Acts 11:4–10

Acts 11:4 — "Peter began, and explained to them in order" Luke's Greek word kathexēs ("in order") signals deliberate, sequential narration — the same word used in Luke 1:3 for the evangelist's own orderly account. Peter is not rambling or defending himself emotionally; he is offering a careful eyewitness deposition. This matters theologically: Peter's apostolic authority is exercised here not as an autocratic decree but through patient explanation of what God has done. The Jerusalem community is owed a reasoned account, and Peter provides one.

Acts 11:5 — The trance and the descending sheet Peter locates the vision precisely: "the city of Joppa" while he was "praying." Joppa is already a city charged with symbolic freight — it is the port from which Jonah fled God's mission to the Gentiles (Jon 1:3), a resonance Luke surely intends his reader to catch. The word ekstasis ("trance") denotes a state in which normal sensory perception is suspended and the mind is open to direct divine communication; cf. Paul's use of the same term in Acts 22:17. The "great sheet let down from heaven by four corners" (tessarsin archais) is a cosmic image: four corners evoking the four directions, i.e., the whole inhabited earth. Heaven is explicitly the point of origin, marking what follows as divine initiative, not human invention.

Acts 11:6 — The catalogue of creatures Peter "looked intently" (atenisas) — the same verb used of the disciples gazing at the ascending Christ (Acts 1:10) and of Peter himself at the lame man (Acts 3:4). It signals rapt, Spirit-attuned attention. The inventory — "four-footed animals of the earth, wild animals, creeping things, and birds of the sky" — deliberately mirrors the comprehensive animal taxonomy of Leviticus 11, the foundational purity code. Every prohibited category is represented. The vision is a compendium of everything Torah said "no" to.

Acts 11:7 — "Rise, Peter, kill and eat" The command is blunt and performative. "Rise" (anastas) carries resurrection resonance in Luke-Acts; to rise at God's word is to enter new life and new mission. The command to kill and eat does not merely permit impure food; it commands active participation. God is not merely removing a prohibition — he is issuing a positive summons.

Acts 11:8 — Peter's refusal Peter's response — "Not so, Lord" (mēdamōs, Kyrie) — is a fascinatingly complex moment. He simultaneously uses the highest divine title ("Lord") and flatly refuses. This reflects genuine, deeply formed religious conscience, the fruit of a lifetime shaped by Torah observance. Peter is not being willfully disobedient; he is being faithfully formed — and now that formation must be re-formed at a deeper level. The phrase "nothing unholy or unclean has ever entered into my mouth" echoes Ezekiel 4:14, where the prophet similarly protests against ritual defilement, situating Peter within the great prophetic tradition of zealous purity before God.

Acts 11:9 — The divine counter-declaration "What God has cleansed, don't you call unclean" is the theological hinge of the entire pericope. The verb ekatharisen is aorist — a completed divine act, not a future possibility. God has already, decisively, cleansed. This is not an abrogation of God's earlier holiness code by a whim but its fulfillment: the One who gave the purity laws is now the One who declares their typological purpose accomplished in Christ. As Origen observes, the Law was a paidagōgos (Gal 3:24), a tutor whose lessons pointed toward the reality now arrived.

Acts 11:10 — The triple repetition and the return to heaven Three times — the biblical number of divine confirmation (cf. Isaiah's triple kadosh, the three denials and three reinstatements of Peter himself). The sheet and its contents are then "drawn up again into heaven," a reversal of the descent that frames the vision as a unified divine action: God lowers what is His, declares it holy, and reclaims it. Nothing is abandoned; everything is transformed.

Catholic tradition illuminates this passage with extraordinary richness precisely because it touches the deepest questions about continuity and fulfillment between the Old and New Covenants — a question the Magisterium has engaged with particular care.

The Council of Florence (Cantate Domino, 1441) affirmed that the Mosaic ceremonial precepts, including food laws, ceased to be obligatory with the coming of Christ — not because they were evil, but because their finis (end, purpose) had arrived in him. Peter's vision dramatizes this fulfillment: the sheet is lowered from heaven precisely because heaven has acted in the Incarnation. The Catechism (§1961–1964) distinguishes the moral law (permanent), the ceremonial law (fulfilled and superseded in Christ), and the judicial law (fulfilled in the New Covenant order). The vision of the sheet exemplifies the supersession of the ceremonial dimension without any contempt for Israel's prior calling.

St. John Chrysostom (Homilies on Acts, Homily 25) notes that the vision had to be repeated three times because Peter's resistance was so deeply formed — "God does not use compulsion but persuasion even with His own apostles." This is itself a theological datum: grace works with, not against, human moral formation.

Pope St. John Paul II, in Redemptoris Missio §25, cites the Cornelius episode (of which this retelling is part) as a paradigmatic instance of the Holy Spirit preparing hearts for the Gospel before the missionary arrives — the Spirit's universality precedes the Church's explicit proclamation. Peter is not the origin of Cornelius's salvation; he is its instrument.

Finally, the triple repetition connects typologically to Peter's triple denial (Lk 22:61) and triple reinstatement (Jn 21:15–17), suggesting Luke's theology of Peter as a figure whose failures and renewals are always threefold, always Christologically framed.

This passage speaks with particular urgency to Catholics navigating the relationship between religious tradition and the calls of the Spirit in the present moment. Peter had a conscience formed by centuries of faithful practice — and God did not despise that formation. But God also asked Peter to distinguish between the form of holiness and its substance. Contemporary Catholics can recognize a similar tension: between inherited practices, disciplines, and cultural expressions of faith that have genuinely formed us, and the Spirit's invitation to receive God's grace at work beyond the boundaries we assumed.

Practically: when Catholics encounter God's grace working in unexpected people, cultures, or circumstances — in someone of a different background, social class, or life history — the temptation is Peter's temptation: "Not so, Lord." This passage calls us to examine whether our resistance is prophetic discernment or merely the comfort of the familiar. It also models something crucial: Peter does not abandon his prior formation, nor does he act alone. He accounts for himself to the community. That ordered, communal discernment — not private spiritual freelancing — is the Catholic pattern for navigating the Spirit's surprises.