John Calvin Commentary Acts 12:1

"Now about that time Herod the king put forth his hands to afflict certain of the church." — Acts 12:1 (ASV)

What follows is new persecution raised by Herod. We see that the Church had some short truce, so that it might, as it were, by a short breathing spell, recover some courage for the time to come, and that it might then fight anew. So today, there is no reason why the faithful, having borne the brunt of one or two conflicts, should promise themselves rest, or should desire the kind of discharge that old, worn-out soldiers usually receive.

Let it be enough for them if the Lord grants them some time in which they may recover their strength. This Herod was Agrippa the elder, the son of Aristobulus, whom his father killed. Josephus nowhere calls him Herod, perhaps because he had a brother who was king of Chalcis, whose name was Herod.

This man was stirred up to afflict the Church, not so much out of any love he had for religion, but so that by this means he might flatter the common people, who otherwise did not greatly favor him. Or rather, he was moved to this by tyrannical cruelty, because he was afraid of innovation—which tyrants always fear—lest it disturb the peaceful state of their dominion. Yet it is likely that he shed innocent blood so that, according to the common cunning of kings, he might gratify a furious people, because Saint Luke will shortly after declare that Peter the apostle was put into prison so that he might be a pleasing spectacle.

He killed James. Undoubtedly, the cruelty of this madman was restrained and bridled by the secret power of God. For assuredly, he would never have been content with one or two murders and so have abstained from persecuting the rest; instead, he would rather have piled up martyrs in heaps, unless God had set His hand against him and defended His flock.

So when we see that the enemies of godliness, though full of fury, do not commit horrible slaughters to mix and stain all things with blood, let us know that we do not need to thank their moderation and clemency for this. Instead, it is because when the Lord spares His sheep, He does not allow their enemies to do as much harm as they would like. This Herod was not so considerate that he would hesitate to win peace or the people’s favor with the punishment of a hundred men or more.

Therefore, we must consider that he was restrained by One who had authority over him, so that he might not more vehemently oppress the Church. He killed James, just as when any sedition is raised, the leaders and captains are dealt with first, so that the common rabble may be terrified by their punishment.

Nevertheless, the Lord allowed him whom He had equipped with steadfastness to be put to death, so that by death he might gain the victory as a strong and invincible champion. So, notwithstanding the attempts of tyrants, God makes choice of sweet-smelling sacrifices to establish the faith of His gospel.

Luke calls this James who was killed "the brother of John" to distinguish him from James the son of Alphaeus. For while some make out this latter James (the son of Alphaeus) to be a third cousin of Christ and merely one of the disciples, I do not agree with that, because I am persuaded by strong reasons to think that there were no more. Let anyone who wishes consult Galatians 2. Therefore, I think that the apostle and James the son of Alphaeus were one and the same person: the one whom the Jews threw headlong from the top of the temple, and whose death was so highly commended for his singular holiness.