John Calvin Commentary Acts 15:37

"And Barnabas was minded to take with them John also, who was called Mark." — Acts 15:37 (ASV)

And Barnabas gave counsel. Luke here records that sorrowful disagreement which ought to make all the godly afraid for good reason. The partnership of Paul and Barnabas was consecrated by the heavenly oracle. They had long labored with one mind under this yoke to which the Lord had tied them; they had, by many experiences, felt the excellent favor of God; indeed, that wonderful success mentioned previously by Luke was a manifest blessing of God. Though they had been almost drowned so often in so many storms of persecution, and were so severely attacked by countless enemies, though internal strife was everywhere stirred up against them, yet they were so far from being pulled apart that their agreement was then most of all proven. But now, for a minor issue, and one which could easily have been resolved, they broke that holy bond of God’s calling.

This could not happen without great distress to all the godly. Since the heat of the contention was so great and vehement in these holy men, who had long accustomed themselves to endure all things, what will happen to us, whose emotions, not yet so brought to obey God, often rage without restraint?

Since a minor cause separated them, who had long, amid such great trials, holily maintained unity, how easily can Satan cause those to be divided who have either no desire, or at least a lukewarm desire, to foster peace? What great pride was it for Barnabas—for whom there was nothing more honorable than to be Paul’s companion, a position in which he might behave like a son towards his father—to so stubbornly refuse his counsel?

Perhaps, also, some might think that Paul was not very gracious in not forgiving this fault in a faithful helper. Therefore, we are admonished by this example that unless the servants of Christ take great care, there are many chinks through which Satan will creep in to disturb the harmony that is among them.

But now we must examine the cause itself, for there are some who blame Paul for the disagreement; and, at first hearing, the reasons they offer seem probable. John Mark was rejected because he withdrew from Paul’s company; but he did not fall away from Christ.

A young man, not yet familiar with bearing the cross, returned home from the journey. Some allowance should have been made for his age; being an inexperienced soldier [a novice], he faltered in troubles at the very first encounter. Therefore, he was not necessarily going to be a slothful soldier for his whole life.

Now, since his returning to Paul was an excellent testimony of repentance, it seems to be a point of unkindness to reject him; for those must be treated more graciously who willingly punish themselves for their own offenses. There were also other reasons that should have made Paul more gracious.

The house of John Mark was a well-known meeting place (Acts 12:12); his mother had hosted the faithful during very severe persecution. When Herod and all the people were in a rage, they used to have their secret meetings there, as Luke reported previously. Surely Paul ought to have shown consideration for such a holy and courageous woman, lest excessive severity should alienate her. She was desirous to have her son devoted to preaching the gospel; now, what great grief it might have been to her that his efforts and diligence should be refused for one minor fault? And now since John Mark not only laments his fault, but indeed amends it, Barnabas has a good reason to pardon him.

Yet we may gather from the text that the Church approved Paul’s counsel. For Barnabas departs, and with his companion he sails to Cyprus. There is no mention made of the brothers (as if he had departed secretly without taking his leave); but the brothers commend Paul in their prayers to the grace of God, by which it appears that the Church stood on his side.

Secondly, since God shows forth the power of His Spirit in blessing Paul, and blesses his labors with the joyful success of His grace, and leaves Barnabas, as it were, buried, a probable reason may be drawn from this: that it pleased Him that such an example of severity should be shown.

And surely the offense of John Mark was greater than it is commonly considered. Indeed, he did not slide back from the faith of Christ, yet he forsook his calling and was an apostate from it. Therefore, it was a matter that might have set a bad example if he had been immediately received again into the calling from which he had slid back. He had committed himself to serve Christ on the condition that he would no longer be free. It was no more lawful for him to break his promise made in this regard than it is for a husband to leave his wife, or for a son to forsake his father. Nor does weakness excuse his unfaithfulness, by which the holiness of the calling was violated.

And we must note that he was not altogether rejected by Paul; Paul counted him as a brother, provided he was content with the common order. He refused to admit him to the public function of teaching, from which he fell shamefully through his own fault. And there is no great difference between these two: whether the one who has offended is completely excluded from pardon, or only has public honor denied him. Though it may be that they both went too far, as incidental factors often spoil a matter that is otherwise good.

It was well done of Paul, and profitably in accordance with the right of discipline, not to admit him as his companion, whose inconstancy he had once experienced. But when he saw Barnabas so importunate, he might have yielded to his desire. We ought to value the truth more than the favor of the whole world; but it is fitting that we wisely consider what great weight there is in the matter at hand.

For if, in a matter of no importance or edification, a man boasts of his constancy, prepares himself for conflict, and does not cease to defend to the end that in which he once took delight, it will be nothing but foolish and perverse obstinacy. There was also some middle way and means by which Paul might have granted something to the importunity of his colleague in office, and yet not have departed from the truth.

It was not for him to flatter Mark or to cover up his offense; yet he was not prevented by religion, after he had freely professed what he thought, from allowing himself to be overcome in that matter, which neither damaged true doctrine nor endangered man’s salvation. I say this so that we may learn to moderate our desire, even in the best causes, lest it exceed measure and be too fervent.