let us not give over for want of success in the first attempt, but begin again after every failure."

¹² Ouden mega esti gen. didask. thj oik. Ou mikron k. t. l. The passage is manifestly corrupt, and the mss. lend no assistance. Ben. conjecturally, Nihil majus est quam esse doctores orbis: nec parum, etc. Ed. Par. Ben. 2. Fortasse, oukoun mega. But it is more likely that something is wanting, e. g. "It is no great matter [to be free from the vice of swearing. But to set an example to others would be a great thing], to be teachers herein of the whole world," etc.

¹³ 'Alla pou qeleij idein. agaphte, oti o poluj oxloj k. t. l. The modern text, 9O poluj oxloj, agaphte, k. t. l.

¹ 'All' oude touto ou gar, k. t. l. This seems to refer to eusebeia "but not by our holiness any more than by our own power." The modern text: Oude touto hmeteron, fhsin ou gar, k. t. l. "Not even this is our own, he says; for not," etc.

² or, Child, ton paida. Oecumen. seems to have considered this as a lowly title, for he says: "And of Christ he speaks lowly, tw prosqeinai, ton Paida." But to this remark he adds, "For that which in itself is glorified, can receive no addition of glory."-Below kaqwj en tw prooimiw may refer to the prefatory. matter (after the citation from Joel) of the sermon in ch. ii.: see below, in the Recapitulation, whence we might here supply, anwterw elegen, "Ihsoun ton Naz. k. t. l." "As in the opening address [above, he said: `Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God,0' etc.]." Or, "like as in the opening words of this discourse he speaks in lowly manner of themselves." Oecumen. "He still keeps to lowlier matters, both as to themselves, and as to Christ. As to themselves, in saying that not by their own power they wrought the miracle. As to Christ," etc.

³ h deutera etera, A. b.c. (N. om. h) Cat. Namely, the first, "Ye did it ignorantly, as did also your rulers." The second, "It was ordered by the counsel of God:" as below, "And he puts this by way of apology," etc. The Edd. have adopted the absurd innovation, "`Through ignorance ye did it:0' this is one ground of excuse: the second is, `As did also your rulers:0'" E. F. D.

⁴ Ei pepoiqen, A. C. F. D. N. Cat. and nun after katab. om. C. F. D. N. Cat.

⁵ Polemoij attested by Cat. and Oec. but A. has ponoij, E. and Edd. kakoij. In the following sentence, Proj gar ton kausoumenon kai paramuqian epizhtounta outoj an armoseien o logoj, B. and Oec. read klausomenon, C. F. D. N. klausoumenon, ("to him that shall weep,") A. kausamenon, Cat. kausoumenon, the true reading. The scribes did not perceive that Chr. is commenting on the word anayucewj, "refrigeration," as implying a condition of burning: hence the alteration, klausomenon, or in the "Doric" form (Aristoph.) klausoumenon. E. and Edd. Dio kai outwj eipen eiswj oti proj ton pasxonta kai paramuq. zhtounta k. t. l. "Wherefore also he speaks thus, knowing that it is to the case of one who is suffering," etc.-In the text here commented upon, opwj an elqwsi kairoi anay., E. V. makes opwj an temporal, "When the times of refreshing," etc. But here and elsewhere in the N. T. Matt. vi. 5; Luke ii. 35; Acts xv. 17; Rom. iii. 4; the correct usage is observed, according to which, opwj an is nearly equivalent to "so (shall);" i. e. "that (opwj) they may come, as in the event of your repentance (an) they certainly shall." And so Chrys. took the passage: Eita to kerdoj epagei #Opwj k. t. l. "Then he adds the gain: So shall the times," etc.

⁶ ton prokexeirismenon. Other mss. of N. T. read prokekhrugmenon, whence Vulg. E. V. "which was before preached."

⁷ E. V. has "all," and so some mss. pantwn, and St. Chrys. gives it a littte further on.

⁸ Instead of this clause, "by the mouth." etc. the Edd. have from E. "Still by keeping the matter in the shade, drawing them on the more to faith by gentle degrees."

⁹ Tewj kataskeuazei oti autoi epoihsan to qauma. i. e. "by saying, Why marvel ye? he makes this good at the very outset: You see that a miracle has been wrought, and by us (as the instruments), not by some other man (this is the force of the autoi here). This he will not allow them to doubt for a moment: he forestalls their judgment on the matter: you see that it is done by us, and you are inclined to think it was by our own power or holiness," etc. There is no need to insert the negative, oti ouk autoi: Erasm. and Ben. Lat.

¹⁰ Peter sharpens his accusation of them by the following contrasts: (1) This healing at which you wonder is to the glory of Christ, not of us. (2) God has glorified whom you have betrayed and denied. (3) This you did though Pilate himself would have released him. (4) You preferred to kill the holy and just one and let a murderer go free. (5) You sought to put to death the Author of Life. Vv. 12-15.-G. B. S.

¹¹ The meaning of the following passage is plain enough, but the innovator has so altered it as to make it unintelligible. Yet the Edd. adopt his reading (E. D. F.) without notice of the other and genuine reading. "And yet if it was h eij auton pistij that did all, and that (oti) it was eij auton that the man believed, why did (Peter) say, not Dia tou onomatoj, but 'En tw onomati>\/ Because they did not yet," etc.

¹² E. has oti ugihj esthken after ouk hdesan instead of after touto hdesan. So Commel. Erasm. Ed. Par. Hence D. F. have it in both places, and so Morel. Ben. All these omit oti before en tw on. "And yet in His name they knew not that he stands whole: but this they knew, that he was lame, (that he stands whole)." Savile alone has retained the genuine reading.

¹³ oude/ proeipen, A. b.c. N. i. e. foretold nothing concerning them. Edd. ouden peri eautwn eipen, "said nothing concerning (the hearers) themselves."

¹⁴ There is one extenuating circumstance: they did it in ignorance (Cf. Luk. xxiii. 34; 1 Cor. ii. 8; Acts xiii. 27). This fact forms the transition-point to the presentation of a different side of the death of Jesus. It was their crime, but it was also God's plan. They did it from motives of blindness and hate, but God designed it for their salvation. So that Peter, in effect, says: There is hope for you although you have slain the Lord, for his sacrificial death is the ground of salvation. To this view of the death of Christ he now appeals as basis of hope and a motive to repentance (oun v. 19).-G. B. S.

¹⁵ megalhn deiknusi thn boulhn, meaning the determinate counsel of God above spoken of. Above, after kai palin, some other citation is wanting, in illustration of his remark that the prophecies of the Passion are all accompanied with denunciations of punishment.

¹⁶ h gar kata agnoian, h kata oikonomian. Edd. omit this interlocution, Sav. notes it in the margin. "Repent ye therefore." Why repent? for either it was through ignorance, or it was predestinated. (Nevertheless, you must repent, to the blotting out of your sins, etc.)

¹⁷ touto monon, b.c. N. "this is all:" i. e. no more than this: he does not impute that one great sin to them, in all its heinousness: he only speaks of their sins in general. A. and the other mss. omit these words.

¹⁸ The reference is hardly to the resurrection, but to the Parousia. To the hope of this event, always viewed as imminent, all the expressions: "times of refreshing," "times of restitution" and "these days" (vv. 19-24) undoubtedly refer. So Olshansen, Meyer, Alford, Hackett, Gloag, Lechler and most recent critics.-G. B. S.

¹⁹ The modern text; "Saying this, he does not declare, Whence, but only adds," etc.-'Akmhn decasqai. Ben. Utique suscipere. Erasm. adhuc accipere. It means, Is this still to take place, that he should say on dei decasqai, as if the event were yet future? And he answer is, "He speaks in reference to former times, i. e. from that point of view. (So Oecumen. in loc. to dei anti tou edei.) And then as to the necessity; this dei is not meant in respect of Christ's Divine Nature (for of that he forbears to speak), but the meaning is, So it is ordered," etc. The report, however, is very defective, especially in what follows. He is commenting upon the words, "Until the time of restitution (or making good) of all that God spake," etc. pantwn wn elalhsen o Qeoj, which expression he compares with what is said of the Prophet like unto Moses, pantwn osa an lalhsn. Christ is that Prophet: and what He spake, the Prophets, obscurely indeed, spake before. He adds, that Peter's mention of the yet future fulfilment of all that the Prophets have spoken is calculated also to alarm the hearers. See the further comment on these verses at the end of the recapitulation.

²⁰ Ou ouden newteron. Meaning perhaps, that as Christ was from the first designed for the Jews, the Gospel is no novelty, as if nothing had been heard of such a Saviour before. E. D. F. wste ouden newteron, which is placed before the citation ton prokex.-Below, A. b.c. N. 'Eplhrwsen a edei paqein\ 'Eplhrwqh a dei genesqai exrhn oudepw, which is manifestly corrupt. We restore it thus: 'Eplhrwsen; #A edei paqein eplhrwqh, a de genesqai exrhn oudepw. The modern text: 'Eplhrwsen a edei paqein\ 'Eplhrwsen, eipen, ouk eplhrwqh deiknuj oti a men exrhn paqein, eplhrwsen a de (deoi add. F. D.) genesqai leipetai eti, oudepw.

²¹ C. N. Ou gar dh kata Mwsea hn, ei gar paj o mh ak. ecoloqreuqhsetai, muria de eipen ta deiknunta oti ouk esti kata Mwsea. B. omits ou gar . ...hn, inadvertently passing from hn ou gar to the subsequent hn ei gar. A. omits the words muria . ...oti, which disturb the sense of the passage. In the translation we have rejected the second gar. For eipen, Sav. marg. gives eipoi tij an, which we have adopted. The modern text substitutes to, kai, estai for ei gar, and inserts kai alla after muria de.

²² Tauta ola epagwga is strangely rendered by Ben. hoec omnia adjecta sunt. But this is the comment, not upon the threatening in v. 23, but upon the matters contained in the following verses, 24-26.

²³ Mh gar wj aperrimmenoi diakeisqe, B. N. oukoun mh gar, A. palin mh gar, C. mh oun, F. D. kai gar, Cat. oukoun mh. E. and Edd., which also add at the end of the sentence, h apobeblhmenoi, where the other mss. have, Palin h anastasij, as comment on anasthsaj.

²⁴ To de, Wj eme oudamou logon an exoi. He had before said. that in the very description of "the Prophet like unto Moses," it is shown that He is more than like Moses: for instance, "Every soul which will not hear," etc. would not apply to Moses. Having finished the description, he now adds, You see that the wj eme nowhere holds as the whole account of the matter: to be raised up (from the dead) and sent to bless, and this by turning every one from his iniquities, is not to be simply such as Moses. The modern text adds, "Unless it be taken in regard of the manner of legislation:" i. e. Christ is like unto Moses considered as Deliverer and Lawgiver, not in any other respect.

²⁵ E. and Edd. "that they shall hear all things which Christ shall say: and this not in a general way, but with a fearful menace" It is a powerful connection, for it shows that for this reason also they ought to obey Him. What means it, "Children of the Prophets," etc.

²⁶ legw dh to mh orgizesqai, as the explanation of eij touto. The other text confuses the meaning by substituting kai to mh org. "Not to swear, and not to be angry, is a great help to this." Which increases the "intricacy" of which Ben. complains in the following passage, where oaths are first said to be the wings of wrath, and then are compared to the wind filling the sails. Here instead of, wsper gar pneuma thj orghj o orkoj, fhsin, esti, (cited as an apothegm), the modern text gives, wsper gar pn. h orgh kai o orkoj esti. "For wrath and swearing is as a wind." The imagery is incongruous: oaths, the wings of wrath: oaths the wind, and wrath (apparently) the sails: but the alterations do not mend the sense.

²⁷ kan gar mh epiorkhte, omnuntej olwj ouk iste. The modern text, kai oute epiorkhsete, oute omosesqe olwj. Ouk iste. Which does not suit the context. "Make it a law with the passionate man, never to swear. ...The whole affair is finished, and you will neither perjure yourselves, nor swear at all." He seems to be speaking of oaths and imprecations, by which a man in the heat of passion binds himself to do or suffer some dreadful thing. "Suppose you do not perjure yourself, yet think of the misery you entail upon yourself: you must either study all sorts of expedients to deliver your soul, or, since that cannot be without perjury, you must spend your life in misery, etc. and curse your wrath."-'Anagkh tini kai desmw, with comma preceding: so Sav. but A. b.c. anagkh nom. preceded by a full stop: "For needs must you, binding yourselves as with a cord," etc: and so the modern text, with other alterations (adopted by Sav.) which are meant to simplify the construction