Epistle of Saint Matthias

Acts 1:15-26

In those days, Peter rising up in the midst of the brethren said (now the number of persons together was about hundred and twenty): Men and brethren, the Scripture must needs be fulfilled which the Holy Ghost spoke before by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who was the leader of them that apprehended Jesus; who was numbered with us, and had ob- tained part of this ministry. And he indeed hath possessed a field of the reward of iniquity; and, being hanged, burst asunder in the midst; and all his bowels gushed out. And it became known to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the same field was called in their tongue Haceldama, that is to say, the field of blood. For it is written in the book of Psalms: Let their habitation become desolate, and let there be none to dwell therein: and his bishopric let another take. Wherefore of these men, who have companied with us, all the time that the Lord Jesus came in and went out among us, beginning from the baptism of John until the day wherein He was taken up from us, one of these must be made a witness with us of His Resurrection. And they appointed two; Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. And praying they said: Thou Lord, who knowest the hearts of all men, show whether of these two Thou hast chosen, to take the place of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas hath by transgression fallen, that he might go to his own place. And they gave them lots, and the lot fell upon Matthias, and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

Haydock

Verse 15. Peter, rising up, &c. Peter, says S. Chrys. on this place, who was prince, or chief of the apostolical college, who had authority over them all, who by his place and dignity, might, without them, have chosen, and appointed a new apostle to succeed Judas, (Christ having said to him, confirm thy brethren,) &c. yet he consults them. Wi. — Here Peter acts and ordains in virtue of his supremacy, and the other apostles agree to his appointment.

Verse 18. Possessed a field. Judas is here said to have done, what was done by others, with the thirty pieces of money, the reward of his iniquity. And being hanged, that is, as S. Matt. says, (c. xxvii. 5.) having hanged himself, he burst asunder. The Greek has it, falling headlong, as perhaps he did, by the judgment of God, from the place or tree where he hanged himself. Wi. — Judas did not possess the potter’s field, but he furnished the price to buy it, giving back the thirty pieces of silver. Menochius. — We often say in common, that we have done what happens in consequence of any action of ours, though it was not in our first intention. Calmet.

Verse 20. His bishoprick. The words were prophetically spoken in the Psalms, of the traitor Judas. Wi. — Let their habitation. In some MS. copies, in both Greek and Syriac, we read his. In the Psalms, the text was written against the Jews, the persecutors of Christ in general; but in this place, Peter applies it to Judas in particular. Estius in dif. loca.

Verse 21. Came in, and went out among us. That is, conversed with us. Wi.

Verse 25. To his own place of perdition, which he brought himself to. Wi.

Verse 26. And he gave them lots, which they might lawfully do, when they knew that both of them were fit, and every way qualified for the office. Wi. — Lots. This method of deciding the election of ministers by lots, is one of those extraordinary methods which was inspired by God; but can seldom or ever be imitated. Where both candidates appeared equally worthy, as in the present case, and human judgment cannot determine which is to be preferred, it cannot be said that it was wrong to decide it by lots. Thus were avoided any of the evil consequences which might have happened by one party being preferred before the other. S. Augustin observes, that in a doubtful case, where neither part is bad, to decide by lots is not in itself wrong. Sors enim non aliquid mali est, sed res est in dubitatione humana divinam indicans voluntatem. In Psalm xxx. A.

Denzinger

2161: Gospel of Luke before Acts

The Author, the Time of Composition, the Historical Truth of the Gospels
According to Mark and According to Luke 

Reply of the Biblical
Commission, June 26, 1912

VII. Whether it ought to be affirmed that the Gospel of Luke preceded the book of the Acts of the Apostles; and although this book, with same author Luke [Acts 1:1 f.], was finished before the end of the Apostle’s Roman captivity [Acts 28:30 f.], his Gospel was not composed after this time?–Reply: In the affirmative.

2166 to 2171: Acts of the Apostles

The Author, Time of Composition, Historical Veracity of the Book of the
Acts of the Apostles

Reply of the Biblical Commission, June 12, 1913

2166 I. Whether in view especially of the tradition of the whole Church going back to the earliest ecclesiastical writers, and noting the internal reasons of the book of Acts, considered in itself or in its relation to the third Gospel, and especially because of the mutual affinity and connection between the two prologues [Luke 1:1-4; Acts 1:1 f.], it must be held as certain that the volume that is entitled Actus A postolorum, or, (Greek text deleted), has Luke the Evangelist as author?–Reply: In the affirmative.

2167 II. Whether for critical reasons taken from the language and style, and from the manner of narrating, and from the oneness of aim and doctrine, it can be demonstrated that the book of the Acts of the Apostles should be attributed to one author alone; and therefore that the opinion of more recent writers which holds that Luke is not the only author of the book, but that different persons are to be recognized as authors of the same book is devoid of any foundation?–Reply: In the affirmative to both parts.

2168 III. Whether in outward appearance, the prominent chapters in the Acts where the use of the third person is broken off and the first person plural introduced, weaken the unity and authenticity of composition; or rather historically and philologically considered are to be said to confirm it?–Reply: In the negative to the first part; in the affirmative to the second.

2169 IV. Whether because of the fact that the book itself is abruptly concluded after scarcely making mention of the two years of Paul’s first Roman captivity, it may be inferred that the author had written a second volume now lost, or had intended to write it; and so the time of composition of the Book of Acts can be deferred long after this captivity; or whether it should rather rightly and worthily be held that Luke toward the end of the first Roman captivity of the Apostle Paul had completed his book?–Reply: In the negative to the first part; in the affirmative to the second.

2170 V. Whether, if there is considered together the frequent and easy communication which Luke undoubtedly had with the first and prominent founders of the Palestinian church, and also with Paul, the Apostle of the Gentiles, whose assistant in the preaching of the Gospel and companion in travel he was; also his customary industry and diligence in seeking witnesses, and in observing things with his own eyes; also, and finally, the evident and amazing agreement for the most part of the Book of Acts with the letters of Paul and the more genuine monuments of history, it should be held with certainty that Luke had at hand sources worthy of all trust, and applied them accurately, well, and faithfully, so that he rightly indicates for himself full historical authority?–Reply: In the affirmative.

2171 VI. Whether the difficulties which are usually raised from the supernatural deeds related by Luke, and from the narration of certain discourses which, since they are handed down in summary, are considered fictitious and adapted to circumstances; also from certain passages, apparently at least, in disagreement with history whether profane or biblical; finally also from certain accounts which seem to be at odds with the author of the Acts, or with other-sacred authors, are such as can call the historical authority of the Acts into doubt or at least in some manner diminish it?–Reply: In the negative.

⇦ Back to Saint Matthias