Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians

that it signifies, at the outset, that he was not a disciple of man, but of Christ himself. ^A

CHAPTERS OF THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS

PAUL THE APOSTLE'S EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS

PROOEMIUM

Immediately he removes the suspicion that he might be called a disciple of men. For I am an apostle, he says, not ^C receiving—

this ministry from men, nor through man, but having come to this work through Christ himself. "But through Jesus Christ and God the Father." Notice the ^A use of "through" applied to both the Father and the Son, and the Son being named first. "Who raised him from the dead." This is said out of honor for the Father, and on account of the weakness of the hearers. "From the dead." He opportunely mentioned the dispensation and the death of the Lord, so that, by reminding them of the benefits of Christ, he might in this way persuade them no longer to pay attention to the Law, but to Christ. "And all the brethren who are with me." Why does he now mention all the brethren? Because those who were slandering him said that Paul alone was prohibiting circumcision in a new way. He wishes, therefore, to show that there are many who share in such doctrines as these. "To the Churches of Galatia." Observe the manifestation of his anger. For he did not say, as he was accustomed, "To the beloved," or "To the sanctified," or at least "To the Churches ^B of God," but "To those of Galatia." — "Grace to you." Since they were in danger of falling from grace on account of their circumcision, he prays this for them. Well, however, does he say, "And peace." For they had been made enemies toward God through the observance of legal precepts. "From God the Father." Whence do you have, he says, the right to call God Father, except from Baptism? Why, then, do you cling to the Law? "Who gave himself." Behold, he gave himself; when, therefore, you hear that he was given by the Father, understand this to be the good pleasure of the Father. "That he might deliver us." He gave himself for our sins, both blotting out what was in the past and preserving us for the future. "For in order," he says, "to deliver us from the present evil age," that is, from wicked deeds and a corrupt life. For this he calls the "evil age," not time itself or the days. Far from it! For we too are accustomed to speak in this way whenever something unexpected happens ^C to us: "I spent a bad day." "Of this evil age." By saying "from the present evil age," he showed that evil is not unbegotten, nor eternal, but temporal. "According to the will of God and our Father." Since they were saying that it was not right to abandon the Law, as it had been given by God, he shows that believing in Christ was also the will of the Father. For it was according to the will of the Father that Christ gave himself. You see that nowhere is there a command from the Father to the Son, but only assent. And again, by saying "our Father," he reminds them of Baptism. What, then, do you have to do with the Law? "To whom be glory for ever." Having contemplated, through the things mentioned, the ineffable benefits of God, he brings his speech to an end in a doxology. For it was not possible to express them fully.

I marvel that you are so quickly turning away from him who called you in the grace of Christ to a different gospel, which is not another, except that there are some who trouble you, and want to pervert the Gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, let him be accursed.

There were two sins: the fact that they were turning away, and the fact that

so that there would be no need for time for the impostors. Consider his diligence. Since they thought that by clinging to the Law they could appease the Father, he shows that he who departs from Christ and the Gospel departs also from the Father. For the Father himself, he says, called us to the grace of His Son. For the Son provides remission by His own blood, by grace and not by wages, for it is the Father who calls to this. And the Spirit consents. For common is the ^A benefit towards us of the holy and blessed Trinity. "Unto another Gospel." For those who were persuading the Galatians to observe Sabbaths and circumcision called their own deception a Gospel, ensnaring them more by the name. "Which is not another." Which, he says, is only one, and there is no other besides this. Unless there are some who trouble you, wishing to pervert you, and to subvert the Gospel of Christ. "But even if we." Lest anyone say that he supports his own preaching out of vainglory, he first curses himself, if he should wish to alter anything in the Gospel. "Or an angel from heaven." Do not, he says, speak to me of Peter and James and John: but even if the powers above should ^B pervert the Gospel, let them be anathema. This, he says, is not because Peter and those who were with him, or the supernal virtues, were preaching anything else, but wishing to stop the mouths of the impostors who were deceiving them, appealing to the dignity of Peter, however little they might differ from the preaching. "Beyond that which we preached." That is, besides that which, signifying however little it might differ from the preaching.

As we said before and now ^C again I say: if any one preaches a Gospel to you beyond that which you received, let him be anathema. For do I now persuade men or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if I still pleased men, I would not be a servant of Christ.

For, lest they think that he said these things in an angry spirit, and that he was not so disposed in truth, he repeats the word, asserting that this has been judged and confirmed by him. "For do I now persuade men or God?" Then, lest they think that he wishes to persuade them, and preaches different things to others—for the impostors were slandering him, saying that among some he preaches circumcision, but among others something else—and that they might fall away ^D as if occupied with flatteries, he says: For is it because I now wish to assure you that I have set these things forth? I wish to make my faith full to God, since I neither wish to please men, and therefore neither you. "Or do I seek to please men?" I did not say these things, he says, in order to flatter and please you. For if I had wished to please men, I would certainly have held fast to Judaism, and to friends and kinsmen, and would not, having abandoned all, have run to Christ.

Chapter I. Narrative concerning himself, how he migrated from Judaism through revelation.

I, 11-14. Notum autem vobis facio, fratres, Evangelium quod prædicatum est a me non esse secundum hominem: neque enim ab homine accepi illud, neque

didici: sed per revelationem Jesu Christi. Audistis enim meam conversationem quondam in Judaismo, quod supra modum persequebar Ecclesiam Dei, ac expugnabam illam, et proficiebam in Judaismo supra multos æquales in genere meo, cum vehementer zelator essem traditorum a majoribus meis institutorum.

^A He wishes to show them that he did not receive his preaching from men, but from Christ Himself. "That it is not according to man." For it is according to God, that is, according to the revelation of God. "For neither did I receive it from man," he says. For this is what those who slandered him were saying: that Paul had received the preaching from men, and not as Peter had, from Christ. Therefore they said he ought not to be obeyed. "For you have heard." Then, because the Galatians were ignorant of the revelation made to him by Christ, he wishes to confirm it by showing that he was formerly a persecutor, but was now suddenly transformed; for unless some divine vision had occurred to him, he would by no means have been transformed so suddenly, so that, being persuaded from this that he was a disciple of Christ, they would not despise him. "My conversation." And the rumor would by no means have spread from Palestine to Galatia, had he not been a violent persecutor. "In Judaism." ^B [Severian] What need was there for mentioning his conversation in Judaism? It was to show that he does not serve opinion, but truth. For he did not flee to grace out of hatred for the law; he was indeed defending the law, but, having found that which was more perfect, he departed from the law. "And I was expunging it." Not only was I persecuting it, he says, but I was also attempting to overthrow and obscure it: this is what "I was expunging it" means. "And I was progressing." I was progressing in the devastation of the churches, that is, I was always adding to it in order to be more savage. Or I was progressing, that is, for this reason I was honorable among the Jews. What, therefore, was the cause of my suddenly waging war against those who held me in honor and loved me? Nothing else, he says, but the revelation of Christ. "Being a more vehement zealot." I was progressing, since I was an extreme zealot of the traditions of my ancestors. ^C Therefore, he says, I never did what I did out of vainglory, but out of zeal for God, even if it was misguided. He, therefore, who did nothing even then out of vainglory, how could he now, after the recognition of the truth, preach false things so as to please men, rather than those things which he had received from Christ?

I, 15, 16. But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace, to reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the Gentiles: immediately I did not confer with flesh and blood. ^D If he was separated and chosen from his mother's womb for the preaching, he was surely left in the intervening time by some divine dispensation, so that his sudden transformation might confirm many. "And called me by his grace." He, indeed, was called as a vessel of election.

^A didici. He says he was called by grace, as if saying: "Since I was unworthy and unfit, the Lord called me by grace." "By revealing His Son to me." He says the Father did not call me without revealing His Son to me. And he says, "In me," wishing to show that he learned it not by word alone, but by mind and heart, as if the knowledge had settled deep within the inner man. "That I might preach Him." Do you see that the Father who called him and revealed His Son to him, He Himself appointed him to be a preacher and an apostle? How, then, does he say, could I have received and been taught the preaching by men? Immediately I did not slide into relaxation and self-indulgence; nor did I, as if having accomplished something great, fall into idleness and negligence, but I pursued the course of the Gospel with strength and rigor. — Or in this way: I did not count it a priority to see relatives, or home, or companions, or fatherland, but leaving all things (for in this I am not inferior to Peter and John), I immediately ran to Arabia and to Damascus and to the preaching. "I did not confer with flesh and blood." (Which we follow other interpreters in rendering: "I did not assent to flesh and blood," for the previous scholia pointed to this meaning.) I did not go down, he says, into discussion with the apostles about the preaching, being content with the divine revelation. He says this, showing that he did not learn the preaching from the disciples, but from Christ himself. For those who were slandering him used to say that he was a disciple of men, and not of Christ. ^B

I. 17-19. "Neither did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus. Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Peter, and remained with him fifteen days. But other of the apostles I saw none, except James the Lord’s brother."

He said the same thing more clearly, demonstrating that he was not taught by the apostles, but by Christ Himself. I did not go, he says, to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before me and learn anything from them. For although he did go up to Jerusalem from Damascus, as the Acts of the Apostles indicate, it was not ^C to be a disciple, but to preach Christ Himself and to teach the faith. For in the same manner as I went away into Arabia, he says, to preach, and again to Damascus, in the same manner also I went to Jerusalem. But after three years of my preaching and teaching, I went up to see Peter, not to learn anything from him. For I was already evangelizing and preaching. "But I went away into Arabia." Having spoken of the cities to which he went, he keeps silent about the magnificent works that were done by him there, which was a sign of great humility. "To visit Peter." Consider his humility; after so many and such great struggles, he went away to visit Peter, as one greater. And the fact that he remained was for the sake of the honor he showed to Peter. Notice also how cautiously he speaks: "I remained with him," and not "I was taught." "But other of the apostles I saw none." ^D

A non vidi.” Who did not see anyone, how could he have learned from them? “The brother of the Lord.” He was not the brother of the Lord, but was thought to be, yet that he might elevate him, he calls him the brother of the Lord. ^A

I, 21-24. “Now the things which I write to you, behold before God, that I do not lie. Then I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia. But I was unknown by face to the churches of Judaea which were in Christ. But they only heard that, ‘He who persecuted us sometime, now preaches the faith which once he destroyed,’ and they glorified God in me.”

I say to you before the Lord that I do not lie. Do you see how he struggles for this word? For there was danger that he might not be considered trustworthy for the preaching, as if he were a disciple of men and not of Christ. “Into the regions of Syria.” After having seen Peter, he again betook himself to the way toward the Gentiles. To the parts, he says, of Syria and Cilicia: for he had been sent to them. “But I was unknown.” I did not preach, he says, to those who had believed from the circumcision, that it was necessary to be circumcised (for this is what the slanderers were saying, that he preaches circumcision to those who believe from among the Jews); so much, therefore, he says, did I not preach, that they did not even know my face. Or thus. I did not learn from Peter; I only saw him. I did not learn from James; for him, too, I only saw. I did not see another of the apostles. But perhaps from some other humbler and not so distinguished person? And how could this have place, to learn from those who had not even seen my face? For I was unknown by face to the churches of Judaea which were in Christ. For the others needed teaching, but they did not teach. Truly, therefore, I did not learn from man. ^B

“To the churches of Judaea.” To the congregations situated around Syria and Cilicia, which had turned from the Jews to the Lord. For this is what “which were in Christ” denotes. “And they glorified God in me.” He did not say, “They praised,” or “They glorified me,” but, “They were glorifying, he says, God;” for whatever was being done in me was of the grace of God. “In me,” that is, because of me. “They were glorifying God in me,” not this or that teacher, but God Himself. Since He Himself had revealed to me, and had taught me the preaching. ^C

CAPUT II. On the presenting of the apostles as witnesses for the life which is by faith.

II, 1-3. “Then after fourteen years, I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, having taken with me also Titus. But I went up according to revelation, and I communicated to them the Gospel which I preach among the Gentiles. But privately to those who were of reputation, lest by any means I might be running, or had run, in vain. But neither was Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, compelled to be circumcised.”

Of the first ascent, he said Peter was the cause; of the second, the revelation. “With Barnabas, having taken with me also Titus.” These he was leading with him as witnesses of his own preaching. “But I went up” ^D

^A according to revelation. And why did he not confer with them at the beginning, but after so many years? Because many who saw Peter and those with him—the apostles—permitting circumcision, while Paul did not permit it, were offended, as though there were a disagreement in the preaching. Therefore, the Holy Spirit revealed to him the going up to Jerusalem, so that those who were offended might be persuaded that there was no disagreement in the preaching, but rather a dispensation by which circumcision was permitted. “And I set before them the Gospel.” That is, I communicated it, I took counsel with them. “Which I preach.” That is, without circumcision. “But privately.” Because those who from among the Jews had believed in Jerusalem were offended if anyone prohibited circumcision, and Paul’s preaching abolished it, he communicated his preaching to them privately, so that he might keep them without offense. And why privately? So that by having set it before them all, I might not offend those of the circumcision who were then newly established, and cause them to depart entirely from the faith of Christ, and lose my race, and my struggle and my labor be shown to be in vain. For how is it not running and having run in vain, when, while running to save others, I again destroy them through thoughtless strictness? ^B How then does he today even refute them publicly? Because there had been more progress, and some were daring to make the dispensation into a dogma. Or the phrase “lest somehow” can be taken as a question, as being an affirmation that I do not run or have not run in vain, but that I did all things with security and providence. “To those who were for a time reputed.” The phrase “to those who were reputed” does not mean to negate that Peter and those with him were great, but as if one were to say: to those who were something, the chief ones. “Lest somehow I run in vain.” For it was not so that I might learn, “lest somehow I run or had run in vain” (for I knew from the revelation of Christ the exactitude of the preaching), but so that those who suspected there was a dissension between me and Peter and those with him might learn that I do not run or have not run in vain. “But not even Titus, who was with me, being a Greek.” He says, the one who went up with me to Jerusalem, being a Greek, that is, uncircumcised. Therefore, being uncircumcised, he was not compelled by the apostles to be circumcised, which was proof that neither Peter and those with him preached circumcision, but because of condescension to the believers from Israel, they permitted circumcision. — Otherwise. He says, not even Titus, although he was clearly born of Greek seed, did the apostles compel to be circumcised, even though they saw the false brethren present. For the phrase “but not even” must be taken to apply to what follows, for instance: But not even Titus was compelled, he says, to be circumcised, nor even because of the false brethren who had crept in. What then? Why did he circumcise Timothy, if he makes no account of the false brethren? He did not circumcise him because of them either—God forbid! But that he might gain those who were scandalized through weakness of judgment. For to those who are weak, one must condescend for the healing of the infirmity, but to those who act out of malice and an evil mind, one must not yield, not even in the slightest. For these, not only do they not need healing, but they are beyond all healing of

^A passions rooted within them; rather, they also seek to infect their neighbors with their own disease. Therefore, "We did not yield," the divine Paul declares, "not even for an hour."

II, 4, 5. "But because of false brothers, who had crept in to spy out our freedom which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage, to whom we did not yield in submission for even an hour, that the truth of the Gospel might remain with you."

And not because the false brothers were present, he says, did the apostles compel Titus to be circumcised, which was a sign that Peter and those with him were not legislating circumcision. Now, the false brothers were certain ones in the guise of Christian brothers, preaching circumcision—not as Peter and those with him did, for the sake of condescension and a certain economy, but defending the matter as a law. And whereas the apostles permitted this only among the Jews, these men made circumcision an ordinance even among the Gentiles; for these were the ones who were disturbing the Galatians. Thus, he says, not even when these men were present, whose work it was to preach circumcision, was Titus compelled to be circumcised. "Who crept in." The false brothers, he says, surreptitiously stole in, seeking to spy out our freedom in Christ, that they might ^B again subject us to the yoke of the law and to Jewish observances. For not to be subject to these he calls "freedom." See, moreover, how he showed them to be enemies who had entered for the corruption of the faith: first, by saying "crept in," signaling their secret and insidious entry; and by saying "to spy out." For one who spies, spies for the purpose of harm and treachery. And, "that they might bring us into bondage," he says. For while those with Peter permitted circumcision in order that they might gradually steal away the bondage of the law, these men did so in order to enslave. "To whom we did not yield for even an hour." For this reason, he says, we did not yield to their submission, that the truth of the Gospel preached by me to you might remain unshaken and firm. And what is the truth of it? "The old things have passed away, and if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature" (II Cor. V, 17), and that to those who are circumcised, Christ will profit them nothing. "In submission." He did not say "in doctrine," but "in submission," indicating that they were exerting themselves to make us submit and be brought back under the bondage of the law.

^C II, 6-8. "But from those who seemed to be something, whatever they once were, it matters nothing to me. God does not accept the person of man. For to me those who seemed to be something gave nothing; but on the contrary, when they saw that the Gospel of the uncircumcision had been committed to me, just as Peter’s for the circumcision (for He who worked through Peter for the apostleship of the circumcision worked also through me for the Gentiles)."

^A If Paul had openly said that they were granting circumcision by dispensation, the faithful from among the Jews who delighted in circumcision would have departed from them, because they were not receiving circumcision in truth, but by way of dispensation and condescension. Therefore, Paul does not reveal the dispensation now. Rather, he manages his argument in another way, as if he were at odds with those around Peter, saying that they will give an account to God for what they preach; and this, on account of their weakness.

"To be something." Regarding those who seemed to be great, those around Peter—whatever they are—whether they are well-pleasing to God or not, because they permit circumcision, I, he says, am not moved. For each will give an account to God, and God would not blush at them on account of their being leaders. "For God shows no partiality to man." How this has been spoken has been outlined above.

"Whatever they were." He shows that they too had already ceased granting circumcision by dispensation. For he did not say, "Whatever they are," but "Whatever they were."

"For those who seemed to be something to me, they added nothing." Regarding this, he says, it makes no difference what concerns them, because, hearing my preaching in the meantime, they added or took away nothing; but by those who "seemed to be something," he means those around Peter, who are indeed great.

"But on the contrary." Not only, he says, did they not correct anything in my preaching, but on the contrary, they even praised it. The order of the letter is as follows: "But on the contrary, when they saw that the Gospel of the uncircumcision had been committed to me,"—and after much else, the discourse returns to its tenor—"they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship." This, then, is the opposite of being corrected: the very fact of giving the right hands, which was a sign of receiving their preaching.

"The Gospel of the uncircumcision." That is, of the uncircumcised nations. See how he makes himself equal to Peter. For this was needed now, so that he might be shown to the Galatians to be trustworthy. "As Peter." ^B If Paul had said that those around Peter were practicing circumcision by dispensation, he would have appeared to be granting it himself, and in this way he would have been shown to be running in harmony with those against whom he had the task of fighting. If Peter does well by granting it, why do you not do so as well? one might say. And why do you complain bitterly about what you call a "dispensation"? Let them act and do not rebuke them, and—if it is agreeable to you—call it either a dispensation or [a matter of] dogma and accuracy. ^C These things [the Judaizers] would have thought and said against Paul, if he had said that Peter and his followers were receiving circumcision by way of dispensation. For a soul terrified and dismayed in any matter seizes upon a small and incidental opportunity, whatever it may be that presents itself, and lays claim to it and embraces it all the more. Therefore, Paul most wisely remains entirely silent about the dispensation, but rather harshly rebukes the act itself, and treats those who granted it as if they were transgressors, so that, by the severity of the rebuke regarding them, he might frighten those who were truly transgressing and correct them. For this reason, he does not shrink from calling them "those who seemed to be something," and "those who had been condemned," and "those who were acting hypocritically," and "those who were not walking uprightly," so that he might, if only for a time, confirm the preaching of Christ. Thus they were confident in one another regarding the preaching, and were bound by such a bond that they might, if it should happen, through their mutual [trust]

reproaching them as to their power of conviction, nor did he shrink from doing so. And that you may learn this accurately, observe: Paul in his Epistles reproaches Peter, and Peter in his own Epistle praises Paul, testimony that his Epistles are full of the wisdom and grace of God, and crying out that the unsteady do not grasp the meaning hidden in them, but even distort it. Furthermore, Paul, in saying these things about Peter regarding the preaching, honors and esteems him far more than himself. For what is there in the way of slander in being seen as held in esteem, and not walking aright, if you compare it to being anathema from Christ? "Of the circumcision," that is, of the Jews. ^B

"But when they knew the grace that was given to me, James and Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the circumcision, only that we should remember the poor," which I also made haste to do.

"But when they knew the grace." He produces Peter and those with him as witnesses to the grace given to him. "Who seemed to be pillars." Those who were, he says, pillars of the faith, and seemed so to all. "Gave the right hands." They made the doctrines common, he says, and took us as partners in the preaching. For this reason they also gave their right hands, signifying that they were pleased with our preaching, because it was the same as theirs. "That we should go unto the Gentiles." That we, he says, should preach to the Gentiles, and they to the Jews. "Only the poor." By dividing the preaching, he says, we have the poor as an undivided charge. Now these were the poor who had been despoiled by their own tribesmen who had not believed, because of their faith in Christ. ^C

CAPUT III. Of the altercation against Cephas concerning salvation being in faith and not in the law.

"But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation."

Paul's opposition to Peter was not a matter of conflict or reproach, but of dispensation. For since Peter and those with him in Jerusalem, by way of ^D some condescension, were permitting circumcision, wishing gradually to bring those who were from among the Jews to perfection, when he came to—

^A Antioch, as long as no believer from among the Jews was there, he would eat without distinction with those from the Gentiles who had believed; but when they arrived, so as not to scandalize them, because they were still weak, he would withdraw from eating with them. And the reason for this, as has been said, is their weakness. And the fact that Paul opposed Peter openly, and not in private, was a matter of economy, so that the believers from among the Jews, seeing their teacher Peter being rebuked openly—why he does not associate with the uncircumcised and why he does not contradict them—might know that the observance of the Law is no longer necessary after faith, but that it provided a pretext for Peter to be rebuked. And that this was arranged by economy, Paul came openly to these discussions with Peter, so that the believers from the circumcision, hearing, might change their observance of the Law; for if the truth had been anger, they ought to have discussed it with one another in private.

Otherwise. Eusebius Pamphili, in his *Ecclesiastical History*, demonstrates that this Cephas was not Peter the Apostle, but one of the seventy who bore the same name as him. And the argument is plausible. For Peter would not have needed to withdraw again, who had already defended himself concerning this in Jerusalem and persuaded everyone, when, having eaten with Cornelius, he had scandalized some of the circumcision, when he also said: "In truth, brothers, I perceive that God is no respecter of persons, but in every nation he who fears him is acceptable to him." For it was not he who had said these things who was involved here. For if he, having done this at the beginning of his preaching, persuaded everyone that he had not acted wrongly, with the Spirit leading him to this, how would he now, after so long a time, after Peter had given proof of his own virtue, have need again of such a dispensation? But the fact that he was "blamed" can also be understood in this way: "There was no other occasion for me," says Paul, "to resist him to his face and to rebuke him, than that he had been previously blamed by the Jews for eating with the uncircumcised when he ate with Cornelius." For if he had not been previously blamed by those who were scandalized there, he would not have withdrawn now. And if he had not withdrawn, there would have been no need for the rebuke, nor for the resistance to his face. But what does resistance to the face profit at all?

^D [OF THE SAME.] Because he acted opportunely in being made to say before the Jews: "We, being Jews by nature, and not sinners from among the Gentiles, knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law, except through faith in Jesus Christ, and we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the Law." Because these things were said before all, the resistance to the face occurred. Since, if there were any fault, it was necessary to reproach and correct in private, as the Lord says: "If your brother sins, rebuke him in private; but if he does not ob—

^Atemperate, then bring others and the Church also."

"For he was reprehended." ^B Peter was reprehended not because of a just cause, nor by Paul who understood the dispensation—far be it!—but by those who did not know what was being done in the way of a dispensation, and supposed that it was a simulation based on the situation itself, because when the faithful from among the Jews were absent, he would eat with the Gentiles, but when they were present, he did so no longer. You know what was written and promulgated for Cephas.

"From James." This James, called the brother of Christ, was the bishop of Jerusalem. Therefore, those who had come from him were those who had believed from among the Jews, still adhering to the Law.

"He was afraid and withdrew himself." Clearly, from the company of the Gentiles. But the phrase "being afraid" does not mean that he feared that he might suffer something at their hands, but that those who were scandalized would recoil from the faith.

"And they simulated along with him." He calls the matter simulation, so that the hidden dispensation would no longer be of benefit to the believers from the circumcision.

"And the rest of the Jews." For there were also other believers from the circumcision at Antioch, who themselves, he says, withdrew themselves from those who were from the uncircumcision, because of those who had come from James.

"But when I saw that they were ^C not walking uprightly regarding the truth of the Gospel, I said to Peter before everyone: 'If you, being a Jew, live in the manner of the Gentiles and not in the Jewish manner, why do you compel the Gentiles to judaize? We, who are Jews by nature and not sinners from among the Gentiles, knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, unless through faith in Jesus Christ. And we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law. Because no flesh will be justified by the works of the law. But if, seeking to be justified in Christ, we ourselves are found to be sinners, is Christ then a minister of sin? God forbid!'"

In the same understanding as the statement "they simulated along with him," so also was the statement "they were not walking uprightly" spoken. For he does not wish to reveal the dispensation. "Regarding the truth of the Gospel." For the truth of the Gospel is that one should neither be circumcised, nor separate oneself from the believers from the uncircumcision, since "there is no Jew nor Greek."

"Having said to Peter before everyone." You see that he blamed Peter before everyone for this reason: not that he might condemn Peter, but that he might benefit those from the circumcision, as has been said before.

"If you, being a Jew." He almost said openly to those from James: "Imitate your teacher who lives in the manner of the Gentiles," that is, without observance. For he constructs this from the conversation with Peter.

"Why [do you compel] the Gentiles?" You, he says, do not do it, nor should you compel others to do it. But why did he not say: "Why do you compel those from the circumcision to judaize?" Since it was because of them that these things were being said, and the logic of the discourse suggested that it be said in that way. He spoke like this so that...

^A he might appear to care for his own disciples, those from the Gentiles, so that the dispensation for which there was complaint might not be revealed. "We [are] by nature Jews." That is, as far as concerns our ancestors and progenitors. "Knowing that a man is not justified." Having finished the discourse in which he withstood Peter, he comes next to his proposal, gradually disparaging circumcision, and saying that one must not cling to the law, as it is unable to save. And these things, he says, were in regard to Peter; but we who are Jews by nature, that is, not proselytes (for this is what "[not] sinners from the Gentiles" means), since we have known that it is not possible to be saved through the works of the law (for great, he says, is the diligence and caution required there), we have believed in Christ, expecting, he says, to be saved through faith in him. These things are fitting to have been said both to Peter and to the Galatians. "By [the] works of the law." Because of the burden that is in it. "Since by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified." The things necessary in the law, even nature taught: for instance, "Thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal," and the rest of whatever things are of this kind. But the matters concerning the Sabbath, and circumcision, and the leper, and one emitting semen, and sacrifices, and vessels of sprinkling: these were peculiar to the law. For nature taught nothing about these. These, therefore, he calls works of the law. And of these, the transgression is sin, but the keeping of them does not effect perfect justice. For these were figures of other things, although they were nevertheless appropriate for the Jews for that time. About these the divine Apostle said, "Since by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified." — ^B "But if while seeking to be justified in Christ." If, therefore, desiring to be justified through Christ, we have been found sinners, he says, because we abandoned the law, is Christ then the cause of sin for us? Do you see how by the reduction to an absurdity he casts down the law? If therefore you cleave to the law, and wish also to be justified through Christ, you are found sinners in your abandoning the law. Is Christ therefore the cause of this for us? God forbid! He removed that absurdity by a simple negation.

"II, 18-21. For if I rebuild the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. For I through the law died to the law, that I might live to God; I have been crucified with Christ. And it is no longer I that live, but Christ lives in me. And insofar as I now live in the flesh, I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me and delivered himself up for me. I do not set aside the grace of God. For if justice is through the law, then Christ died in vain."

We destroyed, he says, or dissolved the law, by leaving it and running to Christ. If, therefore, we try to raise it up again, we are by that very fact transgressors, because we are trying to fix again that which was dissolved by us. ^D Consider, however, his prudence. They thought they were transgressors because they did not keep the law, but he shows them to be transgressors because they cling to the law,

^A adhere. "I constitute myself a transgressor." For by obeying the Law again, I show that as a transgressor I first abandoned it and believed in Christ. "For I." I, he says, by obeying the Law itself, have set myself as one dead to the Law. For the Law heralded Christ to me, and to it I am indeed dead (for I no longer conduct my life according to it), but I follow the dogmas of the latter. "Through the Law I have died to the Law." That is, through the evangelical Law, I have died to the Law of Moses. How then, having been dead and having no operative force toward it, shall I keep it? Or, through that Law itself and the burdensome observances of the things contained in it, I have become dead to sin through it. Is it therefore just to keep that which kills? "That I might live to God." That is, [to live] the immortal and ageless life. "With Christ, through baptism I have been crucified." The Law, therefore, in so far as it had power, killed, but Christ brought to life. How then should I keep the Law? "And I live, no longer I." Through the way of life that follows, through which its members were put to death. For he says, "Put to death your members which are on the earth." — "But Christ lives in me." Operating, ruling, having become everything to me; and in this He lives in me, in that nothing is done by me which is not pleasing to Him. "And the life which I now live in the flesh." And not only, he says, do I live the intellectual life because of Christ, but also the sensory [life]. How? Being under sentence because of the Law, we were destined, he says, to die even carnally, as in the deluge. But Christ made us live, having redeemed us from the curse of the Law; so that not only the intellectual life, but the sensory also, has been bestowed upon us through the faith in Christ. How then do we turn back again to the Law? "And who gave himself for me." He makes the common [gift] ^B personal, showing that each one ought to acknowledge such grace toward Christ as if He had become man for his sake alone. "I do not set aside the grace." As those who, even now, still clinging to the Law, set aside the grace which is through Christ. And to set aside is to disbelieve, to belittle, to mock. Do you see where he has led the discourse? "For if righteousness [is] through the Law." For if, he says, the Law has the power to save and to justify, Christ died in vain. For He gave Himself up for this reason, as the Law was not powerful, so that He Himself might save through His death. For if the Law saves, the death of the Lord is superfluous. ^C

CHAPTER IV.

^A in vain, if indeed it be in vain? He therefore who supplies to you the Spirit, and works miracles among you, does he do it from the works of the Law, or from the hearing of faith? Even as Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness. »

Having demonstrated that he himself was taught not by men, but by the Lord, he now teaches with greater authority, making a comparison of the Law and of faith. He calls them foolish; for it is truly foolish to depart from Christ and to adhere to the Law. « Who, » he says, « has bewitched you? » He did not say, « Who has deceived you? » lest he should heap reproach upon reproach; but, « Who has bewitched and envied you? » showing that they were performing things worthy of envy before this. « Before whose eyes Jesus Christ. » And yet he was crucified in Jerusalem. How then does he say, « Before whose eyes, » and, « among you? » He is showing the power of faith, which looks even upon things far distant. However, because he said « portrayed, » or described, namely through the writing of the preaching, it is as much as to say: The preaching indeed portrayed the cross and death of Christ for you, but you with the eyes of faith saw him as if he were present; for you believed in such a way as if you had seen the very death of Christ itself. « This only I wish to learn from you. » ^B [THEODORE] Since, he says, you do not heed such a great dispensation, I will speak a short word to you. Did you receive the Holy Spirit and perform so many powers and signs through the works of the Law, or through faith? For since you were not deemed worthy of the Spirit when you adhered to the Law, how then, having abandoned faith, do you again hold fast to the Law? « So foolish are you, » he says, that as time progresses, you run backward. For having begun by the Spirit to be made perfect (for this must be understood in a common sense), now you are being made perfect by the flesh. For they were made perfect by the Spirit when they performed signs, but now they were being circumcised in the flesh. Observe, moreover, he did not say, « You make perfect, » but, « You are being made perfect, » showing that they were letting themselves be circumcised like sheep, not even knowing what they were suffering. « Now are you made perfect by the flesh. » He called grace the Spirit, but the way of life according to the Law, flesh. « You have suffered so many things in vain. » They had been exercised by many afflictions and dangers for the sake of Christ. So many things, therefore, he says, you have suffered to no profit. For if you are being circumcised, those things have no fruit; that is, you have lost them. Then, lest he cast them into desperation, he says: « If indeed it be in vain. » For if you ^C are willing to recover, they will not be in vain. « If indeed it be in vain. » And not also with loss. For that is said to be done or to exist in vain which neither confers anything nor takes anything away. But he who began in the Spirit, and on account of that fell into many afflictions, and then changes, he has not only suffered what he has suffered in vain, but also with loss, having lost the rewards that were laid up for him on account of the afflictions suffered for Christ. « He therefore who supplies to you. » It is God, he says, who supplies the Spirit to you and who works—that is, who works the power of signs within you—who does these things through the works of the Law? he says. ^D

from the signs you have performed, you ought to know the power of faith. Moreover, look also to the forefather Abraham, for he too was justified by faith. ^A

CHAPTER V

That Abraham was also justified by faith for our type.

"Know therefore that those who are of faith, these are the sons of Abraham." And the Scripture, foreseeing that God justifies the nations by faith, preached beforehand to Abraham, saying: "In you all the nations shall be blessed." So those who are of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.

Since they were afraid to abandon the Law, lest in some way they should fall away from the kinship of Abraham, he turns the argument toward the opposite. Therefore, "that those who are of faith." These adhered to the Law most especially for this reason, reverencing its antiquity and age. He wishes therefore to show that faith is older than the Law, and that it existed before it, and that by it they highly pleased God from the beginning. "Preached beforehand to Abraham." As if telling something great—a good thing—that one is saved by faith. For this is what is signified by "preached beforehand," "In you all the nations shall be blessed." The phrase "In you," that is, "In your seed, which is Christ." ^B But how are they blessed? By faith, clearly, of which Abraham is the leader. And "in you" can also be understood as "because of the faith which is in you." The phrase "in you," as to your imitation and likeness, is interpreted by the divine Cyril in the second book of his *Commentary on Worship in Spirit and Truth*, near the beginning of the book. "So those who are of faith are blessed." Those who are united to Abraham by faith and are numbered among his seed, not those who are of the flesh.

CHAPTER VI

That the Law does not justify, but convicts, and brings a curse, which Christ releases.

"For as many as are of the works of the law are under a curse. For it is written, Cursed is everyone who does not remain in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them. ^C And that no one is justified by the law before God is evident, for the just shall live by faith. But the law is not of faith; but the man who does them shall live by them."

As many as are, he says, clinging to the works of the law are cursed. For since that frightened them into abandoning the Law—lest they come under a curse because of what is written, "Cursed is he who does not remain in the law"—he himself strives to show that those who remain in the Law are under a curse. How? Because, he says, no one fulfills the Law; therefore they are cursed; as those who have departed from the Law have been freed from the curse. "Everyone who does not remain." Therefore, those who cling to the Law are cursed, because of not ^D

could be able to fulfill the law. “Be ^A justified before God.” For perhaps some will appear just before men. “Since the just man shall live by faith.” For there is, he says, one way that justifies, that which is by faith. “But the law is not of faith,” but of works: which is manifest from this. “For the man who shall have done these things shall live in them.” Thus, through works, salvation would appear to be in the law, and not through faith.

III, 13, 14. “Christ redeemed us from the curse ^B of the law, having become a curse for us. For it is written: Cursed is everyone who hangs on a wood, so that the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.”

He resolves a tacit objection that arises. Abraham, one might say, was justified by faith for this reason, that, being before the law, he was not under the yoke of the law: so we believe faith justifies, but only those who were not in the time of the law, just as Abraham also; but we who have already been under the law, if we have broken it and are content with faith alone, who shall redeem us from the curse of the law, since it is written: “Cursed are those who have not remained in the law?” This, therefore, he resolves, showing that Christ, by His own curse, rescued us from the curse of the law. And it is well said that He redeemed. For by giving a price, in such a way that He Himself became a curse, He redeemed us from the curse of the law. Observe, however. We were liable to the curse, in that we did not fulfill the law: Christ was not liable to it, in that He had fulfilled it: and yet He took upon Himself the curse to which He was not liable, when He was suspended on the wood, so as to resolve the curse which was against us. Just as if someone should redeem those condemned to death, himself bearing the death that was impending over them. “So that to the Gentiles.” Christ, he says, voluntarily became a curse, so that to the Gentiles, that is, to those not contained under the law, the things concerning the promise of Abraham might come to pass: and they would come to pass through Christ Himself. How through Him? Since the promises were given to the seed of Abraham, and his seed is Christ. Christ, therefore, insofar as He is and is understood to be human, having received the promises by hereditary right, bestowed them upon the rest of the human race ^D that believes in Him. “So that we might receive the promise of the Spirit.” So that in this way, he says, we might receive the Spirit. For indeed, the curse was resolved by the cross, but through the faith which is in Christ, righteousness has come to be; and from righteousness the Spirit, the Paraclete, was summoned. For the Spirit also was in the promise. For by saying: “In you shall all the nations be blessed,” He promised the blessing through the visitation of the Spirit.

Caput VII. That good things are not from the law, but from promise: and the law is preparatory through conviction.

Brothers, I speak according to man. Even a man's testament, if it be confirmed,

^A no one rejects, nor adds anything to it. Furthermore, to Abraham were the promises spoken, and to his seed. He does not say, "And to seeds, as of many, but as of one: And to your seed, which is Christ." Now this I say, that the testament previously confirmed by God regarding Christ, the law which came four hundred and thirty years later, does not invalidate it so as to abolish the promise. For if the inheritance is from the law, it is no longer from promise. But God has graciously granted it to Abraham by promise.

Since, by the signs which had been performed among them, and by the descent of the Holy Spirit, and by the death of Christ, and by the fact that Abraham was saved, he had demonstrated that faith saves and not the law; now he attempts to persuade them of this by means of a human example. For the expression, "According to man," means "according to human speech and example." He rightly calls them brothers, whom he had previously called foolish. For one must sometimes sting, and at other times be gentle. "A man's confirmed testament." Observe what he wishes to establish through the example of the testament. God, he says, promised to Abraham that through his seed the nations would be blessed. Now the seed of Abraham, according to the flesh, is Christ. The law was given after four hundred and thirty years. If, therefore, he says, the law grants blessings and righteousness, then the promise and the testament of God which was made to Abraham becomes void. Furthermore, no one rejects or scorns the testament of a man; yet the testament of God is made void, and that after it had held authority for a long time, namely after four hundred and thirty years? For if that [testament] promised blessing through Christ, but the law blesses instead of Christ, then certainly the testament of God made to Abraham is rendered void. ^B "And well did he say 'confirmed'..." — PHOTIUS: For it had been confirmed by an oath. But he says "confirmed" precisely, for that which is not valid is still subject to change, just as the law itself is in relation to the Gospel. "It is superadded," that is, it adds to it. "Were spoken," that is, were promised. "Now this I say: testament." For the sake of clarity he resumes the discourse. "By God regarding Christ." For the promise verged toward Christ. For He said that through his seed the nations were to be blessed. This, indeed, is what is meant by, "In you." Now the seed of Abraham, according to the flesh, was Christ. "Which [came] after four hundred and thirty years." The four hundred and thirty years are reckoned as follows: from the 75th year of Abraham until the 100th (when Isaac was born) are counted 25 years; Isaac 60 years; Jacob 95 years (when he begat Joseph); the years of Joseph 110; the years spent in Egypt 144 (from the death of Joseph, and this is according to the translation of the Septuagint, as is manifest in the twelfth chapter of Exodus), altogether 434 years. [C/D] "For if the inheritance be from the law." He himself has interpreted this. For if the blessing has come through the law, and not through Christ, the promise and the testament of God have been abrogated and extinguished. "He has graciously granted by promise." The blessing, he says, God has graciously granted by promise, and not through the law.

III, 19-20. "What then is the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made; and it was ordained by angels through an intermediary. Now an intermediary implies more than one; but God is one."

What then is the law? As if an objection had been raised against him: "Why then," he says, "was the law given, if it has no power to save?" "Because of transgressions." It was not given in vain, he says, but that the thing which is pleasing to God might not be transgressed, so that it might at least restrain a few transgressions. "It was added." He rightly says "It was added," in order to show that the Law is not the primary exemplar, as the promises are, but was given subsequently to something else. "Till he should come." But not forever, he says, was the law given, but only until Christ should come, to whom the promise had been made that he would bless all nations. "Ordained by angels." The law was given as ordained, that is, administered and set in order through the mediation of angels, whether this means the priests, or truly the angels. "In the hand of an intermediary," he says, it was given—that is, of Christ. For he wishes to show that the law was also given by Christ, so that he might also have the authority to abolish it. For he who gave it has also the power to take it away. He calls Christ the mediator because he mediated between the Father and man, as if for friendship, and reconciled us to God, [those of us] who had become enemies. "In the hand of an intermediary." Here he calls Christ the mediator, showing that he also gave the law previously. "Now an intermediary implies more than one; but God is one." An intermediary, he says, becomes an intermediary between two parties. Whose mediator, then, is Christ? Certainly of both men and God. Do you see how he shows that he himself gave the law, and that he would also be the Lord to resolve it again? ^B

"Now an intermediary implies more than one." He says, therefore, that while Moses was indeed a mediator for the giving of the law, he was a mediator for only one nation. But he who is truly to be a mediator for all nations towards the one God must not have his mediation founded upon one nation, but upon all nations, since there is one God of all nations alike. And this one must not be a mere man like Moses, but Christ the Son of God, who is at once both truly God and truly man, and by the kinship he has with both, unites both in himself. "For he himself is our peace, who has made both one." "Implies more than one." For he did not become a mediator for one, but for God and men. And if he himself was the mediator, he himself will also save. "But God is one." If, therefore, it is necessary that a mediator must be between two or more parties who are at odds with one another, and God is one, it is clear that he acted as mediator between God and men, and reconciled us to him. If, therefore, Christ and not the law reconciled us, it is clear that Christ and faith in Christ saves, and not the law. ^C

Another. [PHOTIUS]. But God is he who gave both the law and the Gospel, and acted as mediator and reconciled the Father...

^A That is, he is the same one who is Christ. For although there are two between whom mediation takes place, yet the mediator is one; for he must also be one.

“Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid. For if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily justice would have been by the law. But the Scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by the faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.” ^B For if the promises were blessing, but the law makes [men] accursed, therefore the law was given against the promises of God, that is, to hinder them from blessing. He therefore solves this objection both by what follows and by the prohibition; for he says, “God forbid.”

Otherwise [PHOTIUS]. “Is the law then against the promises of God?” He dissolves the objection. For some might say that the law seized the justification of the promises, and was against them. But God forbid. For if it could have given life, one might deservedly think that it had been enacted against the promises, and had snatched away their justification, as being itself able to justify. ^C But since it can do nothing of the sort—neither give life nor justify—it is clear that it was not given against the promises. For these manifest their own justification, saving and justifying him who is of faith. And behold the wisdom! That which any other might have brought forward to the calumny of the law—that it does not give life, nor justify—this he himself established as a defense of the accusation and as an encomium. For on this account, he says, the law was not against the promises, because it could neither save nor justify. And not only was it not against them, but it even in a way cooperated and served them; for by the things in which it neither saved nor justified, ^D it exhorted [men] to flee to faith; and by those things through which it urged [men] to faith, it cooperated so that the promises might be fulfilled. “For if there had been a law given which could have given life.” For if, he says, the law had the power to save, there would have been no need of faith. But it was for this reason that it could not give life, in order that faith might have a place; except that it was clearing the way beforehand and leading forward like a pedagogue, and rendered us capable and receptive of faith. How then would it be against the promises of God, the one preparing the way for the promises? Therefore, it is neither possible nor reasonable to say that the law was given for the removal of the blessings, “verily justice would have been by the law.” But now, he says, it could not, in order that faith might prevail. “But it hath concluded,” that is, God permitted all to be shut up and, as it were, narrowed into sin, through his own distinct words and dispositions. “For this, the Scripture,” in order, he says, that the faith through Christ might have place. For indeed, the law, while it was being transgressed, taught men that they are sinners. But having taught them, it did not free them from sin, so that henceforth, when faith appeared, men eagerly approached it, out of a desire to be delivered from their sins. And this whole thing was done, he says, so that the promises made to Abraham, that “in him all the nations shall be blessed,” might be fulfilled through faith in Christ.

^A “But the Scripture hath concluded.” The Law, he says, as it were apprehended and shut up all under sin; it pointed them out as sinners. How? For it said, “Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.” But this was impossible. For not only did all not perform all things, but not even some of them performed all, but with difficulty did the more prominent among them perform the majority of them. So, in that they did not perform all things, they too were under the curse and sin. All therefore were shown to be shut up under sin. Wherefore, from faith alone are they able to obtain the promise. For from the Law, rather, all were shown to have been driven even into sin. [THEODORET] The divine Scripture rebuked both those before the Law and those under the Law—the former as transgressors of the law of nature, the latter of the Mosaic law. Yet it offered to both these and those an antidote: the salvation promised through faith. For again it has placed “hath concluded” ^B for “hath rebuked and convicted.”

745 III, 23–25. “But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.”

“But before faith came.” For it provided no ordinary security in that it restrained from the majority of sins. “Shut up.” Kept, he says, and guarded for the faith that was to come. How? For the Law rebuked and convicted our transgressions; but since it could not set us free, it did nothing else but make us more prompt to run to the faith that was manifested, that we might be freed from sins. “Unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.” He manifested that the faith in Christ had been preordained from of old, but now has become manifest to men, when also the incarnation [occurred]. “Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster.” Paving the way, that is, for the faith in Christ, by the fact of making known to us our sins, and making us desirous, when faith was manifested, to run to it and to the forgiveness. Wherefore the Law is not contrary to the faith. For neither is the schoolmaster contrary to the teacher, but wants the same things as he, and pre-teaches [us] somewhat of the curriculum. “To bring us unto Christ.” For just as the schoolmaster first instructs children, so that, passing on to the teachers, they might be more apt to learn and to receive the things of those [teachers], so also the Law, having first shown us the very thing of knowing that we sin, did nothing else but make us more ready, when Christ appeared, to run to him, desiring the deliverance from ^D the sins that had been made manifest to us through the Law. Most fittingly, then, was the example of the schoolmaster employed by the Apostle. “That we might be justified by faith.” For while rebuking sins and not being able to justify, it was sending us on to Christ. “But after that faith is come.” Bestowing henceforth perfection and adoption.

"We are no longer under a pedagogue." ^A For when we were infants, it was necessary to act under a pedagogue, but not so when we have become perfect. "For the proof of perfection is the being made sons to God." — "Through faith in Christ Jesus." Through the faith in Christ Jesus, for such is the syntax. Observe, however, that having first spoken of the sons of Abraham through faith, he now calls them sons of God.

^B III, 27–29. "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek. There is neither bond nor free. There is neither male nor female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you be Christ’s, then are you the seed of Abraham, and heirs according to the promise."

Since he has said a great thing by calling us sons of God, he also states the manner in which we became so. He ought, in accordance with the proposed sentiment, to have said: "As many of you as have been baptized into Christ, have become sons of God," for this is the logical consequence. But he said the same thing now in a more effective way. For if we have put on the Son of God, and, as it were, clothed ourselves in His image, it is manifest that we are also partakers of His sonship, even if He has it by nature, while we have it by adoption. "For you are all one in Christ Jesus," in that you have put on one figure and one form, namely that which is Christ’s, and have one head, namely Him, and are all consummated into one body. "In Christ Jesus," he says, for through Him we have our being, through His cross and death and grace. "And if you be Christ’s." ^C If, he says, you are the form and body of Christ, then you are deservedly the seed of Abraham. For since he said before that Christ is the seed of Abraham according to the flesh (to which seed of Abraham, therefore—that is, to Christ—the promises were given), he now summarizes this same point. If you, he says, are the body of Christ, then you are the seed of Abraham and heirs of the promise that was given to his seed; and Christ, he says, is the author of these things for us, He who fashioned us as a body for Himself, and on that account also brought us into the seed of Abraham, and not the law.

CHAPTER VIII.

IV, 1–3. "Now I say, as long as the heir is a child, he differs nothing from a servant, although he be lord of all; but is under tutors and governors until the time appointed by the father. So we also, when we were children, were serving under the elements of the world."

Why is there no difference? Because it was ordered by the father that he should govern nothing until the legitimate age. He has rightly brought in the example of the infant. For just as he, though lord of all, is prevented by his infancy from being in control of his own property, so we too, because we were once infants in mind, were prevented from being deemed worthy of the adoption of God. "When we were children." Children, he says, ^D

^A not in age, but in the knowledge of God, showing that while God indeed wished to bestow these things from the beginning—that is, the adoption—we were the cause of the delay, being infants in mind. We were left, therefore, by the permission of God, to be brought into servitude to the elements, that is, to the rotation of the sun and the moon. For we had been driven into servitude by Sabbaths and new moons and observations of days, which were kept according to the law; for the most part, he says, we were subjected to the sun and the moon, from which days, new moons, and Sabbaths are derived. And wishing greatly to bring down those things which were in the law, he did not say, "We were driven into servitude under the law," but "under the elements." ^B — [THEODORET] When, he says, we were children and imperfect, we had the law as a kind of tutor and steward. (For he called the legal observances "elements of the world.") Since day and night are called such from the sun and moon, and weeks and months and years consist of days, and the law commanded the keeping of Sabbaths, new moons, annual feasts, and the weeks of years, for this cause he said, "Enslaved under the elements," because time also is constituted from these. "Under the elements of the world." — [GENNADIUS] In the rank of tutors and stewards who instruct and moderate those who are imperfect in age for their own benefit, he included the elements of the world, to which we had been enslaved because of our imperfection in knowledge. I do not think, therefore, that he placed the sun and moon in the rank of tutors, because it would be disadvantageous to be subject to them, but he calls them "elements of the world," or the elementary and introductory law. (For he was writing to believers who were from the Jews, and he indicates both the things said a little before, and also, "If you are circumcised, Christ will benefit you nothing.") ^C He calls "elements" days, water, and fire, the observations of which were from the law that brought us into servitude. Of days, in Sabbaths, new moons, and circumcisions. Of water, in bodily purifications and washings. Of fire, in not kindling fire on the Sabbaths, but eating cold food prepared the day before. See also what Eusebius says in the fourth book of the *Evangelical Demonstration* concerning this extraordinary matter. ^D "But when the fullness of time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, that He might redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption. And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, 'Abba, Father!' So you are no longer a slave, but a son. And if a son, then an heir of God through Jesus Christ." "Whose fullness of time?" The time, he says, when it was necessary for Christ to come. For the time of the coming of Christ had been foreordained by the prophet Daniel, which received its end under the reign of Caesar Augustus, when the dispensation of Christ in the flesh took its beginning. "Born of a woman." Therefore he did not say "born *through* a woman," so that you would not imagine that there was a passage through

her, but rather that he took his body from her. "Made subject to the law." In this way he was made subject to the law, because he was also circumcised, in order that, he says, he might redeem those who were under the law and subject to the curse, both by the cross and by the fact that he subjected himself entirely to the law. "That we might receive the adoption of sons." For he not only freed us from evils, by releasing us from the curse of the law, but also granted us adoption. And by saying, "We might receive," he indicated that it was owed from above, but that we were not able to receive it, because of the infancy of our understanding. "And because you are sons." ^B And from where, he says, is it manifest that we were deemed worthy of adoption? From where? From the Spirit of adoption. Which has descended, preparing us and teaching us (this is what is meant by "crying out") to call God "Father," which would never have been, had we not been deemed worthy of adoption. And henceforth take courage, O man, because you are no longer a slave, but a son of God and his heir. Through his own natural Son who was incarnate and who clothed himself in our entirety, you are no longer a slave and under the yoke of the law. How then would it not be absurd for those who have become sons of God, through both Christ and the Spirit, to return again to the law? And observe the indication of the Holy Trinity. The Father sent, the Son became incarnate, and the Spirit cooperated, who also, having entered into our hearts, teaches us to say, "Abba, Father." "And an heir of God through Christ." Through his cross and his death.

IV, 8-12. "But then indeed, when you did not know God, you served those which by nature are not gods. But now after you have known God, or rather have been known by God, how do you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements, to which you desire to serve again from the beginning? You observe days and months and seasons and years. I am afraid for you, lest perhaps I have labored among you in vain. Become as I am, for I also am as you."

He discourses against those who were from the Jews, showing that the observing of days and months and seasons and years, and those things of which the observance was in the law, is idolatry. ^C For this, he says, is nothing other than to worship the sun and the moon, from which the days have their observance. And he said this from an abundance of caution, desiring that they withdraw from the law. For those who were preaching circumcision were also preaching such observations as well. "Or rather have been known by God." For you, he says, did not find God by your own labor, but he himself drew you to himself while you were living in error. "How do you turn again?" He discourses about the sun, the moon, and the stars, from which there were the observations of the days. He calls them "beggarly" and "weak," as having no ^D power. But the word "again" has great emphasis: after adoption, he says, and after having been known by God.

OF OECUMENIUS

^A or the stars?) But it is because they are devoid of intellect, life, and sense. "You observe days." From this it is clear that the false apostles were preaching not only circumcision, but also the observance of these things; they took their starting point from the Law, but then strayed even from the Law. "I am afraid." Observe his tender heart; they are wavering, and Paul is afraid. The words "lest perhaps" signify that they are still standing and have not yet suffered total shipwreck. And he gives them hope, that if they wish to recover, the labor spent on them will not be in vain, as if he were saying: "Remember my labors and sweat on your behalf, and do not make my toil useless." "Become as I am." The discourse is still directed to those who were from the Jews. "Become," he says, "my imitators, because I too, having left the Law, ran to the faith." For indeed, I myself, he says, was as you are, observing and highly esteeming the Law. "For I also was as you." I too loved the Law intensely, but see how I have been changed. "Emulate," he says, "this change in yourselves."

VI, 12-17. "Brethren, I beseech you, you have done me no wrong. But you know that because of the infirmity of the flesh I preached the Gospel to you before; and your trial which was in my flesh you did not despise, nor did you reject, but you received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus. Where then is your blessedness? For I bear you witness that, if possible, you would have plucked out your own eyes and given them to me. Have I therefore become your enemy because I speak the truth to you? They zealously court you not well, but they wish to shut you out, that you may zealously court them."

^B He beseeches them, considering their salvation his own. He recounts their benefits and the honors with which they had honored him, and how they had held him in high esteem, wishing thereby to establish that the reproaches spoken by him against them now were not said because of any hostility or hatred (for how, he says, could I have an inimical mind toward you, by whom I was held in such high regard?), but because the things said were those of one who cared for them and loved them. "But you know that because of infirmity." That is to say, with bodily weakness, that is, with bonds and stripes and prisons, which I endured at the hands of those who opposed the preaching. "I preached the Gospel." What am I saying, he asks, that you did me no wrong? Rather, you showed great honor toward me. For I was preaching to you while being scourged and suffering persecution (for these are what he calls the "infirmity of the flesh"). Yet seeing me suffer these things, you were not scandalized by me, nor did you reject me. For "the trial of me," he says, "that was in my flesh" — calling the stripes, the ^D prisons, and the persecutions a "trial" once again — "you did not despise. But you received me as an angel of God." How then is it not absurd, he says, that having received me when I was being persecuted and driven out as an angel, indeed as the Lord Himself, you should now reject him who is counseling and exhorting you to those things that concern

your salvation? ^A “What then was it?” This—what was it—is not the question of one who does not know, but rather one who is admiring and extolling that blessedness which was once yours, and the reward laid up for it. What was it? How great it was! It is to be marveled at, he says: from what a state of blessedness have you fallen! Or consider it as a question: “What was it?” Remember, he says, what your blessedness was. For I used to call you blessed in the highest degree. But now, what is the case? I rebuke you. Therefore I am hated. And why do I rebuke you? For the sake of your salvation. For if this were not the reason, how would I, who praised and called you blessed, have descended to blaming you, when you had provided no other excuse? “Your blessedness.” What was, he says, your blessedness, whereby I and many others called you blessed on account of your obedience and subjection to the Gospel? What then was it, he says; for now I do not see it. Where, he says, are the deeds of faith that were worthy of such zeal? For he has used “what” in place of “where.” ^B “That you would have plucked out your own eyes.” I know, he says, that you once considered me dearer than your own eyes for the sake of the Gospel. “So have I become your enemy?” I see, he says, no other cause for this hatred than that I deliver to you the true doctrines that lead to salvation, for which you ought rather to have increased your love toward me. “They zealously seek you.” They do not, he says, embrace in you the same faith in Christ to a good end, but rather that, having shut you out from this, they might persuade you to follow themselves; for this whole thing has been devised by them solely for your deception. “Not well.” For there is a good zeal, when one is so zealous that he imitates virtue. There is also an evil zeal, when one is so zealous that he casts out the virtuous man from his virtue. “But they want to shut you out.” They wish, he says, to shut you out and lead you away from the true knowledge, so that finally, having become your masters, they might lead you to their own zeal and imitation. For this reason they lead you away from true knowledge, but lead you to the Law. ^C It is good, however, to be zealous in good things always, and not only when I am present with you. My little children, with whom I am in labor again until Christ is formed in you. But I could wish to be present with you now and to change my tone, because I am at a loss about you. ^D He wishes to show that these men, who are now subverting them and urging them to cling to the Law, and in this way preparing them to become their own zealots and imitators, were formerly zealous for them in the knowledge of the Gospel, when Paul was present with them and teaching them. It is good, therefore, he says, to be zealous for what is good, not only in my presence, but always. He shows that they were deceived on account of his absence. “My little children.” Even if, he says, you have corrupted the form of Christ and the image that was in you, nevertheless you are still my little children. He calls those “little children” who are small and not yet born, or infants who are aborted and in need of birth. For this reason he did not say “sons,” but “my little children.” “Until Christ is formed in you.” You have corrupted, he says, the image of Christ in you, with which you had been clothed through baptism (for as many

baptized in Christ, you have put on Christ, and have lost ^A His form and being His members: there is need, therefore, of another generation, that which again imprints upon you the divine form of Christ. What then? Again I am in labor for you through teaching. I beget you again through instruction, until the divine form of Christ is again imprinted within you. What then do the Novatians say to these things? For behold, he clearly writes these things to those who are believers. "Whom I travail in birth with until the great and excellent characters of the divinity of Christ are shaped in your mind." ^B "I could wish to be present with you." Consider the force of his love. "Litterae," he says, "are not enough for me; I could wish to be present with you and to change the doctrine of words which I now deliver to you into lamentations and complaints, just as I taught you through lamentations." For I am at a loss as to what I should say about you. Whence does it happen that, having been so uplifted by the knowledge of the Gospel, you are now cast down and dragged upon the ground, again clinging to the law? "And to change my voice." To lament the degeneration of the former, but to praise with admiration the firm perseverance of the latter.

CAPUT IX

That those who were prefigured by the natural wife of Abraham and his legitimate son ought not to serve the law.

IV, 21-24. "Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law? For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by a bondwoman and one by a free woman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh; but he who was of the free woman, through promise: which things are spoken by allegory."

"Answer me," he says, "you who desire to be under the law." Well does he say, "you who desire," for the matter was now one of their unseasonable contention. "Do you not hear the law?" For what does it say about itself? For Genesis brings forward the testimony: for it is his custom generally to call the whole Old Testament the law. Do you not hear the law, that is, the book of Genesis? And see what he prepares. If you desire, he says, to hear the law, depart from the law: for thus you will obey it. The same law persuades you to be separated from the law itself, ^C if you know what is contained therein. If, therefore, you obey it, depart from it. Observer, however, the proof. "Abraham had two sons." He wishes to show that those who are the seed of Abraham by carnal kinship, namely the Jews, are kinsmen according to the flesh, but those who are brought into the seed of Abraham through faith, that is, the Christians, are the seed of Abraham according to the promise. But even then, he says, Ishmael, who was a son according to the flesh, was cast out, just as now the Jews, who are his kinsmen according to the flesh. But the son according to the promise, Isaac, he says remained in the house, just as now, he says, the kinsmen according to the promise, the Christians. Do you see that the law knows of the casting out of those who clung to it alone, that is, the Jews? "But he who was of the bondwoman." Deservedly he says that Ishmael was according to the flesh: for by the law of nature ^D

of the flesh he was born. ^A For Isaac, not by the law of the flesh (for how could he who was a hundred years old have begotten?) but solely through the promise. [Photius:] Do not, therefore, let the fact that you are kinsmen of Abraham according to the flesh puff you up and persuade you that you are his heirs, for if you are not born as children of the promise of Abraham—that is, as members and body-joined with Christ, for he is the seed of Abraham by promise—you are outside the promise. "Which things are allegorized;" that is, the births of these two children were types of the future testaments. For not only the things that are seen, but also other things do the births proclaim. "This is what is allegorized," that is, understood in another way. He does not abolish the history, but teaches what was prefigured in the history. For he adds: ^B

Chapter IX

For these are the two testaments. One indeed from Mount Sinai, begetting into bondage, which is Hagar. For Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia. And it corresponds to Jerusalem. But it is in bondage with her children. But the Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. For it is written: Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for many are the children of the desolate more than of her which hath the husband.

Mount Sinai is in Arabia. There the law was given to Moses. It borders on Jerusalem. ^C This very Mount Sinai, in the language of the Arabs, is called Hagar. And, he says, thus: Hagar and Sarah were types of the two testaments. The bondwoman is a type of the Old Testament, in that it also begets servants of the law. But the free woman is a type of the New Testament, in that she brings forth those free from the yoke of the law. For, he says, because Mount Sinai, where the law was given, borders on Jerusalem, and in the language of the Arabs it is homonymous with Hagar the bondwoman—being also called Hagar—so that even from the name the type attains to the truth. "Begetting into bondage." Clearly to the law. "Which is Hagar." Which, he says, the testament has as a type. And thus: because Mount Sinai is called Hagar in the language of the Arabs. "Corresponds," that is, touches, borders on. ^D "To the Jerusalem that now is." For instance, the one here on earth. So that from the one above and free, both places are separated. "But it is in bondage." This, he says, the old testament which was given on Mount Sinai, is in bondage along with her children the Jews; and it serves the law. "But the Jerusalem which is above." The type of Hagar, in these, behold; and also the type of Sarah. And the type of her is the Jerusalem above, that is, the heavenly one. For that city of the faithful is free from the observances that were in the law, and is our mother, he says. So Hagar fulfills the type of the old one and of the Jews. But Sarah, of the new and of us. And he also called the Church "Jerusalem which is above." "For it is written." And so, he says, Sarah was a type of the Jerusalem above, that is, the Church: because she herself, being barren and childless, as the Church from the nations once was, until...

^A overcame Hagar in her seed, that is, in the multitude of her offspring, and the Church overcame the synagogue. And Isaiah is a witness to these things, saying: "Rejoice, O barren one who does not bear." The Church from the nations is what Isaiah exhorts to cry out with joy. "Break forth," he says, whether into birth from barrenness, or into a voice of joy. "For many are the children of the desolate." He calls the Church from the nations desolate and barren. For she was indeed desolate and lacking every good thing before she believed in Christ. "Than of her who has a husband." He calls the synagogue of the Jews "having a husband," that is, a director, governor, and provider, either because she had the law or because she formerly enjoyed the expectation of God.

^B IV, 28-31. "But we, brethren, are children of promise according to Isaac. But as then he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so also now. But what does the Scripture say? Cast out the handmaid and her son; for the son of the handmaid shall not be heir with the son of the free woman. So then, brethren, we are not children of the handmaid, but of the free woman. Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage."

Not only was the Church barren like Sarah, nor did she only have many children afterward like her, but she also gave birth just as she did. For Sarah did not give birth by the law of nature, but by divine grace; nor does the Church give birth to children by the law of nature in the laver of baptism, but by divine grace. Do you see how the figure corresponds to the truth in all things? "According to Isaac." For we were not born according to nature, but according to grace, like Isaac through the promise. ^C [THEODORET.]—Let not even this distress us, that those who have believed are persecuted by the unbelievers. For we find something of this kind also in the figure; but he did not prevail against Isaac in any way. By imitation, he says, of Isaac, we were born by promise. Since, therefore, we are of the free woman, we ought not to serve the law of Moses. "But as then." Even from the fact that the faithful were enduring persecution from the Jews (for they were being persecuted at that time), he shows that the figure also corresponds to the truth. For Ishmael, who was born according to the flesh, persecuted Isaac, who was born according to the Spirit and the promise. "But what does the Scripture say?"

In what preceded for the explanation of that part, "Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law?" we said that Paul was proving that the law itself, that is, the Old Testament, had previously commanded us to abandon the law and Judaism; and behold, this has now been demonstrated. ^D For since Hagar and Ishmael were a type of the Jews and the old law, while Sarah and Isaac were a type of the faithful and the New Testament; and since in the Old Testament itself Hagar and Ishmael were cast out (for he says, "Cast out the handmaid and her son"), it is evident that the casting out of the Jews was depicted in advance within that very Old Testament. Do you see that one ought not to cling to the law?

of the law? Because those who trusted in it were cast out? Behold, therefore, the Old Testament itself, by its own force, counseled that one should not hold to the law, by casting out those who ^A walked only in it—that is, the Jews. For if it were intended for all time to walk in the law and the Old Testament, Hagar and her child would not have been cast out, for they were a type of the Jews. Only Isaac inherited, who was a type of those who have believed in Christ. And again, she was cast out not only for the persecution, but also so that she might not become a participant in the inheritance. "So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman." If therefore we are not children of the bondwoman, ^B nor slaves, why do we subject ourselves to the slavery of the law? We are not, however, because Hagar was not a figure of us, but of the Jews. For Sarah is a figure of us. "With the liberty with which Christ has liberated us." The law enslaved; Christ, however, has liberated us from the curse of the law. It is necessary, therefore, he says, to stand in the liberty given by Christ. But saying "Stand fast" indicates that they were wavering. "And do not be subject again to a yoke." By "again" he indicates their lack of perception. ^C And by saying "yoke," he shows the weight of the slavery of the law.

CHAPTER X

That our calling is not subject to circumcision and law because of Christ’s passion.

"Behold, I, Paul, say to you, that if you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. And I testify again to every man who is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. You are made void from Christ, you who are justified in the law; you have fallen from grace. For we in spirit, by faith, wait for the hope of justice. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails anything, nor uncircumcision: but faith that works by charity. You did run well; who hindered you, that you should not obey the truth? This persuasion is not from him that calls you."

"Behold, I, Paul." He used the authority of his name in place of any demonstration. "Christ shall profit you nothing." For what reason? Because he who is circumcised clearly appears to despise the grace of Christ, believing that he will be saved by the law. He, therefore, who does not believe in Christ, cannot be saved by Him. "That he is a debtor to do the whole law." Besides this, he says, that they are helped in nothing by Christ—which is more miserable than a thousand hells—this also happens, which such persons have added to themselves. For he who has observed the law in one particular will have a necessity to observe it in all things, since all things follow one another as if interconnected. But what is more burdensome than legal observances? "You are made void from Christ." You have been cut off, you have fallen away from Him; the things of Christ and His grace will henceforth bring you no utility. "You who are justified in the law." This is, you are eager to be justified: as if he were saying, "You who are eager to be justified by the law, you have fallen from grace, and you will not even be justified by the law." "For we in spirit..." That is, we who are believers,

^A we do not expect to be saved by the law, but by the supervention of the Holy Spirit. "We await the hope of righteousness." We expect to be saved by a portion of grace. It is well stated, "from faith." For it is necessary that we should offer our faith, and thus receive justification through the Spirit.

"Neither does circumcision avail anything." He refers to circumcision, not that which was practiced before faith, as if he were saying: Those who inscribe themselves into the New Testament will sustain no harm from uncircumcision, just as they will derive no benefit from circumcision. "But faith working through love." For it is not sufficient merely to believe in Christ, but this faith must be worked and preserved and, as it were, rekindled ^B through love for Christ. He hints that those who have believed, yet do not love Christ, have deserted to the law. "Who hindered you?" The word "Who" is not that of one asking, but of one lamenting, as if he said: You had arrived at perfection; what has happened? Who has had such power as to hinder you from obeying the truth of the Gospel? "A persuasion, of course" — that is, the being persuaded by those who tell you to be circumcised. "Not from Christ who invites you to His own faith." As if he said: You were not called by Christ for this purpose, that you should obey those who counsel such things. For it is proper to God to call, but to the hearer to obey. ^C

V, 9-12. "A little leaven ferments the whole lump. I have confidence in you through the Lord, that you will think nothing else. But he who disturbs you, whoever he may be, shall bear the judgment. But I, brethren, if I still preach circumcision, why am I still persecuted? Then the stumbling block of the cross has been abolished. Would that those who unsettle you would even mutilate themselves."

Lest they say: Why do you rebuke us so strongly, since we observe only one precept of the law? He says: One? And what is that to the point? "A little leaven ferments the whole lump." For just as that mixes the whole lump, he says, so also will circumcision bring you into complete Judaism, if you do not correct yourselves. "I have confidence in you through the Lord." I take courage concerning you, he says, I take courage in the Lord that you will correct yourselves and will think nothing other than my teaching. This itself serves to exhort. "But he who disturbs you." You indeed will be changed, yet those who led you into this will not for that reason escape ^D punishment, but will pay and suffer this condemnation. "But I, brethren, if I still preach circumcision." Because they were hurling insults at him, saying, "He is a hypocrite, in one place he says he is persecuted by the Jews, and you know it. If, therefore, I preach circumcision, it is futile for me to be persecuted." What then? Did he not circumcise Timothy? But we say this was done by a certain dispensation, so that he might be easily accepted by the Jews. Observe, he did not say, "If I have performed circumcision," but, "If I preach it." For, he says, what was done by dispensation should not be brought into a doctrine

be received by the Jews. Observe, moreover, that he did not say, "If I practiced circumcision," but, "If I preach it." For he says, do not take what was done as a dispensation to be used as a pattern. The stumbling block of the cross is therefore abolished ^A. "Altogether," he says, "if it is necessary to be circumcised, and I preach this, the contention of the Jews which was against the cross is resolved, and there is no longer any fighting between them and it." For now they hate the cross for this very reason, that it destroys circumcision and the Law. "I wish that they were even cut off." My concern is for you, but as for those who unsettle you, I regard them as those who are incurably sick, and no longer as people for whom I have any hope. And so, let them not only be circumcised, but I wish they had also made themselves eunuchs. "I wish." I wish, he says, that those who bring you the impostures of circumcision had cut themselves off.

CHAPTER XI.

An inscription of the liberty which is according to the Spirit.

^A heresies, envyings, murders, drunkennesses, revelings, and the like. Concerning which I tell you beforehand, just as I also foretold, that they who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

"Walk in the Spirit." By the Spirit, he says, live and conduct yourselves according to those things that please Him, and you shall not fulfill the desire of the flesh. "For the flesh lusts against the Spirit." By flesh here he means carnal and wicked desires. By Spirit, he means the grace of the Holy Spirit, which is directed toward virtue. And he says: Vice is opposed to virtue, and virtue in turn is opposed to vice, fulfilling the role of a certain pedagogue and not allowing us to walk according to our wicked desires. Otherwise: Virtue is opposed to vice so that, when vice provokes, the carnal will ^B does not immediately rush headlong toward sin, as if unleashed and bridleless. Again, vice is opposed to virtue, so that the labor of virtue does not become entirely easy and devoid of reward, as if it followed from nature and necessity, and as if it were brought into action by mere thought without any effort or struggle. But he says this briefly: "So that you may not do the things that you wish," meaning that you may neither do evil things easily and entirely without hindrance, nor do good things easily and altogether negligently; for things that are done in such a way could not even be good. "But if you are led by the Spirit." If, he says, you walk according to the will of the Holy Spirit, you will not err. He who does not stumble in anything is in no need of the law or of counsel sought from ^C the law. But he who has no need of the law is not under the law, which is also what he says elsewhere: "The law is not laid down for the just." "Now the works are manifest." As if he were saying: From the very fruits you will recognize a wicked and base way of life. Again, by "flesh" he refers to corrupted reasoning and a worldly and carnal life. "The works of the flesh." It is evident, therefore, that by "flesh" he calls it the carnal mind—that is, the inclination of the soul toward the worse—and by "spirit" the given grace. "Impurity, licentiousness." By impurity and licentiousness, he means shameful modes of fornication. "Enmities." Unjust ones, that is; for there are also just enmities, which are assumed for the sake of the faith. "If it is possible," he says, "as far as it depends on you, live in peace with all men," so that it is evident that sometimes it is not possible. ^D "Jealousies." For it is not necessary to be jealous or to envy, but to rejoice with those who rejoice, and to weep with those who weep. "Contentions." This is strife born of a quarrel. "Cavillations." It is—for this is where the word *kōmos* (revelry) is derived—when with drunkenness one mocks the opinions of others. "They shall not inherit the kingdom of God." For the present, they all fall away from the kingdom; yet there will also be a diversity of punishments.

V, 22-26. "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faith, gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law. And those who are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. Let us not become desirous of vainglory, provoking one another, envying one another."

^A He said "fruit" and not "work," to show that it requires the help of God in order to bear fruit. "Of the Spirit"—that is, of the Paraclete himself, or of the spiritual and virtuous life. "Joy"—to rejoice in God, to have a good conscience; for such are they who rejoice. "Against such there is no law"—for he who has achieved these things has no need of a law that tutors him, for he is higher than it. "But those who are Christ’s [have crucified] the flesh." Then, lest they might say, "And who does these things?" he says: These are they who do these things, who have crucified the flesh of Christ—that is, their own body (for the flesh of Christ is our own body)—and have, as it were, put it to death against carnal passions. And they have crucified not only the body, as far as the passions are concerned, but the passions themselves, as far as their being fulfilled by them is concerned. According to this interpretation, the word "but" [δέ] is added as a redundant particle. ^B Or in another way: And why, he says, do I recount the species of virtues one by one? For there are some who have crucified themselves as regards the passions, and the passions as regards themselves. According to this interpretation, it is not a redundant particle, but the meaning is, "those who are Christ’s"—that is, those who stretch their own flesh—have crucified it. Thus Clement in the fifth book of the *Hypotyposes*. And the word "but" can also be understood as equivalent to "these indeed"—that is, to be inferred: [Photius] These are indeed they whom I have spoken of, who have crucified the flesh of Christ, and so on. "If we live in the Spirit." We therefore ought also to live according to the will of the Spirit. Once we are about to crucify our flesh, "Let us also walk in the Spirit," he says; that is, let us be content with the grace given by the Holy Spirit, and let us not seek to be saved by the Law. "Let us not become desirous of vainglory." For this is the cause of all evils. "Provoking one another." Into contentions, clearly. "Envying one another." For from vainglory comes envy, and from envy, countless evils.

"Brethren, if a man is overtaken in any trespass, you who are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness, considering yourself, lest you also be tempted. Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ." ^C Many ^D who are defeated by an ambitious love of preeminence were indulging that passion in the reproof of the faults of their neighbors; this he corrects, saying: "If any man," he says, "is overtaken in a sin." For this is what "overtaken" ["προληφθῇ"] means. "You who are spiritual"—that is, those who live according to the spirit—"restore"—that is, correct—such a one. Then, casting out the love of preeminence, he says: "in a spirit of gentleness"—that is, in gentleness, which is a gift of the Holy Spirit. "Considering yourself." Then, lest he who is correcting someone become puffed up, he says: Consider also [yourself] and watch yourself, lest you be caught by the same things. "Bear one another’s burdens." For since it is not possible for a man to be without sin, he advises not to be overly precise in questioning the sins of one's neighbor, as one who knows that you also have sins, and that we ought to bear with one another. "And so fulfill the law of Christ."

^A That what is lacking in me may be completed by another who bears with me; and thus, while everyone reaches out a hand to his neighbor, the commandments of Christ are fulfilled. — [PHOTIUS] For the law of Christ was shown to be such through works. For He Himself took up our sins and bore our diseases. And this is the hyperbole, that He even accepted the cross and death for our sake. — [OECUMENIUS] Or, because bearing one another's burdens and shortcomings is, in this, a fulfillment of the law of Christ, insofar as it is done out of love. And love is the fulfiller ^B of the divine law. — "For if anyone thinks himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceives his own mind. But let each one test his own work, and then he will have his boasting in himself, and not in another. For each one will bear his own load. Let him who is taught the word share with him who teaches in all good things." — "For if anyone thinks he is something," it is for this reason alone that he is nothing, because he thinks he is something. Therefore, being nothing, he deceives himself. — "But let each one test his own work." If someone tests his own work and examines himself accurately, he will have his boasting in himself rather than against another; that is, he will have his boasting against himself, as it were, he will judge himself and not others. ^C He will have his boasting in himself, meaning that, seeing himself diminished and lacking, he will blame himself and refrain from judging others, knowing himself, and that he does not always preserve the same manner of life, but sometimes even falls away from it. — "Let each one test himself." Let each one examine his own deeds which he has carried out in life. For doing this, he will prepare himself for better things. This is not the command of one imposing a law, but of one condescending. For it is not necessary, he says, to boast. But if you must, at least do not boast against your neighbor as the Pharisee did, but against yourself. — Otherwise: If you wish to boast, he says, consider your own life; and if you find it blameless, boast of it to yourself, if indeed you ought to do this at all. "For each one will bear his own load." Why, he asks, do you boast against your neighbor? Both you and he will bear your own load. "And then the work of each will be tested." — "Let him share." He commands those who enjoy spiritual things to dispense carnal ones. "He who is taught the word." He who is instructed, he says, let him share with his instructor food, goodwill, and honor. For this is what he means by, "in all good things." Rightly, however, he said "share" ^D and not "give," for this is a kind of communion: he contributes spiritual things, but you, who are taught, contribute carnal things. — "Do not be deceived, God is not mocked. For whatever a man sows, that he will also reap, for he who sows to his own flesh, from the flesh he will reap cor-

corruption; but he who sows to the Spirit shall from the Spirit reap eternal life. And let us not grow weary in doing good. For in due season ^A we shall reap, if we do not lose heart. Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all, and especially to those who are of the household of faith. “God is not mocked.” He is not deceived, He cannot be imposed upon, He does not repay evil for good, or again good for evil. For the harvest must necessarily correspond to the seed. And no one who sows tares can reap wheat. “For he who sows to his own flesh.” What does one sow in the flesh? Drunkenness, gluttony, indulgence, debauchery. Such a one, from the flesh, that is, on account of the flesh which sinned, shall have punishment there. And the phrase “from the flesh” means, by reason of the sins sown in the flesh. “But he who sows to the Spirit.” What does one sow to the Holy Spirit? What else but almsgiving, and temperance, and every virtue? “From the Spirit he will reap eternal life.” For just as the seeds of the flesh and of the Spirit are different, so too is the harvest. There is corruption, here is eternal life. “Let us not grow weary,” nor lose heart, because the recompense is in the future. For there shall be a time that will surely come, when we shall receive good things, and reap what is now sown by us in goodness. Then, since He made mention of harvest, which requires labor and toil, He added, “Do not grow weary,” as if to say: He who reaps then does not labor, nor does he grow weary, as one does in this world. Do not, therefore, upon hearing of a harvest, suppose that you will also have to toil then. For in sensory ^B things, the sowing entails labor, and the reaping the same. For the reaping and the heat of the season often exhaust the reapers; but that harvest is not such as that. For it is free from labor and sweat. For this is what He meant by “Do not grow weary.” — [PHOTIUS] Or “Do not grow weary,” that is, do not become sluggish, nor desist from doing good. For the crown belongs to those who struggle to the end. “As we have opportunity.” For in this life is the time for work, but there no longer is. “Do good to all.” To Jews, to Greeks, but especially to those who are believers.

CHAPTER XII.

^A to write the letter with my own hand, that my autograph might be laid aside as a confession, that I do not preach circumcision, as they who slander me say. “As many as desire to make a fair show in the flesh.” As many, he says, as desire to be well-regarded by men, these compel you to be circumcised. Which men? Either by the Jews, as those who hold fast to the ancestral law, or by those outside, as using you as their disciples. For “in the flesh,” that is, in men or among men. “They desire you to be circumcised.” They wish to have others circumcised also, so that they may not be harassed and persecuted because of the Cross and the faith. But if it is “they are guided,” you shall understand it thus: They do everything and wish to please men, only so that they may not be ruled and guided by the faith. “For they who are circumcised.” He shows that they do the whole thing out of vainglory. ^B For they, he says, who are circumcised and circumcise you, do not do this as those who keep and observe the law, but so that they may have an occasion of boasting from the fact that they circumcise you. For this is what he means, “In your flesh,” that, he says, they may be teachers, and have you as disciples.

VI, 14-18. But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world; for in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. And whosoever shall follow this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God. From henceforth let no man trouble me; for I bear the marks of the Lord Jesus in my body. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit, brethren. Amen.

He deprecates it as something miserable. What, then, is the glorying? That for our sake, unworthy as we are, He deigned to be crucified. For this is the source of our glorying. Therefore, let it be my glory to glory in the cross of Christ, which to the unbelieving seems even to be a source of reproach. “By whom the world is crucified unto me.” By world, he means worldly things, namely, the praise and glory that is sought by men. As far as I am concerned, therefore, all these things are dead. Then, exaggerating the matter, he said: And I am dead to these things; by a double mortification, indicating their flight and utter uselessness. “But a new creature.” All things, he says, are a new creation. For all of us who have believed, whether circumcised or having uncircumcision, have become a new creature, with the old man buried, and ourselves regenerated in the laver of baptism. “And whosoever shall follow this rule.” As many, he says, as shall be content with this rule and doctrine, namely, that all things are a new creation, and do not subject themselves to the law. “And upon the Israel of God.” Israel is the faithful people, as one who sees God. As for the unbeliever, even if he descends from Jacob, he is cast out of the kinship that is towards Him. “From henceforth let no man trouble me.” He does not say this as one shunning, God forbid; but wishing to keep the laws he set forth ^D

to be immovable, as if he were to add or subtract nothing further. ^A — [Phot.] "Let no one cause me trouble." Let no one call me to a defense of what I do. For I have, even while silent, a greater defense, which is situated in my works. For the stigmata of Christ—that is, the wounds and scars I suffer for Christ—these cry out, as well as the course and the zeal I have undertaken for his sake, and the unfeigned, pure, and unconcealed nature of my preaching. "Let no one cause me trouble." How long, he says, do you, while you waver, bring upon me afflictions and troubles? Be swayed, if not by anything else, then at least by the stigmata of Christ, which I bear in my body for your sake and for the sake of the preaching to you. By saying "the stigmata of Christ," he at the same time brings to mind that he too suffered for our sake. And so it is meet in every way to depart from the Law and to be firmly established in the faith. "The stigmata of Christ." By stigmata he means the stripes and the wounds inflicted for the Lord and for the sake of the preaching. "I bear in my body." It is as if he were saying: Let no one slander me among you as a hypocrite. ^B For these wounds and these stripes, inflicted on account of the Lord, provide witness that I conduct my life without hypocrisy. For he was being slandered, as if everything he did were done out of dissimulation—at one time preaching circumcision and at another not. "With your spirit." With your inner directing mind. He prays that grace may come to the soul.

The end, with God's help, of the Epistle to the Galatians. It was written from Rome.

ARGUMENT OF THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS

^C He sends this from Rome, not yet having seen them, though he had heard about them. The occasion for the Epistle was this: The Ephesians, having believed in our Lord Jesus Christ, had an ingenuous faith in him and love for all the saints, and they wished to be confirmed by Paul. ^D When the Apostle had learned this, he wrote this Epistle to them, as it were, for their instruction. And first he shows that the mystery which has been enacted in our regard is not something new, but that it was from the beginning and before the foundation of the world the good pleasure of God, so that Christ for

us might suffer, and we might be saved. ^A Afterwards he discourses on the calling of the Gentiles, in order to show that they believed worthily. And he demonstrates that our calling came to pass not through man, but through Jesus Christ, who is the Son of God, so that from this fact they might also learn that they did not become worshippers of men when they believed in Christ, but true worshippers of God. He signifies also that Jesus was sent for this reason, to preach the Gospel, and that these things were his concern. Then he adds to the Epistle exhortatory discourses to husbands and wives, parents and children, masters and servants: and universally he confirms all against the devil and his demons, saying that our struggle is against them; and like ^B a good trainer of athletes, he anoints all with his words against the diabolical efficacy, and thus concludes the Epistle.

THEODORET

Ephesus was a metropolis of Asia, but it worshipped Diana. And so vehement was the worship of this demon that they even declared Ephesus to be a temple-warden of Diana, as is written in the Acts. In Ephesus itself, John the Evangelist, after his relegation, spent much time, in which he also died—and Paul ordained Timothy as bishop there. The philosophers who flourished throughout Asia resided especially in Ephesus; wherefore he used great care when writing to them, and writes to them deeper thoughts, which are sublime even for those who are instructed in the faith. ^C He writes the Epistle from the city of Rome, while he was in chains.

CHAPTERS OF THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS

1. Concerning our election, introduction, and perfection in the Lord. 2. A prayer for the knowledge of the goods introduced to us through Christ. 3. Concerning the reconciliation of the Gentiles and Jews to God through Christ, in hope according to grace. 4. Concerning the divine wisdom given to him for the illumination of the Gentiles and the refutation of demons. 5. A prayer for the Church for the power and love of God. 6. An exhortation concerning unifying love, even if the gifts ^D are divided for common utility. 7. Concerning prudence and justice, which render us conformable to God. 8. That we ought to live in a manner worthy of sanctification, refuting vices by works, not words, being filled with the Spirit through psalms, not with wine. 9. An arrangement of domestic duties for those who are governed and those who govern according to Christ. 10. Concerning the power which is according to Christ, in the manner and habit of armor.

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE EPHESIANS

CHAPTER ONE

Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints who are at Ephesus and to the faithful in Christ Jesus: grace unto you and peace from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with all spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ: just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him in love.

“By the will of God.” Note that “by” is said of the Father. ^B “To the saints who are…” Consider how great the virtue was at that time, that he should call worldly men saints and faithful. “Grace unto you.” It is with good reason that he begins with grace, for it is through grace that God is the Father of men, and through grace that the Son gave Himself as a ransom for us. “Who has blessed us with all blessing.” This is said in contrast to the Jewish blessing; for that was rather carnal, whereas ours is spiritual. And well does he say, “With all,” for you have become immortal, sinless, a child and brother of God, and a co-heir. Your firstfruits are to be adored by the Cherubim. [PHOT.] He blessed us, through the Son; He chose us, through the Son; He graced us, through the Son. But how through the Son? O, the wonder! By His blood, he says. Do you see the riches of grace? Or rather, the overflowing and ineffable mercy? Nor only these things, but He also made known to us the mystery of His will. By whom was this? This too was through the Son. All things are through the Son, with the concurrence of the Father’s good pleasure. For the Father’s will is in nothing separated from the beloved Son. ^C And since he has spoken of the mystery being made known to us, he mentions adoption again, saying, “Through whom we have also been allotted.” For those who are adopted as sons are deemed worthy to inherit of the adoption, which has been brought about through the Son and was foreordained, with the good pleasure and the Father’s will present. And this has come to pass, in order that ^D