[99] 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, 'Entautha de auto to 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 (homophues) with the Father, Who appears in this manner to Moses at the bush."
[100] 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.
[101] 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. Vers. vs. A.V.). The latter view cannot explain the singular verb which follows, ekathisen.--G.B.S.
[102] hina deichthe autou gumne he pistis. 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 anatrephomenon ("Samuel brought up in the temple,") A. has anastrephomenon, which we have adopted.
[103] 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 (houtoi) 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.
[104] 'Elattouto. Alluding to Numb. xi. 17. "I will take of the Spirit that is upon thee, and will put it upon them."
[105] Ina de exe. (Cat. hina deixe.) OEcumen. hina echosi, "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 exen...dia touto. "Because it was permitted...therefore."
[106] 'Ekei de en aichmalosia esan polloi e kai ekei diesparto ta ethne ta ton dogmaton. A. B. C. N. As ta ton d taken as apposition to ta ethne yields no satisfactory sense, we adopt from the modern text pros before ta ethne, and make, as there, ta ton 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 e kai ekei diesparto, we infer that ta ton 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 had 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 modern text the passage is thus altered: "But, inasmuch as the Jews were in captivity, it is likely that there were then present with them many of the Gentiles: e hoti kai pros ta ethne ta ton dogmaton ede katesparto, kai dia touto polloi kai ex auton paresan ekei. Or, because ta ton d. had become disseminated among the Gentiles also, and therefore many also of them were there present, kata mnemen on ekousan. Here ta ton dogmaton is taken to mean the doctrines of the Christian Faith:' as Erasmus renders the passage, Sive quod ad gentes quoque fidei dogmata seminata fuerint, et hanc ob causam complures ex iis aderant ut memorarent quæ audierant. It can hardly be supposed that St. Chrysostom 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.
[107] 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 heterais glossais (4), hemeterais glossais (11), and te idi& 139; dialekto (6, 8). Cf. Mark xvi. 17.--G.B.S.
[108] Panu ge (ou gar;) anthropoi k. t. l. See above, p. 47. note u. and 66, note c. The modern text has, Panu ge; hoti anthropoi 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, hoti ouk an emethusthesan, meaning, "because [so early in the day] they would not have been drinking much," (this is the force of the tense methusthenai as in John ii. 10) "therefore they ascribe all to the quality (of the wine);" because as OEcumen. says, explaining this remark of Chrys., the fumes of gleukos mount more quickly to the brain, etc. Erasmus, seemingly referring this to memestomenoi, translates hebetudini crapulæque rem totam ascribunt: Ben. even more strangely, agendi et loquendi modo totum ascribunt.
[109] 'Ekei: referring to ch. i. as expounded in Hom. iii. So OEcumen, in loc. Ano men ten kedemonian epideiknutai, en hois to plethei epitrepei ten eklogen k. t. l.
[110] Here the modern text (Edd.) enlarges by the additions "to account the wonder of the tongues the work of drunkenness? But not a whit 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."
[111] 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.
[112] 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.
[113] Euthumiais, i.e. "bursts of self-complacent mirth" (e.g. at Athens), opposed to thumois "explosions of wrath." Ben. without specifying the authority, notes a various reading, athumiais, which is found in none of the Paris copies, and is quite unmeaning. Edd. maniais.
[114] 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.
[115] The text is defective here, archonton phoboi, hoplon ischus; polesi kai teichesin ochurois. 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.
[116] 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 (apatheia). Its contraries are: emulation (zelotupia, see below), envy and vainglory, and all other passions."
[117] kai philosopha, phesin, hina: "And philosophical,' forsooth:" but perhaps it should be kai ephilosophesen hina: "this was the upshot of his philosophizing." E tou philosophou psuche: "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 (ontos muia--ouk eis muian metepipten (sc. he psuche), all' epebaine (sc. muia te en Plat. oikouse) psuche seems to mean, He talks of the soul becoming a fly: and truly the soul in Plato might be claimed by a fly:' epeb. te ps. as e.g. is epibainein te eparchi& 139; to step into possession of, etc. Poias gar tauta ou muias; Edd. mataiologias; adding, Pophen de toiauta lerein epebaleto; "What could put it into his head to rave in this fashion?"
[118] 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.
[119] 'Epei ekeino ge kai anerei. 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.
[120] Di' auton, Ben. per illas, which they seem to refer to gunaikes. Erasm. per illos, which is doubtless right: by means of the philosophers, as below, en tais ekeinon psuchais.
[121] Kai zeloi par autois ho kuon kata Platona. Edd. have this after "polity and laws," where it is clearly out of place, whatever it means.
[122] Edd. Sphodra ge; ou gar phrenos batheias. Read Sphodra ge (ou gar); phr. b. as above, p. 22, note 1, and 28, note 1.