John Calvin Commentary Acts 23:2

"And the high priest Ananias commanded them that stood by him to smite him on the mouth." — Acts 23:2 (ASV)

And the chief priest. Luke’s narration does not seem to agree with the usual historical account. Josephus writes the following concerning the high priests of that time: Quadratus, proconsul of Syria, after deposing Cumanus from the government of Judea, commanded Cumanus to answer for himself before Caesar.

Quadratus also sent Ananias, the high priest, bound with him. Josephus makes no mention of who was chosen in Ananias’s place, except that it is likely Jonathas was given the honor. According to Josephus, Jonathas was later slain by the cunning and treachery of Felix, prefect of Judea, who succeeded Cumanus.

This occurred because Jonathas had often spoken his mind to Felix; and Felix, unable to tolerate the man's steadfastness, made a pact with a certain Doras to secretly send murderers to kill him.

Then, as the same Josephus testifies, King Agrippa made Ishmael, the son of Phebeus, high priest. But when Ishmael was sent by the people to Rome concerning a certain lawsuit and was detained there by Poppaea, Nero's wife, Agrippa put Joseph (also called Chabus), the son of Simon, in his place. Immediately growing weary of him as well, Agrippa then appointed Ananus, the son of Ananus, to be high priest.

Furthermore, Josephus says that this last event happened when Albinus succeeded Festus after Festus’s death. I do not see why some call this Ananus “Ananias.”

This identification has some plausibility, as he is called a Pharisee, and it is also said that he was bold and resolute, and without any lawful authority, caused James, the Lord’s brother, to be stoned. However, if we believe Josephus, this Ananus could not be the Ananias mentioned here by Luke, because this Ananus was made high priest many years after Felix had left the province.

I have another conjecture. During all that time, a certain Ananias, a high priest, was prominent, who, except for the official title, was practically chief in the priestly order.

Because Josephus leaves a gap between the high priesthood of Ananias (the one sent to Rome) and Ishmael, it may be that this other Ananias held the office of high priest in the interim. But even if this were not so, it appears from Josephus that Ananias (who died when the city was besieged) was, during the reigns of Claudius Caesar and Nero, equal in dignity to the chief priests of that time.

Indeed, his authority is so highly praised that it seems as if he held the chief governance, even if other men held the official symbols of honor. He is also called αρχιερευς somewhat indiscriminately, like those who were actually the ruling high priests.

Now, let readers ponder and consider whether the word αρχιερευς in this place signifies chief rather than highest, as it does in many other places. For the Evangelists everywhere call the priests of Aaronic lineage αρχιερεις to distinguish them from the Levites, who held a more inferior degree of priesthood.

Moreover, it may be that this Ananias, who was considered bold and courageous, filled the high priest’s position during his absence. The details we have recounted from Josephus are recorded partly in the Twentieth Book of Antiquities, from the third chapter to the eighth, and partly in the Second Book of the Wars of the Jews.

He commanded him to be smitten. We see that there was great disorder in this assembly. For since the high priest was in such a rage that he commanded Paul to be struck for no reason, he undoubtedly did it with the consent of all the rest—indeed, so that he might win the favor of these enraged men.

The Lord allows the wicked to be so carried away by Satan that they abandon all appearance of fairness and self-control. Hypocrites would gladly maintain some show of moderation, and undoubtedly this high priest attempted to project the gravity that befitted his position.

But the Lord tore this mask from his face, so that not even the modesty of an ordinary man was found in him; instead, he poured out his furious rage like a beast.

Meanwhile, we see what horrible and vile disorder existed in the Church at that time. Ananias, who was the chief of the council, though he ought to have restrained others by his seriousness, forgot all modesty and compelled them to violence and savagery.

Therefore, they had no regard for discipline at that time; instead, confused barbarism remained among them. And this is no wonder, for they had estranged themselves from God; they had most shamefully rejected Christ; their entire religion was for sale.

Consequently, it was fitting that they should run headlong into a furious madness—a madness that would be loathsome even to secular people—so that they might be punished in their own shame for their ungodliness.