Acts 22:26Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

“A man who is a Roman, and uncondemned...” Paul did not lie when he said that he was a Roman. His father, for the sake of representation, had bought this name for himself with money, because those counted worthy to be called by it enjoyed great honor.

Paul says this so that, if he were punished, they would not begin to treat him with contempt. If they had punished him, they would have given the matter another turn and would have killed him.

But now, though for no other reason than this very fact, that he was a Roman, they not only did not punish him, but also released him.

Paul sets forth two offenses in their punishing him. One is that they wished to punish him without trial. The other is that they wished to punish a Roman. Therefore he brought greater fear upon them.

Then the tribune commanded that the apostle be brought into the fortress. In order to learn precisely of what he was guilty, he wished to subject him to torture.

Paul had already been stretched out with straps for this purpose. But he appealed to the protection of his rank as a Roman citizen, which he possessed by birth. This saved him from undeserved blows.

When the tribune learned that Paul was a Roman citizen, he was afraid even because he had bound him (v. 29). Nevertheless, wishing to know reliably what the Jews accused him of, he did not release him.

On the next day he freed him from the bonds and ordered the chief priests and the Sanhedrin to assemble. Then he brought Paul out of the fortress and set him before them (v. 30).

The soldiers at once bound his hands, stripped him naked, and bent him into the position for that terrible and often fatal torture. Not far from this very place the Savior also had once been subjected to it.

Three times before this the Apostle Paul had endured the rods of Roman lictors. Five times he had undergone the Jewish scourging of forty lashes less one.

Here a new kind of torment lay before him, namely the scourge that the Romans used to force a confession of the truth by torture. But this time the Apostle Paul did not lose self-command, even at the extremity, and objected to the order.

He boldly declared that he was a Roman citizen and was exempt from bodily punishment.

They stretched him out with straps: those being scourged were usually fastened to a post, and this is probably what the expression means.

Paul said, and so forth: the apostle points to a twofold violation of law in the torture to which they wished to subject him. First, he was a Roman citizen and exempt from bodily punishment (compare the note on Acts 16:37-39). Even in the case of a proven crime, he was not subject to punishment by scourging, since this was the punishment of slaves.

Second, it was in general a violation of Roman criminal law for the tribune to begin a judicial inquiry with punishment, that is, with torture. This was so quite apart from the fact that the person on trial here was not a slave, but a Roman citizen.

Paul’s declaration of his dignity as a Roman citizen saved him from many tortures, which were to be carried out formally with special instruments of torture.

Yet even the fact that he was mercilessly dragged to one of the instruments of torture and his weak body tightened with strong straps caused him great pain. Therefore he, humble as he was, dared to speak of his rights as a Roman citizen, something he had not done in lesser trials (see Acts 21:33).