It ought not to be forgotten that in such a Gospel as this^[1] there is embraced every good deed that was done to Jesus; as, for example, the story of the woman^[2] who had been a prostitute and had repented, and who, having experienced a genuine recovery from her evil state, had grace to pour her ointment over Jesus so that every one in the house smelled the sweet savor. Hence, too, the words, Wherever this gospel shall be preached among all the nations, there also this that she has done shall be spoken of, for a memorial of her.^[3] And it is clear that whatever is done to the disciples of Jesus is done to him. Pointing to those of them who met with kind treatment, [Jesus] says to those who were kind to them: What you did to these, you did to me.^[4] So that every good deed we do to our neighbors is entered into the gospel, that gospel that is written on the heavenly tablets and read by all who are worthy of the knowledge of the whole of things. But on the other side, too, there is a part of the gospel that is for the condemnation of the doers of the evil deeds that have been done to Jesus. The treachery of Judas and the shouts of the wicked crowd when it said, Away with such a one from the earth,^[5] and Crucify him, crucify him,^[6] the mockings of those who crowned him with thorns, and everything of that kind, is included in all the Gospels. And as a consequence of this we see that everyone who betrays the disciples of Jesus is reckoned as betraying Jesus himself. To Saul, when still a persecutor it is said, Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?^[7] and, I am Jesus whom you are persecuting.^[8] There are those who still have thorns with which they crown and dishonor Jesus, those, namely, who are choked by the cares and riches and pleasures of life, and though they have received the word of God, they do not bring it to perfection.^[9] We must beware, therefore, lest we also, by crowning Jesus with thorns of our own, should be entered in the gospel and read of in this character by those who come to know how Jesus, who is in all and is present in all rational and holy lives, is anointed with ointment, is entertained, is glorified, or how, on the other side, he is dishonored and mocked and beaten. All this had to be said; it is part of our demonstration that our good actions, and also the sins of those who stumble, are embodied in the gospel, either to everlasting life or to reproach and everlasting shame.

The earlier story of this vision relates that his companions stood stunned, hearing indeed the voice but seeing no one.^[1] Hence it can be inferred that they heard the sound of a garbled voice, but they did not hear the distinct words.

Paul, speaking of his deeds, says that his companions saw the light there some time ago, yet that they did not drink in the voice with their ears; but then, at the time when he fell blind, his companions are said also to have heard the voice.^[1] Thus the work of the narrator varies. But there is no doubt that it is necessary for both [passages] to harmonize; for then [according to Luke] they are said to have heard, to have received the sound, now [in Paul’s own words] undoubtedly not to have heard. This will be a simple way of explanation: the voice is justly denied to have spoken since it was indistinct, nor is a thing believed to be given by speech when a person receiving it does not store it up in his understanding. He is stimulated so little on account of his doubting ear, and ambiguous noise strikes only the air. They are said at the same time thus to have heard, thus not to have heard. The one standpoint is of noise, the other standpoint is of true speech, and a single circumstance bears and bears again a twofold meaning.

Our Lord spoke humbly from above so that the leaders of his church would speak humbly. Now, if someone should ask, How did our Lord speak humbly with Paul if Paul’s eyes were seriously injured? they should realize that this impairment did not [result] from our compassionate Lord, who spoke humbly there. Rather, [it was the result] of the intense light that shone radiantly there. This light was not a punishment that befell Paul on account of the things he had done. It injured him with the intensity of its rays, as he himself said, When I arose, I could see nothing because of the brilliance of the light.

For [Paul] truly became a witness to [Jesus], and a witness as one should be, both by what he did and by what he said. We too must be such witnesses and not betray what we have been entrusted. I speak not only of doctrines, but also of our way of life. Look, what he knew, what he heard, he bore witness to this before all, and nothing hindered him. We too have heard that there is a resurrection and ten thousand good things; therefore, we ought to bear witness to this before all. We do in fact bear witness, you say, and believe. How, since we do the opposite? Tell me, if someone should say he was a Christian but should then apostatize and act like a Jew, would his testimony be sufficient? No, not at all; for people would look for testimony through his actions. Likewise, if we say that that there is a resurrection and ten thousand good things but then look down upon them and prefer the things here, who will believe us? For all people pay attention not to what we say but to what we do. You will be a witness, [Christ] says, to all.^[1] That is, not only to the friends, but also to the unbelievers. For this is what witnesses are for: they persuade not those who know but those who do not. Let us become trustworthy witnesses. How will we become trustworthy? By the life we lead.

What he uttered here is important. For he did not say baptized in his name but calling on the name of Christ. It shows that he is God; for it is not lawful to call on anyone else except God.

Baptism, therefore, washes away indeed all sins—absolutely all sins, whether of deeds or words or thoughts, whether original or added, whether committed in ignorance or allowed in knowledge.

Look how [Paul] thrusts himself into danger. Even after that vision, I came, he says, to Jerusalem. This is again without witnesses. But look, the result provides the witness. He said, They will not accept your testimony. They did not accept it. And yet, he says, if one had to make a reasonable guess, one would have guessed that they would certainly accept it. For I was the man who made war upon the Christians, and for this reason they ought to have accepted it. Here [Paul] constructs two arguments: one, they cannot defend their actions, for they persecute him against all likelihood and contrary to reason; and two, Christ was God, who gave prophecies contrary to expectation, not looking to things past but knowing beforehand things to come.

At the Lord’s passion only the priest leaped from his throne and tore his garments,^[1] because on that occasion the old priesthood was being changed to a new one. Now, however, since after the killing of the apostles the whole people together would be robbed of the glory of the kingdom, all of them flung off their apparel and raised up to the heavens an outcry mixed with dust, in accord with what the psalm says, The pride of those who hate you ever rises.^[2]

The tribune ought to have questioned more closely whether the things that Paul said were so—even if he had to question the Jews, and if these things were not so, and only then to order that he be scourged, to find out why they shouted thus against him. Moreover, he ought to learn from those who were shouting and to ask if they had even heard anything that was said. Instead, he simply used his power and acted according to their pleasure. For he was not trying to do something just but only to stop their rage, unjust as it was.