the Week of Proper 28 / Ordinary 33
Click here to join the effort!
Bible Dictionaries
Aquila and Priscilla
Hastings' Dictionary of the New Testament
or (or Prisca)* [Note: Luke uses the from Priscilla (in Acts), St. Paul the form Prisca (in his Epistles).]
The references to this husband and wife are Acts 18, Romans 16:3, 1 Corinthians 16:19, and 2 Timothy 4:19. These passages suggest that Aquila and Priscilla were, in St. Paul’s eyes, people of importance in the early Church, though ecclesiastical tradition has little to say about them. The careful description of Aquila as ‘a Jew, a man of Pontus by race’ (Acts 18:2), rather implies that Priscilla his wife was not a Jewess; because her name is usually put first, it is thought that she was of higher social standing than her husband. Evidence has been offered by de Rossi that Priscilla was a well-connected Roman lady. Discussing this evidence, Sanday and Headlam suggest that both Aquila and Priscilla ‘were freedmen of a member of the Acilian gens’ (Romans5, 420). But they admit the possibility of Priscilla being ‘a member of some distinguished Roman family.’ Ramsay strongly urges this theory, and it explains much in the story-their social position, their command of money, their influence in Rome, their freedom from Jewish prejudices, etc. Another explanation of why Priscilla’s name comes first may be that she was the more vigorous and intelligent Christian worker. Thus Harnack describes them as ‘Prisca the missionary, with her husband Aquila’ (Expansion of Christianity2, i. 79).
Aquila and Priscilla came from Italy to Corinth, ‘because Claudius had commanded all the Jews to depart from Rome’ (Acts 18:2). Suetonius says the expulsion was caused by a series of disturbances ‘due to the action of Chrestus’ (Claud. 25); i.e. Christian ferment was one cause of the edict. It is probable, therefore, that Aquila and Priscilla had been influenced in Rome by Christian teaching, though it cannot be decided whether they were already converts to Christianity. For this reason they were compelled to leave the country, though the edict was not rigidly enforced on all Jews. Priscilla accompanied her Jewish husband to Corinth, where they followed their trade as tent-makers. They seem always to have been able to maintain a fair position, for their house was a meeting-place for the Church both in Ephesus and in Rome. Probably, then, they were people of considerable means, though their expulsion from Rome limited their resources for a time. Comradeship in trade is given as the reason why St. Paul lodged with Aquila and Priscilla in Corinth; but their favourable attitude to Christianity must have been a strong inducement on both sides. Under St. Paul’s influence they became not only earnest Christians, but also enthusiastic helpers of the Apostle. Writing to the Corinthian Church in after years, the Apostle says: ‘Aquila and Priscilla greet you much in the Lord’ (1 Corinthians 16:19). This is a warm personal greeting, in the way not merely of friendship but of love and service to Christ-a suitable greeting from those who had helped St. Paul to found the Church.
When St. Paul went to Ephesus, Aquila and Priscilla went with him and remained there to do pioneer work whilst he visited Jerusalem. They shrank from the responsibility, and wanted the Apostle to remain (Acts 18:20). But he urged them to stay, promising to return. So the initial work in Ephesus was done by Aquila and Priscilla. They tried to prepare the ground before St. Paul returned, and to sow the seed of Christian teaching as far as they were able. During this time Apollos (q.v. [Note: quod vide, which see.] ) came to Ephesus, with his imperfect apprehension of Christianity. Aquila and Priscilla admired his learning and his earnestness; and, recognizing that such a man must either be a strong supporter of the cause or an influential opponent, they did their best to instruct him more carefully (Acts 18:26). Subsequent events throw doubt on the ability of this couple, who were themselves recent converts, to educate the eloquent Alexandrian in the Pauline interpretation of the gospel. Would not his presence overshadow Aquila and Priscilla, tending to make their work more difficult? The elementary and even chaotic state of things in Ephesus at this period is shown by the incident of the twelve men ‘knowing only the baptism of John’ whom St. Paul found when he returned to the city (Acts 19:1 ff.). As nothing is said about the baptism of Apollos, and as the twelve men ‘had not heard whether the Holy Spirit was given,’ it seems unlikely that there had been any Christian baptism in Ephesus before St. Paul came to superintend the work. Nevertheless, Aquila and Priscilla seem to have fulfilled their mission with skill and courage; and, when a Church was gathered, the members met in their house (1 Corinthians 16:19). This may explain their presence in Rome when the Epistle to the Romans was written. As St. Paul left them in Ephesus to do pioneering work, so he seems to have sent them to Rome to prepare the way for his coming there. The decree of expulsion was not enforced permanently; their connexion with a leading Roman family made it more possible for them to return to Rome than for Jews with no influence; whilst their knowledge of the city, their social standing, as well as their experience in Corinth and in Ephesus, with their devotion to himself, fitted them pre-eminently for such work as St. Paul contemplated.
The recognition of the social position of this devoted couple, and of their valuable pioneering work, invests them with special interest as having assisted St. Paul in his missionary labours in a unique way. Their devotion to the Apostle was signalized in some remarkable fashion, apparently when he was in danger. His description of them as ‘my fellow-workers in Christ Jesus, who for my life laid down their own necks; unto whom not only I give thanks but also all the churches of the Gentiles’ (Romans 16:3-4), sets them side by side with the Apostle. They have laboured along with him in a pre-eminent manner, and have attested their worth as independent workers (cf. Weizsäcker, i. 394). ‘They furnish the most beautiful example known to us in the Apostolic Age of the power for good that could be exerted by a husband and wife working in unison for the advancement of the Gospel’ (McGiffert, 428).
The references to Aquila and Priscilla have been used as arguments against the historicity of parts of Acts and in favour of treating Romans 16 as not part of that Epistle. But the two reasons relied on are not strong enough to carry the conclusions. It is supposed that both were Jews (so Weizsäcker, McGiffert; cf. Lightfoot on Phil.4, 1878, p. 16)-though Priscilla was probably a Roman; and their migratory life is fully explained if they were people of means, who became enthusiastic helpers in St. Paul’s missionary labours, and whom he selected to do pioneering work in Ephesus and in Rome. In particular their return to Ephesus at a later period (2 Timothy 4:19) is quite comprehensible. Not only would they have trade connexions with the city, but also their presence would be specially welcome because they had been actually the founders of the Church.
Aquila and Priscilla have been selected by some scholars as likely authors of ‘Hebrews.’ Harnack has argued strongly for this suggestion, and Rendel Harris favours it. M. Dods says: ‘All that we know of Aquila seems to fit the conditions as well as any name that has been suggested’ (Com. on ‘Hebrews’ [Expositor’s Greek Testament ], 234). It has to be said, however, that the suggestion implies a closer intimacy with Judaism than seems likely in their case. The influence of the Roman wife probably preponderated over the Jewish influence of the husband. They were not Christians of the Judaistic type, but cordial workers on Pauline lines among Gentiles. At the same time, the discussion of a Jew’s difficulties by such a vigorous mind as Priscilla possessed may have qualified Aquila to write ‘Hebrews’ with his wife’s help. It is a question, however, whether their authorship would harmonize with the independent use of Pauline thoughts characteristic of the Epistle (cf. Expositor, 8th ser., v. 371ff.).
Literature.-articles in Hasting's Dictionary of the Bible (5 vols) on ‘Aquila,’ ‘Priscilla,’ ‘Corinth,’ ‘Corinthians’; in Encyclopaedia Biblica (by Schmiedel) on ‘Acts’ and ‘Aquila’; and in Schaff-Herzog [Note: chaff-Herzog The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia (Eng. tr. of PRE).] on ‘Aquila’; Sanday-Headlam, Romans 5, Edinburgh, 1902, Introd. § 3, and p. xl, also pp. 418-420; W. M. Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen, London, 1895, pp. 253ff., 267ff.; A. Harnack, Expansion of Christianity2, do. 1908, i. 75 and 79; C. v. Weizsäcker, The Apostolic Age, i. 2 [do. 1897] 307ff.; O. Pfleiderer. Primitive Christianity, i. [do. 1906] 246; A. C. McGiffert, Apostolic Age, Edinburgh, 1897, pp. 273, 427f.; Expositor’s Greek Testament , ‘Hebrews,’ Introd. p. 228, ‘Acts of Apostles,’ p. 383, ‘Romans,’ pp. 560, 718f.
J. E. Roberts.
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Hastings, James. Entry for 'Aquila and Priscilla'. Hastings' Dictionary of the New Testament. https://www.studylight.org/dictionaries/eng/hdn/a/aquila-and-priscilla.html. 1906-1918.
