what shall I say, what shall I think? Whence comes it that you, who had ascended to the very heights of heaven, and by the signs you displayed through your faith, have now suddenly been brought down to such a state of imperfection as to be dragged toward circumcision and the sabbaths, and to hang upon the opinions of the Judaizers? For this cause, he also says at the beginning: "I marvel that you are so quickly shifting," and here: "I am perplexed about you," A as if he were to say: "What am I to say? What am I to speak? What am I to think? I am at a loss." Hence also there is a need to lament, which the prophets also do in hopeless situations. This is not a small form of therapy—not only to counsel, but also to mourn. For this too he said when speaking to the Milesians: "For three years I ceased not to admonish you with tears" (Acts 20:31). This is what he says here also, saying: "To change my voice." For in straits and in difficulties that happen beyond expectation, being overcome, we turn at last to tears. Since, therefore, he has rebuked and shamed them, and has then again applied healing, he has lamented; and this lamentation is not only of rebuke, but also of cajolery. For it neither hardens, as rebuke does, nor does it relax, like the healing, but it is a mingled remedy and has great power for exhortation. Since, therefore, he has lamented and softened their minds, and drawn them to himself all the more, he enters again into the struggles, placing a greater head B of argument, showing that the law itself does not wish to be kept. Then, indeed, he brought the example from Abraham, but now he brings in the law itself, exhorting them not to keep it, but to depart from it—which was more powerful. So that if you wish to be obedient to the law, he says, depart from it; for this is what it itself wishes. But he does not say it exactly in this way; rather, he constructs it differently, mixing in history. "Tell me," he says, "you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law?" Well did he say, "you who desire," for the matter rested not on the sequence of events, but on their untimely contentiousness. By "the law" here he means the book of the creation, which he frequently does, naming the entire Old Testament thus. "For it is written," he says, "that Abraham had two sons, one by the bondwoman, and one by the free woman." Again he goes back to Abraham, not to repeat himself, but because the patriarch’s glory was great among the Jews, he shows that from thence the types had their beginning, and present things were foreshadowed in him. And first, having shown that they were sons of Abraham, since the patriarch’s sons were not of the same worth—but one was from the slave, the other from the free woman—he shows finally that they are not only sons, but are sons in such a way as the free and noble-born. Such is the power of faith. "But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh; but he of the free woman through promise." What is "according to the flesh"? Since he was saying that faith joins us to Abraham, and it seemed unbelievable to the hearers that he should call those who were not born of him his sons, he shows that this paradox came from above. For Isaac was not born according to the sequence of nature, nor according to the law of marriages, nor according to the strength of the flesh, C and he was a son and a genuine one, having sprung from dead bodies and from that womb. For neither did the flesh produce the conception, nor did the seed produce the birth; for the womb was dead, both because of her age and because of her barrenness, but the Word of God fashioned him. In the case of the slave, it was not so; rather, he is bound by the bonds of nature and the custom of marriage. But nevertheless, he who was not born according to the flesh was more honorable than he who was born according to the flesh. Let it not, therefore, disturb you that you were not born according to the flesh; for it is precisely for this reason that you are his kin, because you were not born according to the flesh. For this does not make [men] more honorable, but even more dishonorable; for that birth which is not according to the flesh and is more spiritual is more wonderful, and this is evident from those born of old. For Ishmael was born according to the flesh, but he was a slave, and not only this, but he was even cast out of his father's house; but Isaac, who was born according to promise, as he was a son and free, was lord of all. "Which things are allegorized." He called the type an allegory catachrestically. What he says is this: This history does not only signify what appears, but it also declares other things; hence it is called an allegory. And what did it declare? Nothing other than all present things. "For these," he says, "are the two covenants, one indeed from Mount Sinai, bearing children into slavery, which is Hagar." "These"—who? Of the children; their mothers, Sarah and Hagar. What are "the two covenants"? Two laws. But since there were names of women in the history, he remained in the designation of the class, and from the names he shows the great sequence of events. D And how from the names? For the name Hagar, he says, is Mount Sinai in Arabia. The slave was called Hagar; and Mount Sinai is so interpreted in their native tongue. 4. So that all who are born from the Old [Testament] must be slaves. For that mountain, where the Old Testament was given, takes on a like name in the slave, as does Jerusalem; for this is what it means: "It is ranked with the present Jerusalem." That is, it is a neighbor, it touches it. "And it is in slavery with its children." What then follows from this? That not only was she a slave, and bore slaves, but this too—that is, the covenant of which the slave is the type. For indeed, Jerusalem lies next to the mountain that is of the same name as the slave; and on this mountain the covenant is also given. Where then is the type of Sarah? "But the Jerusalem above is free." Consequently, those born of her are not slaves. The type of the Jerusalem below was Hagar, and it is evident from the mountain so called; but the type of the one above is the Church. But nevertheless, he is not satisfied with the types, but he also adds Isaiah as a witness to what has been said; for having said, "The Jerusalem above is our mother," and having called the Church thus, he shows the prophet voting for the same things as himself: "For he says, 'Rejoice, O barren woman who does not bear; break forth and cry out, you who are not in labor, for many are the children of the desolate more than of her who has the husband.'" Who then is the barren woman, and who was she who was desolate before this? Is it not clear that she is the Church from the Gentiles, [once]—of God's knowledge [index: entries preserved]
But who is she who has a husband? Is it not clear that this is the synagogue? And yet the barren woman surpassed this one in the multitude of her children, since that one had only one nation, but the children of the Church fill Greece, Barbary, the earth, the sea, and indeed the entire world. Do you see how what was done by Sarah, and what was said by the prophet, prefigured for us the things to come? But consider this also: Isaiah called her barren, and showed her to have become the mother of many children. This happened in a typical way in the case of Sarah, for she too, being barren, became the mother of a numerous offspring. But even these things were not enough for Paul, and he inquires into how the barren woman also became a mother, in order that he might thereby accommodate the figure to the truth; and therefore he adds, saying: B *We, however, brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise*. For the Church was not only barren, like Sarah, and did not only become the mother of many children like her, but she also gave birth in the same way. For as it was not nature, but the promise of God that made that woman a mother (for He who said: *I will return according to this time, and Sarah shall have a son* [Gen. XVIII, 10], the same entered into the womb and fashioned the infant), so also our regeneration is not of nature, but the words of God, which the faithful know, pronounced by the priest in the laver of water, as in a womb, form and regenerate him who is baptized. If, then, we are children of the barren woman, and we are free—and what, someone might say, is this freedom, when the Jews were indeed constraining and scourging those who had believed, while those who were thought to be free were being afflicted by persecutions? For these things were happening when the persecution of the faithful was burning. But do not let this trouble you, he says, since this too happened beforehand in a figure; for Isaac also, while being free, endured persecution from the slave Ishmael. And therefore he subjoins, saying: C *But as then he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the spirit, so it is now*. *But what says the Scripture? Cast out the son of the slave-woman: for the son of the slave-woman shall not be heir with the son of the free-woman*. What then? Is this the consolation, to have shown that those who are free suffer persecution from slaves? By no means, he says; for I do not stop here, but hear what follows, and then you will receive a consolation sufficient to ease the faint-heartedness of those under persecution. What then are the things that follow? *Cast out the son of the slave-woman: for the son of the slave-woman shall not be heir with the son of the free-woman*. Do you see the signs of a temporary tyranny and an untimely arrogance? The boy is cast out from his father's possessions and becomes both an exile and a wanderer along with his mother. Now consider with me how wisely these things were said. For he did not merely say, "He persecuted," and therefore he was cast out, but, *That he might not become heir*. For he did not take this punishment upon him because of the temporary persecution (for that was a small thing and irrelevant to the matter), but he did not permit him to become a sharer in the goods prepared for the son, signifying that even if the persecution were removed, this had been destined for him from the beginning—a thing which does not take its beginning from the persecution, but from the will of God. Nor did he say, "The son of Abraham shall not be heir," but, "The son of the slave-woman," adding his title from a more ignoble race. But Sarah was barren, for the Church gathered from the Gentiles was such. Do you see how the figure is preserved in all things? For as she, when she had not given birth through all the previous years of her life, becomes a mother in extreme old age, so also this one, when the fullness of time came, brings forth. D Moreover, the prophets had predicted this, saying: *Rejoice, O barren one, who does not bear, break forth and cry, you who are not in labor, for many are the children of the desolate one, more than of her who has a husband* (Isai. LIV, 1). Although she did not know God, yet when she knew Him, she conquered the synagogue of numerous offspring. *Therefore, brethren, we are not children of the slave-woman, but of the free-woman*. He moves and turns all these things, studying to show that what has been done is not recent or new, but has been prefigured long ago and before many ages. Is it not therefore absurd for those chosen and made partakers of freedom for so many ages to surrender themselves voluntarily into the yoke of slavery? After these things he adds another cause, which persuades them to persevere in the dogmas.
CHAPTER V
For in freedom, he says, Christ has set you free, stand fast. Do not ensnare yourselves again in a yoke of slavery. By the name of "yoke" he indicates the burden of the matter to them; and by saying, "again," he shows their great senselessness. For if you had not experienced this burden, you would not be equally blameworthy; but if, having known by experience how heavy the weight of this yoke is, you subsequently submit yourselves again to it, what pardon could you deserve? *Behold I, Paul, say to you, that if you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing*. See what terrible threats. Rightly, therefore, he also anathematized the angels. But how shall Christ profit them nothing? For He Himself did not approve this, but declared it, because henceforth the authority of his person was sufficient for any proof (and therefore he anticipated by saying: *Behold I, Paul, say to you*: which was the expression of one confident toward those to whom he was speaking); we, as best we can, will add what we hold.
A How will Christ profit him that is circumcised? He who is circumcised is circumcised as one fearing the law; and he who fears, lacks faith in the power of grace; and he who lacks faith, gains nothing from that in which he lacks faith. Or again, in another way: he who is circumcised makes the law his master; and thinking it to be his master—and in the greater part transgressing it, while keeping it in the lesser part—he again subjects himself to a curse; and in subjecting himself to the curse, and thrusting aside the freedom that comes from faith, how can he be saved? For if it is permitted to say something even paradoxical, such a man believes neither in Christ nor in the law, but stands in the middle, wishing to gain from both here and there; for which reason he will gain nothing from anywhere. B Then, having said that he will benefit nothing, he brings in the proof enigmatically and in a few words, speaking thus: *And I testify to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law*. For so that you might not think these things were said out of enmity, he says: I do not speak to you only, but *to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law*; for the legal requirements are linked to one another. And just as one who has signed himself over to be a slave from a free man no longer does what he wills, but is held by all the laws of slavery; so also in the case of the law, when you have taken upon yourself a little bit of the law, and have brought yourself under the yoke, you have dragged in the whole lordship. This is also true as regards an inheritance from without: he who has touched nothing is free from all the matters to which the deceased was liable; but if he manages some little thing, even if he does not inherit everything, he has rendered himself liable for everything by that part. This occurs also in the case of the law, not only for the reason I have stated, but also for another: for the legal requirements are linked one to another. What do I mean? Circumcision has sacrifice joined to it, and the observance of days; the sacrifice again has the observance of days and of place joined to it; the place, a thousand ways of purification; the purifications introduce a kind of swarm of varied observances. For it is not permitted for the unclean to sacrifice, or to enter into the holy of holies, or to do any other such thing. Therefore, the law draws many things along through the one commandment. If, therefore, you are circumcised, but not on the eighth day, or on the eighth day but without a sacrifice, or with a sacrifice but not in the appointed place, or in the appointed place but without the legal requirements, or with the legal requirements but not being clean, or being clean but not purified with the proper rites, all those things perish. For this reason he says that *he is a debtor to do the whole law*. If the law is master, do not keep a part, but the whole; and if it is not master, do not keep even a part. C *You have fallen away from Christ, you who are justified by the law; you have fallen from grace*. Since he has established the facts, he now pronounces judgment, and on the danger of the precipices that exist at the end. For when he who runs to the law cannot be saved from that side, and has fallen from grace, what is left for him other than unavoidable punishment, since one has failed him, and the other does not receive him? After having thus increased their fear, and shaken their mind, and shown the shipwreck which they are about to endure, he opens wide the harbor of grace near at hand for them; which he does everywhere, demonstrating that salvation from that source is the easiest and most secure. Therefore, he adds, saying: *For we through the Spirit, by faith, wait for the hope of righteousness*. We need none of those legal requirements, he says; for faith is sufficient for us to provide the Spirit, and through Him, righteousness, and the many and great goods. *For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails anything, nor uncircumcision, but faith working through love*. Do you see how he now stripped himself for the contest with greater confidence? For he who has put on Christ, let him no longer be busy with these things, he says. And yet he was saying that circumcision is harmful; how then does he call it indifferent here? It is indifferent for those who already had it before faith, not for those who are circumcised after faith. See also where he cast it out, placing it alongside uncircumcision. For that which makes the difference is faith. Just as, therefore, if you were choosing athletes, whether they be hook-nosed or snub-nosed, whether black or white, these things make no difference for the test, but you must look only to see that they are strong and skilled; so also for him who is to be enrolled into the New Testament, these bodily things harm nothing, just as they do not benefit, if they be present. And what is, *working through love*? He struck them with a great blow here, implying that this intrusion happened because they were not rooted in the love for Christ; for it is not just the believing that is required, but also the remaining in love. As if he were to say: If you loved Christ as you ought, you would not have defected to slavery, you would not have abandoned Him who ransomed you, you would not have insulted Him who set you free. He hints here also at those plotting against them, showing that even they, if they had love toward the others, would not have dared to do these things. He wishes also to correct their lives by this point. *You were running well; who hindered you?* This is not the voice of one judging, but of one at a loss and lamenting. How has such a race been interrupted? Who is it that has been so powerful? D You are in a position superior to all, and being in the order of teachers, you did not remain in the order of disciples. What has happened? Who has been so powerful? These are the words of one calling back and lamenting all the more, just as he said before: *Who has bewitched you?* *The persuasion is not from Him who calls you*. The One who calls you did not call you to these things, so that you should be so tossed about; He did not enact these things as laws, so that you should Judaize. Then, so that no one might say: Why do you inflate the matter so much and speak of terrible things? We have kept only one commandment of the law, and do you make such a din? Hear how he frightens them, not from things present, but from things future, saying thus: *A little leaven leavens the whole lump*. So also this little thing, he says, is powerful for you.