John Calvin Commentary Acts 23:6

"But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Brethren, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees: touching the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question." — Acts 23:6 (ASV)

And when Paul knew. The policy of Paul, about which Luke mentions, does not seem to befit the servant of Christ. For the craftiness which he used was wrapped up in pretense, which was not far from a lie. He says that the state of his cause consisted in the resurrection of the dead: but we know that the strife arose about other matters: because he annulled the ceremonies, because he admitted the Gentiles into the covenant of salvation.

I answer, that though these things are true, yet he did not lie. For he neither denies that he was accused of other matters, nor does this make the whole controversy consist in one point; but he says truly that the Sadducees were therefore offended with him, because he held the resurrection of the dead.

He knew that those who had conspired together against him were also enemies to one another. He knew that his own conscience was clear, and it would have been an easy matter for him to prove his cause good before just judges. Yet because he sees them cry out against him clamorously, and that he had no place granted to defend himself, he sets his enemies against each other. From this it also appears that they were carried away by ignorance and blind zeal.

Therefore, we must note that Paul began with the desire to truly and plainly unfold the whole matter. He did not craftily refuse to make a pure and sound confession, such as the servants of Christ ought to make. But because the way was stopped before him, and he could not be heard, he used the last remedy: to declare that his adversaries were carried headlong by blind hatred. For the outcome shows that those are not guided by reason or judgment who are led astray by mutual discord.

Now, if anyone who darkens the light of doctrine excuses his craftiness by Paul's example, he is easily refuted. For it is one thing for a person to provide for himself alone at the expense of truth, and another to turn the professed enemies of Christ from resisting Him, so that they may strive among themselves.

Furthermore, we see the nature of the wicked: though they disagree among themselves like enemies, yet when they are to make war against the gospel, they forget their own conflicts. For Satan, the father of discord, brings about only this one agreement among his own: that they may be united in mind and purpose to extinguish godliness.

So we see that the heated factions in Popery are quiet only as long as they join hands to oppress the gospel. For this reason, the disciples of Christ must be more courageous to foster and nourish truth, so that, being united, they may better resist.

Also, we gather from this what kind of peace the Scripture commends to us. Christ says that the peace-makers are the children of God (Matthew 5:9), and this is true: they must do what they can to bring all people to grow together under the Lord.

Yet this does not prevent us from (fighting under the banner of the same Lord), as it were, with the sound of the trumpet, stirring up the wicked, so that they may, like Midianites, slay one another (Judges 7:22), provided that both simplicity of zeal and the wisdom of the Spirit direct us to this.

One part were Sadducees. We see here again, as in a mirror, how deformed and confused the ruin of the Church was at that time. Faith is the soul of the Church; nothing is more essential to faith than agreement, nothing more contrary than sects.

And this must necessarily follow when everyone (setting aside the word of God) drew his disciples to his own inventions. For there is no other holy bond of unity than the natural and plain truth of God. As soon as people depart from that, it is no wonder if they are scattered and drawn here and there like members pulled apart.

Therefore, the beginning of sects among the Jews was the corruption of the law; just as the Lord avenged the profanation of His word, which was corrupted with various human inventions, with like punishment in Popery. For this reason, we must fear all the more, lest horrible and more lamentable scatterings hang over our heads than that which was in the time of Popery, of which some signs appear.

And it is no wonder, since we provoke the Lord to wrath in so many ways with our ungratefulness. But though the face of the Church is stained and marred with many spots and blemishes, and whatever deformity may occur hereafter, let us comfort ourselves with this: that as God was careful then to deliver the Church wonderfully from destruction, so through His grace some seed will always continue.

Indeed, it is inevitable that godly minds will somewhat despair when they see things so far out of order. But let us learn immediately to hold up that shield: that the Lord, who, in such a thick mist of errors, in such a heap of superstitions, in the unbridled licentiousness of sects, preserved His Church among the Jews, will never allow it to be entirely extinguished in the world.

The same thing likewise happened in Popery. For when the worship of God was overthrown there, the doctrine of salvation was oppressed, the kingdom of Christ was thrown down, and ungodliness openly reigned, yet God saved certain hidden remnants, and there was always some wheat in the chaff.

It is very profitable to compare these examples. When we inveigh today against Popery, its hired patrons cry out on the other hand that nothing is more absurd than for us to imagine that the Church of God was extinguished for many ages, as if we imagine that God had no people left when those who ought to have maintained His pure worship had forsaken Him.

Indeed, we complain that those tyrants corrupted the Church, that the temple was profaned by them, so that it did not greatly differ from a pigsty, that the flock of Christ was scattered, and His sheepfold broken down. Finally, that the Church was hidden from human eyes, yet in such a way that the Lord knew His elect, though they were dispersed, and brooded over them under His wings.

And this shows how foolishly the Papists brag and boast of titles of honor, in that not the common people, nor any private individuals, but the priests themselves formerly divided the Jewish church by deadly dissension.

Therefore, there is no reason for us to be afraid to stoutly resist the pride of the Pope and of all his followers, with whom we have the same struggle which the prophets and apostles had with the priests of their time. And as reverence for the Church did not prevent holy men from challenging the tyranny of the wicked priests, so we must not be terrified by empty appearances under which the Papists vainly boast, since they have, nevertheless, cast off the doctrine of godliness.

It is certain that the people were then divided into three sects, but Luke only mentions the Pharisees and Sadducees, omitting the Essenes, because it was most fitting for his purpose to do so.

And though this is the common opinion concerning their names—that the former took their name from 'separating,' because they withdrew themselves from the company of others on account of their feigned holiness, and that the second group took their name from 'righteousness,' as if they were called zeduchim—nevertheless, for my own part, as I have said elsewhere, I am rather of the opinion of those who say that the Pharisees took their name from 'interpreting.' For phrus signifies exposition, from which interpreters are also called phruschim; and we know that the Pharisees, not being content with the natural doctrine of the law and prophets, added many inventions which they said they received from the fathers.