The Divine Initiative in the Conversion of Gentiles

Commentary 19 on Acts 11:1-18

Fr. Pat Collins, CM

Lectio Divina

21st Sept 2026

To begin, we need to understand our scripture reading in context. A number of preliminary points can be made.

Firstly, in a previous Lectio it was mentioned that the Acts are described in terms of a geographical model, i.e., a journey from Jerusalem to the ends of the earth, namely Rome. That journey contains three Pentecosts: that of the Jews in Acts 2, that of the Samaritans in Acts 8 and the Gentiles in Acts 10.

Secondly, in chapter 10 Luke described two visionary experiences, those of Peter and Cornelius, a Roman army officer, each of which confirmed the other.

Thirdly, Luke recounted this incident no more than once. This was due, not due to a mistake, but rather to the fact that, as a Gentile convert himself, Luke considered this incident to be of major significance in Acts, the time when the Good News spread beyond the Jewish world to that of the Gentiles.

Fourthly, as a result of divine guidance, Peter travelled to the home of Cornelius. When he got there, he proclaimed the kerygma. As he did so, the Holy Spirit was manifested. 'All who heard the word’ were caught up in a charismatic experience which was very reminiscent of that which Peter and the disciples had experienced on Pentecost Sunday. 

The 'astounded' reaction of Peter's Jewish-Christian companions from Joppa highlighted the fact that this incident included 'even Gentiles . . . speaking in tongues.’  The latter gift had not been mentioned since the Pentecost experience of Acts 2:4. The act of baptizing the Gentile believers followed as a logical consequence. The structure of Luke's narrative makes it quite clear that the initiative in this case was God’s. These points need to be kept in mind when reading and interpreting the significance of what we are told in Acts 11:1-18.

Word of the conversion of Gentiles eventually reached the Christian Jews of Jerusalem, & they said in an accusing way to Peter, "You went into the house of uncircumcised men and ate with them." This charge, while traditionally worded, was tantamount to saying that Peter had set aside Christianity's Jewish features and thereby seriously endangered its relationship with the nation. What they would have expected, as a minimum, was that the Gentiles would have become circumcised Jews before they accepted the Christian Gospel. But they were not required by Peter and his companions.  

Peter defended his actions by recounting his experiences at Joppa and Caesarea, with an emphasis on the divine initiative in all that transpired and his inability to withstand God. Thus, he recounted the details of the vision that came to him at Joppa (vv. 5-10), of his reception by Cornelius (vv. 11-14), and of the Spirit's coming upon the group gathered in Cornelius's house (vv. 15-17). It was the Lord, insisted Peter, who gave him the vision and who explained its meaning. It was the Spirit who told him to have "no hesitation" i.e., "making no distinction", by going with the messengers to Caesarea and entering Cornelius's house. By the way, Peter mentioned that Cornelius had recounted that he “had seen an angel standing in his house.” If a messenger of God could enter the Gentile’s house, why couldn’t Peter?  It was God who took the initiative by baptizing Cornelius and his companions with the Holy Spirit. Therefore, concluded Peter, "Who was I to think that I could oppose God?" While Peter’s justification of what he had done was mainly based on religious experience, he underpinned what he said by having recourse to the word of God, specifically words spoken by Jesus when he said in Acts 1:5, ‘John baptised with water, but you will be baptised with the Holy Spirit.’ Then Peter added, “It is clear that God gave those Gentiles the same gift that he gave us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ; who was I, then, to try to stop God!” 

On hearing about Peter's experiences, the Christians at Jerusalem "remained silent" and "praised God." This probably meant that his critics, at least for the moment, were silenced, while those more receptive to God's working acknowledged that Peter was right and credited God rather than human ingenuity for what had happened.