Acts 1:1

“Immediately, therefore, so did the apostles, whom this designation indicates as "the sent." Having, on the authority of a prophecy, which occurs in a psalm of David, chosen Matthias by lot as the twelfth, into the place of Judas, they obtained the promised power of the Holy Ghost for the gift of miracles and of utterance; and after first bearing witness to the faith in Jesus Christ throughout Judµa, and rounding churches (there), they next went forth into the world and preached the same doctrine of the same faith to the nations.”

“"The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and to teach." Why does he put him in mind of the Gospel? To intimate how strictly he may be depended upon. For at the outset of the former work he says, "It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order." Neither is he content with his own testimony but refers the whole matter to the Apostles, saying, "Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word." Having then accredited his account in the former instance, he has no need to put forth his credentials afresh for this treatise, seeing his disciple has been once for all satisfied, and by the mention of that former work he has reminded him of the strict reliance to be placed in him for the truth. For if a person has shown himself competent and trustworthy to write of things which he has heard, and moreover has obtained our confidence, much more will he have a right to our confidence when he has composed an account, not of things which he has received from others, but of things which he has seen and heard. For thou didst receive what relates to Christ; much more wilt thou receive what concerns the Apostles.”

“Now mark how unassuming he is. He does not say, The former Gospel which I preached, but, "The former treatise have I made;" accounting the title of Gospel to be too great for him; although it is on the score of this that the Apostle dignifies him: "Whose praise," he says, "is in the Gospel." But he himself modestly says, "The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and to teach:" not simply "of all," but from the beginning to the end; "until the day," he says, "in which He was taken up." And yet John says, that it was not possible to write all: for "were they written, I suppose," says he, "that even the world itself could not contain the books written." How then does the Evangelist here say, "Of all?" He does not say "all," but "of all," as much as to say, "in a summary way, and in the gross;" and "of all that is mainly and pressingly important." Then he tells us in what sense he says all, when he adds, "Which Jesus began both to do and to teach;" meaning His miracles and teaching; and not only so, but implying that His doing was also a teaching. But now consider the benevolent and Apostolic feelings of the writer: that for the sake of a single individual he took such pains as to write for him an entire Gospel. "That thou mightest have," he says, "the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed." In truth, he had heard Christ say, "It is not the will of My Father that one of these little ones should perish." And why did he not make one book of it, to send to one man Theophilus, but has divided it into two subjects? For clearness, and to give the brother a pause for rest. Besides, the two treatises are distinct in their subject-matter. But consider how Christ accredited his words by His deeds. Thus He saith, "Learn of Me, for I am meek and lowly in heart." He taught men to be poor, and exhibited this by His actions: "For the Son of Man," He says, "hath not where to lay His head." Again, He charged men to love their enemies; and He taught the same lesson on the Cross, when He prayed for those who were crucifying Him. He said, "If any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also:" now He not only gave His garments, but even His blood. In this way He bade others teach. Wherefore Paul also said, "So as ye have us for an example." For nothing is more frigid than a teacher who shows his philosophy only in words: this is to act the part not of a teacher, but of a hypocrite. Therefore the Apostles first taught by their conduct, and then by their words; nay rather they had no need of words, when their deeds spoke so loud. Nor is it wrong to speak of Christ's Passion as action, for in suffering all He performed that great and wonderful act, by which He destroyed death, and effected all else that He did for us.”

“This statement teaches us that, previous to this, Luke had written one of those four books of the gospel which are held in the loftiest authority in the church. At the same time, when he tells us that he had composed a treatise of all that Jesus began both to do and teach until the day in which he commissioned the apostles, we are not to take this to mean that he actually has given us a full account in his Gospel of all that Jesus did and said when he lived with his apostles on earth. For that would be contrary to what John affirms when he says that there are also many other things which Jesus did, and if they should all be written down, the world itself could not contain the books. And besides, all agree that many things are narrated by the other Evangelists, which Luke himself does not mention in his history. The sense, therefore, is that he wrote a treatise of all these things to the extent that he made a selection out of the whole mass of materials for his narrative and introduced those facts which he judged fit and suitable to fulfill the duty laid upon him.”

“Do not presume to teach any one in words what you have not already performed in deed. For our Lord taught us by His own example that we ought to keep to this order, as of Him it is said: "what Jesus began to do and to teach." Take care then that you do not rush into teaching before doing, and so be reckoned among the number of those of whom the Lord speaks in the gospel to the disciples: "What they say unto you, that observe and do, but not after their words: for they say and do not. But they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers." For if he who shall "break one of these commands, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven," it follows that one who has dared to despise many and greater commands and to teach men so, shall certainly be considered not least in the kingdom of heaven, but greatest in the punishment of hell.”

“"The former treatise I made, O Theophilus, of all things which Jesus began to do and to teach," etc. Having completed the treatise of the Gospel, which Luke says he did after the Lord's Resurrection, he declares, writing to Theophilus, that he has also collected the Acts of the Apostles, so that the undoubted perfection of the Christian faith may be made apparent by the most reliable witness accounts. Luke starts by saying that Jesus Christ, when he was about to ascend to the Father, commanded his disciples that they should not depart from Jerusalem, so that, although they had been baptized, they should be filled with the fullness of the Holy Ghost.”

“The first treatise I have made, O Theophilus, concerning all that Jesus began to do and teach. He says that he wrote in the Gospel about all the acts and words of Christ, not that he could encompass all, lest he be opposed to John, who says: Indeed Jesus did many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book (John 20), but that he chose from all to make a treatise on those he judged suitable and congruent to suffice for his dispensation. Theophilus is interpreted as lover of God, or loved by God. Whoever, therefore, is a lover of God, let him believe that it is written for him, and find salvation here for his soul since Luke the physician wrote it. And it is to be noted that he says: What Jesus began to do and teach. To do first, and afterwards to teach. For Jesus, establishing a good teacher, taught nothing except what he did.”

“I indeed made the first account, O Theophilus, concerning all that Jesus began to do and teach. What he says: Indeed the first, is not an adverb of order, according to the Apostle: First, I thank my God (Romans 1), but as it is easily evident from the Greek, first is a noun to be joined to what follows the discourse, so that the meaning is that he made the first discourse about Jesus by writing the Gospel, now he is about to make the second by adding the Acts of the Apostles. And indeed he fulfills the mention of the first discourse, when he adds: Until the day He was taken up, having given commands through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom He had chosen, and then he made the beginning of the second discourse, when he follows: To whom he also presented himself alive after his passion by many proofs over the course of forty days, etc. For even if he testified in the Gospel that He ascended into heaven, and that the disciples returned to Jerusalem from Bethany, he did not however say there that over forty days after his passion he appeared to them frequently, that they questioned him about restoring the kingdom to Israel, that angels stood by them when he sought heaven, predicting that he would return in like manner, and other such things.”

“He (Luke) reminds Theophilus of his Gospel in order to point to his very careful approach to the matter; because at the beginning of that work of his he says: "it seemed good to me also to write to you in order," and not in just any way, but as "those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word delivered them to us" (Luke 1:2, 3). So he reminds him of the Gospel in order to recall the care with which it was written; and he recalls this so that, having in mind the same careful approach in composing the present book as well, he might be as attentive as possible to what is being written. Therefore he had no need this time for any other endorsement; since the one who was deemed worthy to write about what he heard, and who is trusted in what he wrote, justly deserves far greater trust when he sets forth not what he heard from others, but what he himself saw. For this reason he does not say: "the first Gospel, which I preached," but: "the former treatise"; since he was free from arrogance and humble-minded and thought that the title "Gospel" was above his work, although the Apostle so honors him for this work, calling him "the brother whose praise in the Gospel is throughout all the churches" (2 Cor. 8:18). But by his expression "of all things" he seems to contradict the Evangelist John. John says that it was not possible to describe everything; while he says: "I wrote of all things from the beginning even to the ascension." So what shall we say to this? That by the expression "of all things" Luke indicates that he did not omit any of the things that are essential and necessary, from which the divinity and truth of the preaching are recognized; because both Luke and each of the Evangelists in their Gospels placed at the head of everything that from which the divinity and truth of the preaching are recognized, and moreover in such precise form, as if according to some pattern. In a similar manner John the Theologian himself also set forth all these things. They did not omit a single one of those features through which, on the one hand, the ministry of the Word in the flesh is recognized and becomes an object of faith, and on the other, the majesty of His divinity shines forth and is revealed. John says that if one were to describe in parts and briefly everything that the Lord said and did, even then the world could not contain the books that would be written (John 21:25); but all the more could it not contain them if someone wished to set forth in writing all the deeds and words of the Lord with an investigation of their meaning; because the human mind can neither contain nor comprehend their meanings and the reasons for which the Lord acted and spoke, for the reason that everything He did in human nature, He did as God; from this perspective the deeds and words of Christ can neither be expressed in speech nor conveyed in writing. However, I also allow that this addition is a hyperbolic figure of speech and does not unconditionally say that the world could not contain the books that would be written if the exposition were more extensive. One may also say that this Evangelist (John), as one who developed theoretical contemplation more than the others, truly knows all the works and deeds of the Savior — not only those which He manifested in the flesh, but also those which He accomplished from eternity, both without a body and with a body. If someone were to undertake to describe the features of the nature, origin, distinction, essence, and so forth of each of these deeds, then, even if one were to allow the possibility of this, it would be impossible for the world to contain the books that would be written. And if someone understands the word "world" not simply as the world, but as a person lying in evil and thinking about worldly and carnal things — because the word is understood this way in many places of Scripture — in this case too John speaks truly, that if someone wished to describe all the miracles performed by Christ, such people, disposed by the multitude and greatness of Christ's deeds to come to unbelief rather than to faith, could not contain what was written. And this is precisely why the Evangelists often pass over in silence a whole crowd of those who were healed and bypass a multitude of miraculous acts, indicating only the general fact that many were delivered from various diseases, that there were many miracles, and so on, but do not enumerate them; because for people incapable of understanding and deceived, the enumeration in detail of many miracles usually served as an occasion for unbelief and unwillingness to listen to the preaching rather than for coming to faith and a disposition to listen. He means the miracles and the teaching — yet not this alone, but also that Jesus taught by deed; for He did not merely exhort people in word to do this or that while not doing it Himself, but by the deeds which He Himself performed, He persuaded them also to imitate Him and to be zealous for virtue. One should know that Theophilus was one of those converted to the faith by Luke himself. And do not marvel that Luke showed such great care for one man that he wrote two complete books for him; for he was a keeper of the well-known saying of the Lord, in which it is said: "It is not the will of your Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones should perish" (Matt. 18:14). Why then, writing to Theophilus alone, did he write not one book but divide the subjects into two books? For the sake of clarity and so as not to burden the reader; and indeed they were divided also by content; and therefore he rightly divided the subjects of his narrative into two books.”

“The Scriptures in the New Testament are either legal as in the Gospels where commands are established, or historical as in the Acts of the Apostles, or sapiential as in the Epistles of Paul to which should be added the Canonical Letters, or prophetical as in the Apocalypse. Although the Epistles are placed after the Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles follow the Gospels immediately. "In the former book, O Theophilus, I spoke of all that Jesus did and taught."”

“He spoke first of the word, not the Gospel, although Paul calls his own the gospel when he says: According to my gospel (2 Tim. 2:8); for the splendid flee everywhere; just as Matthew also, saying Book, of the genealogy (Matt. 1:1). But if Mark says, "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ," (Mark 1:1) but does not call his own writing a gospel, rather the proclamation of Christ; For the beginning of the preaching of Christ is the development from the baptism of John. But the beginning of the revelation of the mystery according to Christ and His incarnation is the birth from the Virgin, and all that follows. Matthew was the first to make use of the family records, and Luke himself also, which the faithful afterward rightly called Gospels, as the true gospel, that is, containing the teaching of Christ. As for having made a record of all, it seems to contradict the evangelist John, if he says that it is not possible to write everything; for the world could not contain the books that would be written (Jn. 21:25). Luke says that the account concerning all things was made from the beginning until the ascension. What then do we say? That concerning all these things he says nothing is left out, none of those things that make up the divine nature and truth of the proclamation. For John himself also dealt with all these things. For he omitted nothing of those things by which both the economy of the Word according to the flesh is believed and recognized, and the majesty according to his divinity shines forth and is revealed.”