Acts 21:38Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

Gamaliel spoke in the same way: "Before these days Theudas rose up" (Acts 5:36). Concerning the robbers, the sicarii, some say that they were a kind of robber. They received this name because they carried swords called sicae among the Romans. Others say that they belonged to one of the Jewish sects. Among the Jews there are three chief sects: Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes. The Essenes are called righteous because of the purity of their life, οσιοι, whence the name Essenes. They are also called sicarii because they were zealots, ζηλωταί. Therefore let us not grieve that heresies occur. False Christs also appeared and plotted against Christ, both before this and after, wishing to obscure Him. But the truth is not obscured. It shines everywhere. The same happened in the time of the prophets. False prophets appeared, but by comparison with them the prophets became more radiant. Thus sickness makes health clearer, darkness makes light clearer, and a storm makes calm clearer. The Greeks cannot say that the apostles were deceivers and seducers, because such men were being exposed. The same happened with Moses. God permitted the magicians to act, so that Moses would not also be taken for a magician. By His permission they showed everyone how far the art of magic could extend. Beyond that they could no longer deceive, but themselves confessed that they had been defeated. Deceivers do us no harm. Rather, they make those who wish to be attentive more perfect. But, you will say, do they not share our glory with us? Not among us, but among senseless men. Let us not be overly concerned for glory from men, nor care for it beyond what is fitting. We live for God, not for men. Our citizenship is in heaven, not on earth. There the rewards and recompenses for our labors are prepared. From there we expect honors, and from there crowns. As for men, we must care only so much as not to lead them into temptation or give them occasion for condemnation. But if, when we give no occasion, they condemn us without cause and in vain, then we should laugh, not weep. Strive to do good before God and men. If, while you are striving to do good, another mocks you, do not be troubled by it at all. There are examples of this in the Scriptures. "Do I now seek the favor of men, or of God?" says Paul (Gal 1:10). And again: "Knowing the fear of the Lord, we persuade men, but we are made manifest to God" (2 Cor 5:11). Christ also said this about those who are offended: "Let them alone. They are blind guides of the blind" (Mt 15:14). And again: "Woe to you, when all men speak well of you" (Lk 6:26). And again: "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven" (Mt 5:16). In another place He says: "Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea" (Mt 18:6). Do not wonder at this. There is no contradiction here. On the contrary, both sayings are in perfect agreement. If the offense depends on us, woe to us. But if it does not depend on us, then there is nothing against us. Again it is said, woe to you, because "the name of God is blasphemed" (Rom 2:24). What then, you will say, if I do what is proper, and another utters blasphemy? Nothing happens to you, but woe to him, because the blasphemy was uttered by him. But how can one do what is proper and still give others occasion for condemnation? I shall give you examples. From where do you wish them, from the present or from the past? To prove that we must not fear rumor, do you wish me to point to the very matter we are now examining? Paul lived in Jewish fashion in Jerusalem, but not in Antioch. He lived in Jewish fashion, and others were offended. Yet they were offended unjustly. It is said that he greeted Nero's cupbearer and concubine. What do you think people did not say about him because of this? Yet they spoke unjustly. If he had led them toward vices or wicked deeds, there would have been grounds for condemnation. But if he led them toward a righteous life, then for what could he be blamed? I shall tell of something that happened to one of my acquaintances. Once, when the wrath of God came upon us, this man was still very young and only a deacon. The bishop was absent, and the presbyters were negligent. It happened that many thousands suddenly received baptism in one night. They were all baptized without distinction and without having learned anything. This man resolved to take these people to himself, a hundred or two hundred at a time. He spoke with them about nothing except the mysteries, and how it is impossible for the uninitiated to approach them. When he did this, many thought that through it he was seeking authority. But he did not care about their opinion. Nevertheless, he did not continue doing it, but immediately stopped. What then? Was he the cause of offense? I do not think so. If he had done this without any reason, and had continued besides, I would rightly have imputed such guilt to him. When a work pleasing to God can be stopped because another is offended, then one must not pay attention to him. On the contrary, when through him we are not compelled to offend God, then we should take care. Tell me, when we speak and rebuke those who give themselves to drunkenness, and someone is offended by this, must I stop speaking? Hear what Christ says: "Do you also want to go away?" (Jn 6:67). Thus one should neither despise the weakness of others nor care for it excessively. Do we not see how physicians act? When possible, they accommodate the sick. But when such accommodation can cause harm, they no longer indulge them. In everything it is good to keep measure. Many were offended because of the catechizing of a certain comely young woman, who also remained a virgin. They slandered her and reviled those who catechized her. What then? Should they have stopped the catechizing because of this? No, because they were doing nothing contrary to God, but something very pleasing to Him. Therefore, when some are offended, we must look only at whether this is just and whether it will harm us. "If food causes my brother to stumble," says Paul, "I will never eat meat" (1 Cor 8:13). And rightly so, when abstaining from food does no harm at all. But if people are offended even by my refusal, then one must no longer pay attention to it. Whom, you will say, could this offend? Many, as I know. Therefore abstinence has its place when the matter is indifferent. If we look only to this, the opinion of others, we shall have to abstain from many things. Conversely, if we do not pay attention to them, we shall destroy many. Paul also paid attention to the offense of others. Hear how: "taking care that no one should blame us in this abundance which is administered by us" (2 Cor 8:20). It was not harmful to avert the evil opinion of others. But when we are compelled to permit a great evil because another is offended, then we must not pay attention to him. He himself, and not we, is guilty, because it is impossible to please him without harm. Many were offended because some of the faithful were buried in churches, claiming that one ought not bury them there. But they were offended unjustly, because no harm comes from this. The Jews were offended that Peter ate with the Gentiles. He accommodated them, but Paul did not (Gal 2:12). In everything, while keeping the commandments of God, we must strive in every way not to give occasion for offense. Then we ourselves will not be found guilty, and we will be counted worthy of God's love for mankind. May this be by the grace and love for mankind of His Only-begotten Son, with whom to the Father, together with the Holy Spirit, be glory, dominion, and honor, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

From there they were to see, at his word, the fall of the walls of Jerusalem, and afterward seize Jerusalem. Felix, the Roman procurator in Judea at that time, scattered the Egyptian’s band.

He killed four hundred men and took two hundred captive, but the Egyptian himself escaped by flight. The tribune probably thought at first that Paul was the returned Egyptian.

He thought the crowd, angered by the Egyptian’s former deception, was carrying out its own reprisal against him. But from Paul’s Greek speech he understood his mistake.

The Roman speaks of four thousand robbers, while Josephus says that the Egyptian had about thirty thousand followers. Josephus’s number includes all the followers of this rebel.

The tribune speaks only of his armed band, which Josephus also distinguishes from the general number of his followers. “Robbers” means properly sicarii.

The word comes from the Latin sica, a dagger, with which these robbers were armed; cf. Chrysostom. Under the bad governor and procurator Felix, robbery in Judea and Jerusalem developed greatly, especially during the feasts.

See Josephus, Antt. 20.6 and following; Bell. jud. 2.13.3. These robbers formed the chief contingent of the Egyptian’s bands.

The devil hoped, hiding behind him, to present Christ and the apostles as participants in the crimes attributed to him. But he did not succeed in this at all.

On the contrary, the truth became still clearer and shone more brightly, suffering nothing from the devil’s plots. Those men are permitted to appear so that these may be more glorified.

As Paul himself says elsewhere: ‘that those who are approved may be made manifest’ (1 Cor 11:19). In like manner Gamaliel also said, ‘Before these days Theudas rose up’ (Acts 5:36).

Concerning the sicarii, some say that they were a type of robber, receiving this name because they carried swords called sicae among the Romans.

Others say that they belonged to one of the Jewish sects, the Essenes or the Sicarii, the Zealots.”