Galatians 4:28–5:10

For not alone upon Abraham's account did He say these things, but also that He might point out how all who have known God from the beginning, and have foretold the advent of Christ, have received the revelation from the Son Himself; who also in the last times was made visible and passable, and spake with the human race, that He might from the stones raise up children unto Abraham, and fulfil the promise which God had given him, and that He might make his seed as the stars of heaven, as John the Baptist says: "For God is able from these stones to raise up children unto Abraham." Now, this Jesus did by drawing us off from the religion of stones, and bringing us over from hard and fruitless cogitations, and establishing in us a faith like to Abraham. As Paul does also testify, saying that we are children of Abraham because of the similarity of our faith, and the promise of inheritance.

If, then, God promised him the inheritance of the land, yet he did not receive it during all the time of his sojourn there, it must be, that together with his seed, that is, those who fear God and believe in Him, he shall receive it at the resurrection of the just. For his seed is the Church, which receives the adoption to God through the Lord, as John the Baptist said: "For God is able from the stones to raise up children to Abraham." Thus also the apostle says in the Epistle to the Galatians: "But ye, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of the promise." And again, in the same Epistle, he plainly declares that they who have believed in Christ do receive Christ, the promise to Abraham thus saying, "The promises were spoken to Abraham, and to his seed. Now He does not say, And of seeds, as if [He spake] of many, but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ." And again, confirming his former words, he says, "Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. Know ye therefore, that they which are of faith are the children of Abraham. But the Scripture, fore-seeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, declared to Abraham beforehand, That in thee shall all nations be blessed. So then they which are of faith shall be blessed with faithful Abraham." Thus, then, they who are of faith shall be blessed with faithful Abraham, and these are the children of Abraham. Now God made promise of the earth to Abraham and his seed; yet neither Abraham nor his seed, that is, those who are justified by faith, do now receive any inheritance in it; but they shall receive it at the resurrection of the just. For God is true and faithful; and on this account He said, "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth."

One might ask how he speaks of the Galatians, whom he had called fools. He accused them of starting in the Spirit and finishing in the flesh. When the apostle called them "sons of promise" in the way that Isaac was, he meant that he did not completely despair of their salvation and judged that they would return again to the Spirit, in which they had begun, and become sons of the free woman.

(Verse 28.) But we, brethren, are children of promise according to Isaac. It is of no difficulty of understanding that the Apostle and those like him are said to be children of promise according to Isaac. But because Origen, explaining this passage, thus presents the example of the Apostle: But you, brethren, are children of promise according to Isaac, it is asked how he now calls the Galatians, whom he had called foolish and said had begun in the Spirit, to finish in the flesh, children of promise according to Isaac? Therefore, we say that the Apostle calls them children of the promise according to Isaac, because he does not completely despair of their salvation, and he believes that they will return to the spirit with which they had started, and become children of freedom. Even though they were born according to the flesh, they are children of the slave woman.

It is not merely that the Church was barren like Sarah, or became a mother of many children like her, but she bore them in the way Sarah did. As it was not nature but the promise of God which rendered Sarah a mother, [for the word of God which said, "At the time appointed I will return unto thee, and Sarah shall have a son," (Gen. 18:14.) this entered into the womb and formed the babe,] so also in our regeneration it is not nature, but the Words of God spoken by the Priest, (the faithful know them,) which in the Bath of water as in a sort of womb, form and regenerate him who is baptized.

Wherefore if we are sons of the barren woman, then are we free. But what kind of freedom, it might be objected, is this, when the Jews seize and scourge the believers, and those who have this pretence of liberty are persecuted? for these things then occurred, in the persecution of the faithful. Neither let this disturb you, he replies, this also is anticipated in the type, for Isaac, who was free, was persecuted by Ishmael the bondman. ...

Not only was the Church barren as Sarah was, nor afterwards did she have much offspring like her, but it was begotten in the same manner. For Sarah did not bear Isaac by the law of nature, but by divine grace. Nor does the Church give birth by the law of nature in the baptismal font, but by divine grace. Do you see how the type in every respect agrees with the truth?

"according to Isaac." For we were not begotten according to nature, but according to grace, as Isaac through the promise.

He says, "But we, brothers, are children of the promise according to Isaac." Therefore being free, we ought not to be enslaved under the law of Moses.

We were born not according to nature but according to grace. For, just as in Isaac's case, it was not the law of nature but that of the gospel that fashioned us. Thus the promise given to Abraham engendered us.

The Church, he says, being barren like Sarah, not only became the mother of many children, as she did, but also gave birth in the same manner as she. Just as it was not nature but the promise that made her a mother (for He Who said, "I will return to you at this same time" (Gen. 18:10) entered the womb and formed the fruit), so also with us, as was said above, the divine words pronounced at baptism accomplish a new creation.

Having disclosed the mystery as to the mothers, he now discloses it as to the sons.

First, he differentiates between the sons;

Secondly, he sets down the main conclusion (v. 31).

He distinguishes the sons on three counts:

First, as to the manner of origin;

Secondly, as to the feeling of love (v. 29).

Thirdly, as to their right to the inheritance (v. 30).

The manner of origin, according to which the sons of Abraham are born, is twofold: one is by origin according to the flesh, as Ishmael, of the bondwoman; the other not according to the flesh, as Isaac, of the free woman—not because he was not born in the way of nature, but because, as has been said, it was beyond the natural power of the flesh for a son to be born of a barren old woman. Two people are understood by these two sons: by Ishmael is understood the Jewish people, who derived from Abraham by carnal propagation; but by Isaac, the people of the Gentiles, who descended from Abraham by imitation of his faith. Hence he says: "Now we, brethren," i.e., the faithful, both Jew and Gentile, as Isaac was, i.e., in the line of Isaac, "are the children of the promise" that was made to Abraham: "They that are the children of the promise are accounted for the seed" (Gen 21; Rom 9:8). But note that the children of Abraham according to the flesh are, literally, the Jewish people; but, mystically, the ones who come to the faith for the sake of carnal and temporal goods.

Ishmael, the elder brother, persecuted him while still a nursing infant, claiming for himself the prior right of circumcision and the inheritance of the firstborn.… And it is aptly said that he who is born according to nature persecutes the spiritual. The spiritual one never persecutes the natural one but forgives him like an untutored brother, for he knows that he may progress.

(Vers. 29-31.) But as then he that was born according to the flesh persecuted him that was born according to the spirit, even so it is now. But what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free. In this liberty Christ hath made us free. I do not think it impossible to find where Ishmael persecuted Isaac; but only this, that when the son of the Egyptian, who was elder, played with Isaac, Sara was indignant, and said to Abraham: Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with my son Isaac. (Gen. XXI, 10). And certainly, a simple game among children is unworthy of expulsion and abandonment. But the Apostle, like a Hebrew among Hebrews, and instructed at the feet of the teacher Gamaliel, who once restrained the raging Pharisees against the Lord by council, understood from the words of Sarah saying: for the son of the maidservant will not inherit with my son Isaac, that that simple game was not. But because perhaps Ishmael, as the older one, and at that time already circumcised when he could understand and feel what he suffered, claimed for himself the right of the firstborn, the Scripture called the quarrel of the little ones a game. Unable to bear these words, Sarah, not enduring the custom of the firstborn claiming the rights of a slave woman's son from a young age, burst out in a voice: Cast out the slave woman and her son, for the son of the slave woman shall not inherit with my son Isaac. When this seemed harsh to Abraham (for greater things are always due to the firstborn), not only did Ishmael cease to be the firstborn, but he did not even receive an equal portion with his younger brother: God, who wanted the free woman to be inside and the slave woman to be expelled, confirms Sarah's words and speaks to Abraham: Let it not be harsh in your sight concerning the boy and the slave woman. Everything that Sara tells you, listen to her voice: for it is through Isaac that you will have descendants. Just as in the past, the older brother Ishmael persecuted the infant Isaac, claiming the privilege of circumcision and the rights of the firstborn; so now, according to the flesh, Israel (formerly Ishmael) rises up against the younger brother, the Christian people from the nations. Let us consider the foolishness of the Jews, who killed the Lord, persecuted the prophets and apostles, and opposed the will of God; and we will see much greater persecutions, as History also teaches us, stirred up by the Jews against the Christians than by the Gentiles. Do we marvel at the Jews? Even today, those who are born again in Christ and live spiritually are persecuted by those who still live in the flesh. And as they rise with Christ, they seek the things that are above, not the things that are below. Let them do what they want: let them persecute Isaac with Ishmael; let them cast out the bondwoman and her Egyptian mother. They will not inherit the promise, which only those who are born of the promise will obtain. And elegantly also, he who is born according to the flesh persecutes the spiritual. For the spiritual does not pursue the carnal; but forgives him as to a country brother: he knows that he can improve over time. And if at any time he sees the Egyptian son angry, he remembers the one father who created light, cattle, and mosquitoes: and in a great house, there are not only golden and silver vessels; but also wooden and earthen vessels. Therefore, let us say with the Apostle Paul: We are not slaves of the son, but free (2 Timothy 2); and being renewed in Christ, let us hear the words of the Lord speaking to the Jews: If you abide in my word, you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free (John 8:31, 32). The Apostle, liberated by this freedom, used to say: 'For although I am free from all, he who sins is a slave of sin' (I Cor. IX, 19). He, knowing himself free from all vices, from every desire and error, rightly rejoiced in the freedom of Christ saying: 'We are not slaves, but free: in this freedom Christ has set us free' (John VIII, 34).

What! does all this consolation consist in showing that freemen are persecuted by bond-men? By no means, he says, I do not stop here, listen to what follows, and then, if you be not pusillanimous under persecution, you will be sufficiently comforted. And what is it that follows? "Cast out the son of the handmaid, for he shall not inherit with the son of the freewoman." Behold the reward of tyranny for a season, and of recklessness out of season! the son is cast out of his father's house, and becomes, together with his mother, an exile and a wanderer. And consider too the wisdom of the remark; for he says not that he was cast forth merely because he persecuted, but that he should not be heir. For this punishment was not exacted from him on account of his temporary persecution, (for that would have been of little moment, and nothing to the point,) but he was not suffered to participate in the inheritance provided for the son. And this proves that, putting the persecution aside, this very thing had been typified from the beginning, and did not originate in the persecution, but in the purpose of God. Nor does he say, "the son of Abraham shall not be heir," but, "the son of the handmaid," distinguishing him by his inferior descent. Now Sarah was barren, and so is the Gentile Church; observe how the type is preserved in every particular, as the former, through all the by-gone years, conceived not, and in extreme old age became a mother, so the latter, when the fulness of time is come, brings forth. And this the prophets have proclaimed, saying, "Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not; for more are the children of the desolate than of her which hath the husband." And hereby they intend the Church; for she knew not God, but as soon as she knew Him, she surpassed the fruitful synagogue.

— [THEODORET] Let this not trouble us either, that those entrusted are driven out by the unbelievers. For we find something of this kind also in the type, but it in no way prevailed against Isaac. [end of the excerpt by Theodoret] —

"Yet as at that time." And from that very fact that the faithful were persecuted by the Jews (for they were then persecuted), he shows the pattern to be true. For even Ishmael, who was born according to the flesh, persecuted Isaac, who was born according to the Spirit and the promise. ...

Then, lest someone say: what kind of freedom is this, when the Jews scourge the believers, and those who think themselves free are subjected to persecution? — he says that it was the same way back then too. Ishmael persecuted Isaac, but nevertheless this in no way prevented the one being persecuted from being the lawful son of Abraham and the master of the one persecuting. Thus, from this very persecution of us by the Jews, our likeness to Isaac and our kinship with Abraham is revealed.

Secondly, they are distinguished according to affection, because "he that was born according to the flesh persecuted him that was after the spirit." But this raises a difficulty. First, because it is not recorded that Ishmael persecuted Isaac, but only that they played together: "When Sara had seen the son of Hagar, the Egyptian, playing with Isaac her son, she said to Abraham: Cast out this bondwoman and her son" (Gen 21:9). I answer that the Apostle calls this playing a persecution, because there is deception when an older person plays with a younger one; since the older person, in playing with the younger, intends to deceive him. Or, as some say, Ishmael compelled Isaac to adore the clay images he fashioned. By this he was teaching him to be turned from the worship of the one God; and this was a considerable persecution, since it is a greater evil to cause spiritual death than bodily. Furthermore, in Genesis this is called a game because he did this under the guise of a game.

There is another difficulty, namely, how the children according to the flesh persecuted and do persecute the children according to the spirit? The answer is that from the beginning of the early Church the Jews persecuted Christians, as is obvious in the Acts of the Apostles, and they would do the same even now, if they were able. Now, however, those who are carnal persecute spiritual men in the Church even as to the body; those, namely, who seek glory and temporal gain in the Church. Hence a Gloss says that "all who seek from the Lord earthly aggrandizement in the Church pertain to this Ishmael. They are the ones who oppose those who are making spiritual progress and slander them. They have iniquity in their mouth, and craft and deceit on their tongues." But the ones who spiritually persecute the spiritual sons are the haughty and the hypocrites. For sometimes they who are plainly carnal and evil recognize their guilt and humble themselves before the good; but the foolish persecute in others the goodness they themselves lack.

A further question arises from the fact that heretics whom we persecute say that they are the ones born according to the spirit and we according to the flesh. I answer that there are two kinds of persecution: the good one is that in which a person persecutes another to lead him back to good. And this is what just men do to evil men, and spiritual men to carnal men; either to correct them, if they want to be converted, or, if they are obstinate, to destroy them, lest they contaminate the flock of the Lord. The other type of persecution is evil, namely, when a person persecutes another in order to pervert him; and this is what those who are born according to the flesh do to those who are born according to the spirit.

"Since, when we were children," says the same apostle, "we were kept in bondage under the rudiments of the world. And the child, though heir, differeth nothing from a servant, till the time appointed of the father." Philosophers, then, are children, unless they have been made men by Christ. "For if the son of the bond woman shall not be heir with the son of the free," at least he is the seed of Abraham, though not of promise, receiving what belongs to him by free gift. "But strong meat belongeth to those that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil." "For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness; for he is a babe," and not yet acquainted with the word, according to which he has believed and works, and not able to give a reason in himself.

Above, where the chapter was being interpreted, that: "you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law," (Gal. 4:21) we said this was contrived concerning Paul, namely that even the law itself, that is the old covenant, seemed to need to permit the law and Judaism, and behold it has been demonstrated. For when Hagar was a type of the Jews and of the old law, and Sarah and Isaac of the faithful and of the new covenant, in that very old covenant Hagar and Ishmael were cast out (for, he says, she cast out the bondwoman and her son), plainly in that very old one the expulsion of the Jews was foreshadowed. Do you see that one ought not to hold to the law? Because those who trusted in it were cast out? Behold then that even the old covenant in its power counseled not to hold to the law, to cast out those who adhere only to it, that is, the Jews. For if one must always conform to the law and the old covenant, Hagar and her child, who were a type of the Jews, would not have been cast out. Isaac alone inherited, who was a type of those who trust in Christ. And again, she was not cast out merely because she was persecuted, but that she might not become a sharer of the inheritance.

By "the words of Scripture" he means those spoken of Sarah explaining the goal of the Scripture, for the sake of which he has written these things afresh, so that after the truth the type also may be explained.

Lest someone say: so what of it? Is it consoling for believers, who are now being persecuted by the Jews, that Isaac too was persecuted back then? – he says: listen to what Scripture says, and you will receive instruction: for the temporary persecution that Ishmael inflicted on Isaac, he is completely cast out. And as punishment he not only suffers banishment, but much more – he is deprived of participation in what has been prepared for the son. And this punishment is all the more severe because it has its origin not in the persecution, but in the decision and decree of God. Note also that the one who was not deemed worthy of the inheritance he called the son not of Abraham, but of the bondwoman, indicating that he is also of very lowly origin. So then, look, he has proven that the law itself points to its own abolition, since everything that was said, being a foreshadowing of what is now taking place, is written in the law, that is, in the books of the Old Testament.

Finally, as to their right to the inheritance, they are distinguished by the authority of Scripture: "Cast out the bondwoman and her son" (Gen 21:10). By this we are given to understand that the Jews and persecutors of the Christian religion, as well as carnal and evil Christians, will be cast out from the kingdom of heaven: "Many shall come from the east and the west and shall sit down with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven" (Mt 8:11); "Without are dogs and sorcerers" (Rev 22:15). Furthermore, the bondwoman, i.e., vice and sin itself, will be cast out: "Every work that is corruptible shall fail in the end" (Sir 14:20). The reason for all this is added, "because the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the free woman." For in this world the good are mingled with the wicked and the wicked with the good: "As the lily among thorns, so is my love among the daughters" (Cant 2:2). But in the eternal fatherland there will be only the good. In Judges (11:2) it is said to Jephtah: "Thou canst not inherit in the house of our father, because thou art born of a harlot."

We were therefore sons of the slave woman when we were liable for our sins. But, having received the remission of sins from Christ, we have been made free.

Let us consider whether we should say that the righteous people of old were children of the slave woman or the free. But God forbid that they should be the slave woman's. If therefore they are the free woman's, they belong to the new covenant in the Holy Spirit, whose life-giving power the apostle contrasts with "the letter that kills."

He turns and discusses this on all sides, desiring to prove that what had taken place was no novelty, but had been before typified many ages ago. How then can it be otherwise than absurd for those who had been set apart so long and who had obtained freedom, willingly to subject themselves to the yoke of bondage?

"Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the bondwoman." If then we are not children of a bondwoman, nor of slaves, how do we submit ourselves to the servitude of the law? We are not, since Hagar is not our example, but of the Jews. For Sarah is our example.

Nay, rather banish quite away from your "free" head all this slavery of ornamentation.

All of this is directed toward showing that everything that has now happened to us was prefigured many years before. How then, after this, is it not strange, having received freedom so many years before, to voluntarily become slaves again?

This freedom we obtain from Christ; hence he says, "by the freedom wherewith Christ has made us free": "If therefore the son shall make you free, you shall be free indeed" (Jn 8:36).

Civilisation in the best sense merely means the full authority of the human spirit over all externals. Barbarism means the worship of those externals in their crude and unconquered state. ... The true savage is a slave, and is always talking about what he must do; the true civilised man is a free man and is always talking about what he may do. Hence all the Zola heredity and Ibsen heredity that has been written in our time affects me as not merely evil, but as essentially ignorant and retrogressive. This sort of science is almost the only thing that can with strict propriety be called reactionary. Scientific determinism is simply the primal twilight of all mankind; and some men seem to be returning to it.

They all wore tall shiny hats as if they could not lose an instant even to hang them on a peg, and they all had one eye a little off, hypnotised by the huge eye of the clock. In short, they were the slaves of the modern bondage, you could hear their fetters clanking. Each was, in fact, bound by a chain; the heaviest chain ever tied to a man—it is called a watch-chain.

He obviously means that freedom by which our mother [the church] is free, and she obviously is free by faith. For this is true freedom, to keep faith in God and to believe all God's promises. Therefore by faith Christ has brought us back to freedom and made us free by the freedom of faith.

He had to add an exhortation that they should persevere in the same way that they had first begun to receive from him the gospel and not return to the slavery under the law. He says "stand" which is not possible for one who is under a heavy yoke. For he bows his neck submissively and therefore cannot stand.

He adds "again," not because the Galatians had previously kept the law … but in their readiness to observe the lunar seasons, to be circumcised in the flesh and to offer sacrifices, they were in a sense returning to the cults that they had previously served in a state of idolatry.

(Chapter 5, Verse 1) Stand fast, and be not held again under the yoke of bondage. And from this it is shown that he who cleaves to the yoke of servitude does not stand. And because he who has been granted freedom by Christ has been under the yoke as long as he has had the spirit of servitude in fear, and has followed the beginnings of the Law. But when he says, stand, he exhorts firm and stable faith in Christ, so that the churches of Galatia may remain rooted in the Savior. About this, and in another place, the righteous one speaks: 'He has set my feet upon a rock' (Ps. 39:3), because it is upon Christ. So that the teachings may not be carried about by every wind and may be carried off in different directions (Eph. 4). Hence it is also said to those who are standing: 'And let anyone who stands take heed lest he fall' (1 Cor. 10:12). And in another place: 'Stand firm, act like men, be strong' (Ibid. 16:13), so that they may stand with Him whom Stephen, persevering in martyrdom, saw standing at the right hand of the Father (Acts 7), and also the one who spoke to Moses: 'But you, stand with me' (Exod. 34:2). But he calls the yoke of servitude a harsh, difficult, laborious law, which consumes its cultivators with heavy work day and night. Just as Peter says in the Acts of the Apostles: Why do you attempt to impose a heavy yoke upon the neck of the brothers, which neither we nor our fathers were able to bear (Acts 15:10)? But what he has added, do not burden yourselves again, not that the Galatians were keeping the Law before; but so that the heavy yoke of idolatry, by which the Egyptian people were oppressed and plunged like lead into the Red Sea (Exodus 15), may not be repeated. According to the sense of which he had said above, How do you turn again to weak and needy elements, which you desire again to serve, observing days, and months, and times, and years? For the Galatians, who, after the preaching of Paul the Apostle, had forsaken the idols and at once ascended to the grace of the Gospel, did not return to the servitude of the Jewish Law, which they had never known before: but wishing to observe times, to be circumcised in the flesh, and to offer corporeal sacrifices, they were in a certain way returning to the same worship to which they had previously served in idolatry. For both the Egyptian priests and the Ishmaelites and the Midianites are said to not have a foreskin. However, if only we did not know that the nations observe days, months, and years, so that we may never have any mixed festivities with them.

Have ye wrought your own deliverance, that ye run back again to the dominion ye were under before? It is Another who hath redeemed you, it is Another who hath paid the ransom for you. Observe in how many ways he leads them away from the error of Judaism; by showing, first, that it was the extreme of folly for those, who had become free instead of slaves, to desire to become slaves instead of free; secondly, that they would be convicted of neglect and ingratitude to their Benefactor, in despising Him who had delivered, and loving him who had enslaved them; thirdly, that it was impossible. For Another having once for all redeemed all of us from it, the Law ceases to have any sway. By the word, "stand fast," he indicates their vacillation.

By the word "yoke" he signifies to them the burdensomeness of such a course, and by the word "again" he points out their utter senselessness. Had ye never experienced this burden, ye would not have deserved so severe a censure, but for you who by trial have learnt how irksome this yoke is, again to subject yourself to it, is justly unpardonable.

"in the freedom by which Christ has made us free." The law enslaved; Christ has freed us from the curse of the law. Therefore, he says, one must stand in the freedom given by Christ. But the "Stand firm" [Στήκετε] indicates being unshaken.

"do not again submit yourselves to a yoke of slavery." The word again indicates their insensitivity. And by saying yoke, it shows the heavy burden of the law's slavery.

For the Jews say, that from the beginning God sanctified the seventh day, by resting on it from all His works which He made; and that thence it was, likewise, that Moses said to the People: "Remember the day of the sabbaths, to sanctify it: every servile work ye shall not do therein, except what pertaineth unto life." Whence we (Christians) understand that we still more ought to observe a sabbath from all "servile work" always, and not only every seventh day, but through all time.

Both dispensations, therefore, emanate from that same God by whom, as we have found, they were both sketched out beforehand. When he speaks of "the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free," does not the very phrase indicate that He is the Liberator who was once the Master? For Galba himself never liberated slaves which were not his own, even when about to restore free men to their liberty.

It was not meet that those who had received liberty should be "entangled again with the yoke of bondage" -that is, of the law; now that the Psalm had its prophecy accomplished: "Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us, since the rulers have gathered themselves together against the Lord and against His Christ.

"Liberty in Christ" has done no injury to innocence.

Xerophagies, however, (they consider) the novel name of a studied duty, and very much akin to heathenish superstition, like the abstemious rigours which purify an Apis, an Isis, and a Magna Mater, by a restriction laid upon certain kinds of food; whereas faith, free in Christ, owes no abstinence from particular meats to the Jewish Law even, admitted as it has been by the apostle once for all to the whole range of the meat-market -(the apostle, I say), that detester of such as, in like manner as they prohibit marrying, so bid us abstain from meats created by God.

You are not the ones, he says, who freed yourselves, but the One Who gave a ransom for you. How then after this do you subject yourselves to the lordship of the law against the intention of Christ Who freed you? By saying "stand firm," he made it known that they were wavering.

By the word 'yoke' he points to the heaviness of slavery under the law. And by the expression 'again' he exposes their insensibility, since they, despite knowing the heaviness of slavery from experience, again voluntarily pass into it.

Above, the Apostle showed that justice is not through the Law; here he leads them back from error to a state of rectitude. First, with respect to divine matters. Secondly, with respect to human affairs (6:1). As to the first, he does two things: First, he admonishes them; Secondly, he gives the reason underlying his admonition (v. 2). In the admonition itself he includes two things: one is an inducement to good: the other is a caution against evil. He induces to good when he says, Stand fast. As if to say: Since you have been set free from the bondage of the Law through Christ, stand fast and, with your faith firm and feet planted, persevere in freedom. And so when he says, "Stand fast," he exhorts them to rectitude. For he that stands is erect: "He that thinketh himself to stand, let him take heed, lest he fall" (1 Cor 10:12). Likewise he exhorts them to be firm: "Therefore, be ye steadfast and unmoveable" (1 Cor 15:58); "Stand, therefore, having your loins girt about with truth" (Eph 6:14).

But he cautions and draws them from evil, when he adds: "and be not held again under the yoke of bondage", i.e., do not subject yourself to the Law which engenders unto bondage. Of this yoke, it is written in Acts (15:10): "This is a yoke which neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear," a yoke from which we have been loosed by Christ alone: "For the yoke of their burden, and the rod of their shoulder, and the sceptre of their oppressor, thou hast overcome" (Is 9:4). The reason for adding, again, is not that they had been under the Law before, but that, as Jerome says, to observe the legal ceremonies after the Gospel is so great a sin as to border on idolatry. Hence, because they had been idolaters, if they were to submit themselves to the yoke of circumcision and the other legal observances, they would be, as it were, returning to the very things wherein they had formerly practiced idolatry.

However, according to Augustine in Epistle 19, three periods of time are distinguished with respect to the observance of the legal ceremonies: namely, the time before the passion, the time before the spreading of grace and the time after the spreading of grace. To observe the legal ceremonies after grace had been preached is a mortal sin for the Jews. But during the interim, i.e., before the preaching of grace, they could be observed without sin even by those who had been converted from Judaism, provided they set no hope on them. However, those converted from paganism could not observe them without sin. Therefore, because the Galatians had not come from Judaism but wanted, nevertheless, to observe the legal ceremonies and put their hope in them, they were in effect returning to the yoke of bondage. For in their case, observances of this sort were akin to idolatry, inasmuch as they entertained a false notion touching Christ, believing that salvation cannot be obtained by Him without the observances of the Law.

Now Paul says that Christ will profit them nothing if they are circumcised, that is, in the physical way that his opponents wanted, namely, to put their hope of salvation in circumcising their flesh. For Paul himself circumcised Timothy as a young man when he was already a Christian. This he did [to avoid] scandalizing his own people, not at all in dissimulation but from that indifference which made him say "circumcision is nothing, uncircumcision is nothing." For circumcision is no impediment to the one who does not believe that his salvation lies in it.

It should be noted that the Church was placed in paradise, like the first man, "to till it," in such a way that no one would say "that anything he possessed" was "his own." For it began in a state of great perfection that is observed today in the religious life, for the love of Christ was still recent, and in those days "a large number also of the priests accepted the faith." This Church, meaning the one that began with the Jews, because they were converted at one time by the three thousand, and at another, by the five thousand, possessed the "tree of life," that is, faith, because "My just one lives by faith." It also had the "tree of knowledge," that is, the Law, which remained with them for seeing and reading, and not for eating. Much more: for "the day you eat of it, you must die." And so you may see the tree of knowledge, but not eat of it, or else you would destroy what Christ had done; and death would necessarily come in, for "the letter kills." Hence Paul says: "I, Paul, tell you that if you be circumcised, Christ will be of no advantage to you."

His statement, "I, Paul, say to you," implies that the words are to be accepted not as Paul's alone but as God's.

The letter that he wrote to the Romans was addressed to believers from both Jewish and Gentile backgrounds.… But writing to the Galatians he argues differently, since they belonged not to the circumcision party but to the believing Gentiles.

(Verse 2.) Behold, I, Paul, say to you: if you are circumcised, Christ will be of no benefit to you. In the Gospel, the Savior speaks to his disciples. Whoever listens to you, listens to me; whoever welcomes you, welcomes me (Luke 10:16). And the Apostle testifies, saying: I live, yet not I, but Christ lives in me (Galatians 2:20); and elsewhere: Do you seek a proof of Christ speaking in me? (2 Corinthians 13:3) From which it is clearly proven what he now says: Behold, I Paul say to you, not as if only Paul's words are to be received, but the Lord's. For when he had already stated in his first letter to the Corinthians: Now to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord (I Cor. 7:10); and immediately added: But to the rest I, not the Lord, say (Ibid., 12), so that his authority would not be considered insignificant: I think, he says, that I also have the spirit of God, so that by speaking in the spirit and in Christ, he who imitates the prophets would not be considered contemptible, saying: Thus says the Lord Almighty. But something greater will be made of what was said: Behold, I Paul say to you: if you are circumcised, Christ profits you nothing, if joined with the law, in which it says: Paul, an apostle not from men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and the rest: so that hearing, they are moved not so much by the authority of the sender as by that of the one who sends. Someone may say: The opposite of what is written in this passage is what is written to the Romans: Circumcision indeed profits, if you keep the law (Rom. II, 25); and below: What, then, is greater for the Jew, or what is the advantage of circumcision? By all means, it is first because the words of God were entrusted to them (Ibid., 1, 2). For if Christ is of no benefit to those who are circumcised, how does circumcision benefit those who keep the Law? This question is solved by this response, namely, that the Epistle written to the Romans is addressed to those who believed from both the Jews and the Gentiles, and Paul did this so that neither group would be offended, so that each people would possess their own privilege, and so that the Gentiles would not be circumcised and the circumcised would not have to be uncircumcised. But when he wrote to the Galatians, he used a different argument. For they were not of circumcision, but from the Gentiles who believed. And circumcision could not profit them who would return to the elements of the Law after the grace of the Gospel. And in the Acts of the Apostles (Acts XV) it narrates the story: when certain men arose from circumcision and asserted that those who believed from the Gentiles must be circumcised and keep the law of Moses, the elders who were in Jerusalem and the apostles gathered together and determined by letters that no yoke of the Law should be imposed on them, nor should they observe any longer except to keep themselves from idols, and from blood, and from fornication, or as it is written in some manuscripts, and from what is strangled. And so that there be no doubt, that circumcision is of no use, but rather, on account of those who believed from the Jews, he tempered his judgment on circumcision to the Romans, gradually descending to the later letters of the Epistles, he showed that neither circumcision nor uncircumcision have any value, saying: Circumcision therefore is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the observation of God's commandments (I Cor. VII, 19). For circumcision is nothing to such an extent that it profited nothing even to the Israelite house boasting of circumcision, as the prophet says: All the uncircumcised nations in flesh, but the house of Israel in uncircumcision of the heart (Ezech. XLIV, 9), and Melchisedec, who was uncircumcised, blessed Abraham who was circumcised. For as it says: If you are circumcised (Gen. XLIV); it is such, as if he wanted to say, if you are circumcised in the flesh. Which in another place he does not call circumcision, but mutilation, saying: See mutilation. For we are the circumcision, who serve God in the spirit, and boast in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh (Philippians III, 2, 3). He does not have confidence in the flesh, who expects all benefit from Christ, and does not sow in the flesh, so as to reap corruption from the flesh; but in the spirit, from which eternal life is generated. A more subtle thought must be considered: If you are circumcised, Christ is of no benefit to you. Not only does circumcision itself not profit those who are circumcised, but even if they seem to have other virtues apart from circumcision in Christ, they will perish completely after having faith in Christ and being circumcised. So what then? Did circumcision profit Timothy nothing? By all means greatly. For he was not circumcised in order to consider that he could obtain any advantage from circumcision itself, but rather to benefit others. A Jew became a Jew in order to convert the Jews to the faith of Christ through their circumcision. However, circumcision is not profitable, since it is considered to bring something of its own usefulness.

Lo, what a threat! reasonably then did he anathematize even angels. How then shall Christ profit them nothing? for he has not supported this by argument, but only declared it, the credence due to his authority, compensating, as it were, for all subsequent proof. Wherefore he sets out by saying, "Behold, I Paul say unto you," which is the expression of one who has confidence in what he asserts. We will subjoin what we can ourselves as to how Christ shall profit nothing them who are circumcised.

He that is circumcised is circumcised for fear of the Law, and he who fears the Law, distrusts the power of grace, and he who distrusts can receive no benefit from that which is distrusted. Or again thus, he that is circumcised makes the Law of force; but thus considering it to be of force and yet transgressing it in the greater part while keeping it in the lesser, he puts himself again under the curse. But how can he be saved who submits himself to the curse, and repels the liberty which is of Faith? If one may say what seems a paradox, such an one believes neither Christ nor the Law, but stands between them, desiring to benefit both by one and the other, whereas he will reap fruit from neither. Having said that Christ shall profit them nothing, he lays down the proof of it shortly and sententiously.

"Behold, I Paul." He used the authority of the name instead of any proof.

"Christ will profit you nothing." Why? Because the one who is circumcised, as is clear, despises the grace of Christ and believes that he will be justified by the law. Therefore he who does not trust in Christ would not even take advantage himself.

Writing also to the Galatians, he inveighs against such men as observed and defend circumcision and the (Mosaic) law. Thus runs Hebion's heresy.

Even if, for certain, the apostle had granted pardon of fornication to that Corinthian, it would be another instance of his once for all contravening his own practice to meet the requirement of the time. He circumcised Timotheus alone, and yet did away with circumcision.

Instead of any proof, the apostle appeals to his own authority. Christ no longer benefits the one who is circumcised, because such a person rejects His grace and turns to the law as a benefactor, and does not believe in Christ at all, as if He had not bestowed any benefit upon him. And not believing, he cannot receive benefit from the One in Whom he does not believe.

Then when he says, "Behold, I Paul tell you", he explains these two parts of his admonition: First, the second part; Secondly, the first part (v. 5). As to the first, he does two things: First, he shows what the yoke of bondage is that they ought not submit to; Secondly, he proves it (v. 4). Regarding the first, he does two things: First, he shows that this yoke is a source of great harm; Secondly, that it is terribly burdensome (v. 3).

The yoke of the Law is harmful because it nullifies the effect of the Lord's passion. Hence he says, "be not held again under the yoke of bondage," because "behold, I Paul", who am speaking with the voice of authority, "tell you", and well, "that if you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing", i.e., faith in Christ.

But against this is something recorded in Acts (16:3), namely, that Paul circumcised Timothy. Hence in effect he brought it about that Christ profited him nothing; furthermore, he was deceiving him. I answer that, according to Jerome, Paul did not circumcise Timothy as though intending to observe the Law, but he feigned circumcision in working circumcision on him. For, according to him, the apostles feigned observing the works of the Law to avoid scandalizing the believers from Judaism. In other words, they performed the actions of the Law without the intention of observing them, and so they departed not from the faith. Hence he did not deceive Timothy.

However, according to Augustine, the answer is that the apostles did in very truth observe the works of the Law and had the intention of observing them; because, according to the teaching of the apostles, it was lawful at that time, i.e., before grace had become widespread, for converts from Judaism to observe them. Therefore, because Timothy was born of a Jewish mother, the Apostle circumcised him with the intention of observing the Law. But because the Galatians were putting their hope in the legal observances after the spreading of grace, as though without them grace was not sufficient to save them, and they observed them in that frame of mind, for that reason the Apostle declared to them that "if you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing". For it followed from this that they did not correctly estimate Christ, to signify Whom circumcision was given: "That it may be a sign of the covenant between me and you" (Gen 17:11). Therefore, those who submitted to circumcision believed that the sign was still in vogue and that the one signified had not yet come. Thus they were fallen away from Christ. In this way, then, it is plain that the yoke of the Law is harmful.

There are some who serve the law to a certain extent without being circumcised; for many Romans in Judea served the law without circumcision.… Yet there is no one who is circumcised without being required to serve the whole law. He is a debtor, since the law was given to the circumcised. His meaning here was that they had become so negligent as to deserve to bear all the burdens of the law.

When he says "bound," he is no longer speaking of the law as something unworthy but of a heavy burden which can be made lighter. There is one Lord, who is able to make it either heavy or light according to the choice of those who have not refused to accept salvation through his grace through his appearance in the flesh.

And certain other (heretics), contentious by nature, (and) wholly uniformed as regards knowledge, as well as in their manner more (than usually) quarrelsome, combine (in maintaining) that Easter should be kept on the fourteenth day of the first month, according to the commandment of the law, on whatever day (of the week) it should occur. (But in this) they only regard what has been written in the law, that he will be accursed who does not so keep (the commandment) as it is enjoined. They do not, however, attend to this (fact), that the legal enactment was made for Jews, who in times to come should kill the real Passover. And this (paschal sacrifice, in its efficacy,) has spread unto the Gentiles, and is discerned by faith, and not now observed in letter (merely). They attend to this one commandment, and do not look unto what has been spoken by the apostle: "For I testify to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to keep the whole law." In other respects, however, these consent to all the traditions delivered to the Church by the Apostles.

Just as no one can serve two masters, so it is difficult to keep both the shadow and the substance of the law.

(Verse 3.) However, I testify to every man who circumcises himself that he is obligated to keep the entire Law. God, who first commanded circumcision to Abraham and then through Moses in the Law, established not only circumcision but also many other observances: the celebration of feast days in Jerusalem, the offering of burnt sacrifices morning and evening, the sacrifice of the Passover lamb in one designated place, the rest of the land during the seventh year, the fiftieth year of jubilee, and other things that can easily be extracted from the Scriptures by each individual reader. Therefore, we will refute Ebion and his followers, who believe that those who have believed in Christ after the Gospel must be circumcised, so that they may either undergo circumcision and perform the other things that are commanded in the Law; or if it is impossible to do all these things, then let circumcision, which is omitted along with the other ceremonial ordinances, cease. But if they respond that we are only obliged to do what is possible (for God does not require of us what we cannot do, but what we can fulfill), we will tell them that it is not the will of the same God to observe the Law and to abandon those who observe the Law. But how does He make guilty those who, even if they want to, cannot fulfill the whole Law because it has been interrupted? We on the other hand follow the spiritual law, which says: You shall not muzzle an ox when it is treading out the grain (Deut. 25:4), and understand with the Apostle: Does God take care for oxen? (1 Tim. 10:18; 1 Cor. 9:9). But surely He says it for our sake, and to observe the delicate sabbaths (Isa. 58:13), not so that our ox and donkey and other lowly animals may rejoice on the sabbath; but rather for those humans and animals about whom it is written: In your hand is the welfare of humans and animals, O Lord (Ps. 36:7). Reasonable and spiritual men, but also animals, those who are of slower wit, are educated by the spiritual things to observe the Lord's sabbaths. And it is not contrary to what has been said above: If you are circumcised, Christ profits you nothing. And what follows: I testify to every man circumcising himself that he is a debtor to do the whole law, to this that is inferred by us. For the hearers of the law are not justified with God, but the doers of the law will be justified. Because he who is the author of the Law can say, 'We are not circumcision'; and, 'In secret, a Jew'; and we know that the Law is spiritual. But whoever follows the letter that cuts and kills is not a maker of the Law, but truly an enemy of the Law, especially after the Savior's coming, who removes the veil from the hearts of those who turn to him, so that we, beholding the unveiled face, may be transformed from the oldness of the letter into the newness of the spirit.

That you may not suppose that this is spoken from ill-will, I say not to you alone, he says, but to every one who receiveth circumcision, that he is a debtor to do the whole Law. The parts of the Law are linked one to the other. As he who from being free has enrolled himself as a slave, no longer does what he pleases, but is bound by all the laws of slavery, so in the case of the Law, if you take upon you a small portion of it, and submit to the yoke, you draw down upon yourself its whole domination. And so it is in a worldly inheritance: he who touches no part of it, is free from all matters which are consequent on the heirship to the deceased, but if he takes a small portion, though not the whole, yet by that part he has rendered himself liable for every thing. And this occurs in the Law, not only in the way I have mentioned, but in another also, for Legal observances are linked together. For example; Circumcision has sacrifice connected with it, and the observance of days; sacrifice again has the observance both of day and of place; place has the details of endless purifications; purifications involve a perfect swarm of manifold observances. For it is unlawful for the unclean to sacrifice, to enter the holy shrines, to do any other such act. Thus the Law introduces many things even by the one commandment. If then thou art circumcised, but not on the eighth day, or on the eighth day, but no sacrifice is offered, or a sacrifice is offered, but not in the prescribed place, or in the prescribed place, but not the accustomed objects, or if the accustomed objects, but thou be unclean, or if clean yet not purified by proper rules, every thing is frustrated. Wherefore he says, "that he is a debtor to the whole Law." Fulfil not a part, but the whole, if the Law is of force; but if it be not of force, not even a part.

"that he is a debtor to do the whole law." Against the statement, he says, that no longer does one receive anything from Christ, which is more grievous than ten thousand Gehennas. And such persons lay upon themselves a useless burden. For he who keeps the law in one point will be compelled to keep it in all things, since all will fail. What, then, is weightier than the observances of the law?

Lest anyone think that this is said out of enmity, he adds: I am declaring this not only to you, but to everyone who is circumcised, that you are laying a great burden upon yourselves. The ordinances of the law are closely connected with one another, and if you acknowledge even a small portion of the law and subject yourself to this yoke, then you subject yourself to the dominion of the entire law. For circumcision requires a sacrifice and is appointed to a certain day, and the sacrifice requires a place, a manner of offering, and purifications. For an unclean person cannot offer sacrifices. Purifications in turn require the fulfillment of other legal prescriptions. Do you see how the one who has rejected Christ not only receives no benefit from Him, but also subjects himself to countless burdens? If the law is master, then fulfill everything, but if not, then do not accept even a portion of it.

Furthermore, it is a heavy burden, because it obliges to the impossible. And this is what he states: "I testify again to every man circumcising himself, that he is a debtor to do the whole law". As if to say: I say that "if you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing". But in addition to this, "I testify to every man", both Jew and Gentile, circumcising himself, "that he is a debtor to do the whole law". For one who professes a religion makes himself a debtor to all that pertains to the observances of that religion. And, as Augustine says: "There has never been a religion without some visible sign to which those who live in that religion are obligated; as in the Christian religion the visible sign is Baptism, which all Christians are held to undergo. Furthermore, they are obligated to everything that pertains to the Christian religion." Now the sign of the Mosaic Law was circumcision. Therefore, whoever circumcised himself was put under obligation to observe and fulfill all the matters of the Law. And that is what he says: "he is a debtor to do the whole law": "Whosoever offends in one point, is become guilty of all" (Jam 2:10). No one, however, was able to keep the Law, according to Acts (15:10): "This is a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear."

But suppose someone is circumcised; then according to the aforesaid he is obligated to observe all the matters of the Law. But this is to sin mortally. Therefore, he is obligated to sin mortally and thus he sins in either case.

I answer that on the assumption that the same conviction prevails, he is obliged to observe the matters of the Law: for example, if one is convinced that he would sin mortally unless he were circumcised, then, having become circumcised, if the same conviction remains, he would sin mortally were he not to observe the matters of the Law. The reason for this is that the conviction that something must be done is nothing else but a judgment that it would be against God's will not to do it. If this is the case, I say that unless he did what his convictions dictate, he would sin mortally, not by reason of the work done but by reason of his conscience. Likewise, if he does it, he sins, because ignorance of this kind does not excuse him, since he is ignorant of a precept. Nevertheless, he is not absolutely perplexed, but only in a qualified sense, because it is within his power to correct his erroneous conscience. And this is the way the Apostle is here testifying to everyone who circumcises himself that he is obliged to observe the ceremonies of the Law.

Because it is they, not Christ, who are injured, he adds: "you have fallen from grace." For when the effect of Christ's grace is that those who were debtors to the works of the law were freed from this debt, these people, ungrateful to such great grace, prefer to be debtors to the whole law. Now this had not yet happened, but, because the will had begun to be moved, he therefore speaks frequently as though it had already happened.

He is refuting those who believed that they were justified in the law, not those who observed its legitimate provisions in honor of him by whom they were commanded, understanding both that they were commanded as a foreshadowing of the truth and that they belonged to a particular time.

All the virtue of the one who believes in Christ is by the grace of God. Grace is not from merits but from readiness to believe God. Therefore [Paul writes] "You have already fallen from grace if you place your justification in the law, because (for example) you serve works, because you observe the sabbath or on account of your circumcision. If you believe that you are justified by this, "you have fallen from grace and been made void of Christ." You no longer have your faith from Christ nor hope for grace for yourselves from his passion and resurrection, if you believe that justification comes from the law."

(Verse 4) You have fallen away from Christ: you who are justified by the Law have fallen from grace. Just as no one can serve two masters (Matt. 6), so it is difficult to fulfill both the shadow and the truth of the Law. The shadow is in the old Law, until the day dawns and the shadows are removed; the truth is in the Gospel of Christ. For grace and truth came through Jesus Christ (John 1:17). Therefore, anyone who thinks they can be justified by observing the Law loses the grace of Christ and loses the Gospel they held. And when they lose grace, they are deprived of faith in Christ and rely on their own works. For you have been severed from Christ (κατηργήθητε), not as it has been falsely interpreted in Latin as 'Evacuati estis a Christo', but in Christ's words. By [not adhering to] Christ's work, it is understood more clearly that what he had commanded above all about circumcision, saying: if you are circumcised, Christ profits you nothing, now he comprehends generally about the whole Law, that those who believe themselves to be justified in any observance of the Law do not profit in Christ's work.

Having established his point, he at length declares their danger of the severest punishment. When a man recurs to the Law, which cannot save him, and falls from grace, what remains but an inexorable retribution, the Law being powerless, and grace rejecting him?

Thus having aggravated their alarm, and disquieted their mind, and shown them all the shipwreck they were about to suffer, he opens to them the haven of grace which was near at hand. This is ever his wont, and he shows that in this quarter salvation is easy and secure.

"You are cut off from Christ." You have been severed, you have fallen away from him; all things pertaining to Christ and his grace are now useless to you.

"you who would be justified by the law." Instead of saying, "you are eager to be justified," he said something like this. You who are zealous to be justified by the law have fallen away from grace, and from the law you will not be justified.

That is, you have no communion with Christ: you who think to obtain justification in the law have fallen from grace, which truly justifies. It is a great misfortune when you will not receive what the law promises, and you lose what grace gives.

Then when he says, "You are made void of Christ," he proves what he said, namely, that they must not embrace the observances of the Law, because it involves a double injury: first, the loss of Christ; secondly, the loss of grace. Moreover, the first is the cause of the second, because "you who are justified in the law are fallen from grace."

He says therefore, "You are made void of Christ." As if to say: Verily Christ will profit you nothing, because you are made void of Christ, i.e., of living in Christ. The second injury is the loss of grace. Hence he says: "you are fallen from grace," i.e., you who were full of the grace of Christ, "because of his fulness we have all received" (Jn 1:16); "The heart of a fool is like a broken vessel and no wisdom at all shall it hold" (Sir 22:17). "You", I say, "who are justified in the law," i.e., who believe that you are justified, are fallen—"Be mindful, therefore, from whence thou art fallen and do penance" (Rev 2:5)—"from grace", namely, from possessing future happiness or even from the grace you once had.

(Verse 5.) For we by the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness through faith. He places the Spirit, to distinguish it from the letter. But the hope of righteousness is to be understood as Christ, because he is the truth, patience, hope, righteousness, and all virtues, whose coming we await according to the judgment of all, and not now with patience, but with righteousness he will come to give to each according to his works. The presence of this God the Apostle and those who are like him, anticipating, say: Thy kingdom come (Matt. 6:10), that when the Son shall have delivered up the kingdom to God and the Father, and shall have been made subject to him in all things, then the head shall be subjected to the body, and God will be all in all (1 Cor. 15). Because he who is now in part, through each individual, will then begin to be the whole through all.

We need none of those legal observances, he says; faith suffices to obtain for us the Spirit, and by Him righteousness, and many and great benefits.

"we through the Spirit." For we the faithful, he says, do not expect to be saved by the law, but through the visitation of the Holy Spirit.

"by faith wait for the hope of righteousness," expecting to be saved by a share of grace. Well placed is the phrase "by faith." For our faith must be considered, and therefore one receives justification through the Spirit by faith.

Concerning this expectation and hope Paul writes to the Galatians: "For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith." He says "we wait for it," not we are in possession of it.

We, he says, believers, hope to receive justification not in the law, but in the Holy Spirit. In what way? By faith. Therefore, one must submit to the guidance of faith, then by the descent of the Holy Spirit receive the forgiveness of sins and be deemed worthy of justification in baptism.

Having explained the second point, namely, that they must not submit to the yoke of serving the Law, the Apostle here returns to the first and shows that they must stand fast. First, he gives an example of standing; Secondly, he removes an obstacle to standing (v. 7); Thirdly, he tells them its mode (v. 13). As to the first, he does two things: First, he proposes an example of standing; Secondly, he assigns its cause (v. 6).

He says therefore: Those who want to be justified in the Law, Christ profits them nothing, because they are fallen from grace. But we, namely, the apostles, stand through hope, because "we wait for the hope of justice", i.e., for justice and hope, namely, eternal happiness: "He hath regenerated us unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead" (1 Pet. 1:3). Or, "the hope of justice," i.e., Christ, by Whom we have a hope for justice, because we are justified by Him: "We look for the savior, Our Lord Jesus Christ" (Phil 3:20); "Who of God is made unto us wisdom and justice and sanctification and redemption" (1 Cor 1:30). Or, "the hope of justice", i.e., the hope which is concerned with justice; that we be justified not by the Law but by faith: "We account a man to be justified by faith without the works of the law" (Rom 3:28). Or, "the hope of justice," i.e., the things we hope for, and unto which justice tends, namely, eternal life: "As to the rest, there is laid up for me a crown of justice which the Lord, the just judge, will render to me in that day" (2 Tim 4:8).

And this "by faith," "because the justice of God is by faith of Jesus Christ," as is said in Romans (3:22). Which faith is not of man but of the Holy Spirit Who inspires it. "You have received the spirit of adoption of Sons, whereby we cry: Abba, (Father)" (Rom 8:15). Therefore, as faith is from the Spirit, so from faith is hope, and from hope the justice through which we reach eternal life.

This is the faith that separates the righteous from the unclean demons, for they too, as the apostle James says, "believe and tremble," but their actions are not good. Therefore they do not have that faith by which "the righteous live."

If anyone, holding the faith that works through love, repents of his former sin in such as a way that he from then on turns his back on it, he will be guiltless of the blasphemy that is spoken against the Holy Spirit [namely, impenitence], which is not forgiven to the speaker either in this age or in the one to come.

Everywhere he says that faith in the gospel of Christ accords no value to rank or sex or works done with regard to the body or from the body or for the sake of the body, such as circumcision, works and other things of this kind. None of these, he says, has saving value in Christ. Circumcision is therefore vain, nor by uncircumcision do we gain value in Christ. Because we have conceived faith in him and because we have believed his promises and because through his resurrection we too rise and have suffered all things with him and rise to life with him but also through him, our faith is sure. Through this faith comes works fitting to salvation. This comes about through the love that we have for Christ and God and thus toward every human being. For it is these two relationships above all that set life straight and fulfill the whole sense of the law. They contain all the commands in the Decalogue—if it follows necessarily that he who keeps faith will also keep love, since these two fulfill all the precepts of the law of Christ.

[Lest Gentiles should say] that uncircumcision, in which "Abraham pleased God and had his faith counted for righteousness" is better than circumcision, which was given as a sign and was of no profit to Israel though it possessed it, we shall see that this arrogant boast has also been excluded with the greatest foresight.

(Ver. 6.) For in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision avails anything, nor uncircumcision, but faith which works by charity. For those who wish to live in Christ Jesus, virtues are to be desired, vices are to be avoided. But the things that are in between virtues and vices, neither to be avoided nor desired, such as circumcision and uncircumcision, and other similar things. Certainly, circumcision is beneficial if you keep the Law. Therefore, it was useful for those who lived under the Law, not because they were circumcised, but because the words of God were entrusted to them, which, when they turned into actions, were not foreign to salvation. And let it not move us that Sephora, taking up a stone, circumcised her son, and the angel prevented her husband from suffocating him (Exodus IV), or as it is otherwise said in Hebrew, because now circumcision is not beneficial at all, as it has testified in Christ Jesus, since the time when the Gospel has spread throughout the whole world, the injury of circumcision is unnecessary. It was valid then, like the rest of the Law, when physical blessings were promised to those who observed the Law; namely, if they fulfilled it, they would be blessed in the city, blessed in the field, have full barns, and many other things contained in the promises (Deuteronomy XXVIII). But we, in Christ Jesus, want to be strong and strengthened, that is, in true circumcision, and not in Jewish circumcision. For neither is he a Jew who is openly a Jew, nor is circumcision openly in the flesh, but he is a Jew who is hidden, and circumcision of the heart in the spirit, not in the letter (Rom. II, 28, 29). Therefore, the circumcision of the flesh is of no avail in Christ, but the circumcision of the heart and of the ears, which removes that reproach of the Jews: Behold, your ears are uncircumcised, and you cannot hear (Exod. VI, 12). The circumcision of the lips is beneficial, as Moses himself testified in Scripture: 'But I myself have foreskin on my lips.' It provides many benefits, and in matters of sexual desire, circumcision is defiled by unchastity. Therefore, in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value, for they are placed in the middle, that is, between vices and virtues; but faith, which works through love, is what matters, just as the faith that was reckoned to Abraham as righteousness is confirmed, and every work of faith is placed in love, based on the whole Law and the Prophets, which depend on love. Indeed, in these two commandments: 'You shall love your God' and 'you shall love your neighbor,' the Savior asserted that the Law and the Prophets consist. And Paul in another place: 'For you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not covet,' and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself' (Rom. XIII, 9). Therefore, if every commandment is summed up in what has been said: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself,' and faith works through love, it is clear that the work of faith through love contains the fullness of all the commandments. However, according to the apostle James, faith without works is dead (James 2:26): likewise, without faith, even if good works are present, they are considered dead. Therefore, those who do not believe in Christ but have good morals, what else do they possess besides the works of virtues? Let that example of faith which operates through charity be attributed to that prostitute from the Gospel, who, when she had washed the feet of the Lord while reclining at the table in the Pharisee's house, with her tears, wiped them with her hair, anointed them with ointment, and when the Pharisee murmured, the Lord presented a parable of a debtor who owed fifty and five hundred denarii, and added: For this reason, I tell you: her many sins are forgiven, for she loved much (Luke 7:47, 50). And turning to the woman, he said: Your faith has saved you, go in peace. For it has been clearly demonstrated in this place that this woman had faith through charity, which was very powerful in Christ. For who can say that circumcision in Christ is of no value, when it was known to have been valuable at one time? Did anyone ever doubt whether circumcision was circumcision? But if we consider the many Christians, that is, those of us who have been grafted onto the root of the good olive tree (Rom. 11), rejoicing against the broken branches of the Jewish people, and saying that the uncircumcised is more valuable, in which Abraham pleased God, and faith was reckoned to him for righteousness, than circumcision, which was given as a sign of faith and did not benefit those who had it, we will also see this usurpation of some now carefully excluded.

Observe the great boldness with which he now encounters them; Let him that hath put on Christ, he says, no longer be careful about such matters. Having before said that Circumcision was hurtful, how is it that he now considers it indifferent? It is indifferent as to those who had it previously to the Faith, but not as to those who are circumcised after the Faith was given. Observe too the view in which he places it, by setting it by the side of Uncircumcision; it is Faith that makes the difference. As in the selection of wrestlers, whether they be hook-nosed or flat-nosed, black or white, is of no importance in their trial, it is only necessary to seek that they be strong and skilful; so all these bodily accidents do not injure one who is to be enrolled under the New Covenant, nor does their presence assist him.

What is the meaning of "working through love?" Here he gives them a hard blow, by showing that this error had crept in because the love of Christ had not been rooted within them. For to believe is not all that is required, but also to abide in love. It is as if he had said, Had ye loved Christ as ye ought, ye would not have deserted to bondage, nor abandoned Him who redeemed you, nor treated with contumely Him who gave you freedom. Here he also hints at those who have plotted against them, implying that they would not have dared to do so, had they felt affection towards them. He wishes too by these words to correct their course of life.

"neither circumcision benefits anything." Paul says circumcision, not that which is from faith, as if he were saying: Those who are enrolled in the new covenant will not gain anything from foreskin, just as they will not benefit from circumcision.

"but faith working by love." For it is not enough merely to believe in Christ; rather this faith must be active and preserved and in a sense rekindled by love toward Christ. It is implied that those who believed but did not love Christ have defected to the law.

Since circumcision and uncircumcision belonged to the one God, both therefore were annulled in Christ because of the priority given to faith, this being the faith of which it was written "the Gentiles shall believe in his name."

If, now, he were for excluding circumcision, as the messenger of a new god, why does he say that "in Christ neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision? For it was his duty to prefer the rival principle of that which he was abolishing, if he had a mission from the god who was the enemy of circumcision.

Furthermore, since both circumcision and uncircumcision were attributed to the same Deity, both lost their power in Christ, by reason of the excellency of faith-of that faith concerning which it had been written, "And in His name shall the Gentiles trust? " -of that faith "which," he says "worketh by love." By this saying he also shows that the Creator is the source of that grace.

Previously he said that circumcision is ruinous, so how does he now consider it indifferent? In our opinion, he is speaking here about circumcision that preceded faith; he is saying, as it were: for those who have entered the New Covenant, there is no benefit if they are circumcised, and no harm if they are not circumcised. For everything consists in faith working through love, that is, in faith which must always be active and alive in love for Christ. By this he also indicates that although they had believed, they had not grown strong in love for Christ and as a result turned back again to the law, or else he is instructing them in love for their neighbor. And at the same time he shows that their deceivers too, if they had love for them, would not have dared to do this. So learn that faith becomes active through love, that is, it is alive, while faith that does not have love is inactive — similar to what is said: "faith without works is dead" (James 2:20).

However, this hope does not come from circumcision or from paganism, because these contribute nothing to it. Hence he says, "For in Christ Jesus", i.e., in those who live in the faith of Christ, "neither circumcision nor uncircumcision availeth anything", i.e., they make no difference; "but faith," not unformed, but the kind "that worketh by charity": "Faith without works is dead" (Jam 2:26). For faith is a knowledge of the word of God—"That Christ may dwell by faith in your hearts" (Eph 3:17)—which word is not perfectly possessed or perfectly known unless the love which it hopes for is possessed.

Here a Gloss raises two problems. The first is that he says circumcision and uncircumcision to be indifferent, whereas above he had said, "If you be circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing." I answer that it is from the general nature of the work that they are indifferent, namely, to those who do not put any trust in them; however, they are not indifferent, if you consider the intention of the one acting. For they are deadly to those who put their trust in them.

The second problem concerns his saying that those who do not believe are worse than demons, for the demons believe and tremble. I answer that if you consider the nature of the work, they are worse; but not if you consider the will. For the demons are displeased by the fact of their believing; furthermore, there is not as much malice in the will of a man who does not believe as there is in the demon who hates what he believes.

(Verse 7.) You were running well. Who hindered you from obeying the truth? The Latin translator, in his interpretation, put 'not obeying the truth', which is written in Greek as 'τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι'. He interpreted it in the previous place as 'not believing the truth', which we noted in its proper place because it is not found in ancient manuscripts, although the Greek copies have been confused by this error. The meaning of the passage is: You were worshiping the Father in spirit and truth, and you were receiving from the fullness of Christ, knowing that the law was given only to the people through Moses and not made as well. But grace and truth came through Jesus Christ, not only given but also accomplished. So, since you were running so well, serving the truth rather than the images, why do you, hindered by a distorted teacher, follow the shadow of the Law and abandon the truth of the Gospel? It follows.

You have not reached a consensus with anyone. But since we have not found this written either in Greek books or in those who have commented on the Apostle, it seems that it should be disregarded.

This is not an interrogation, but an expression of doubt and sorrow. How hath such a course been cut short? who hath been able to do this? ye who were superior to all and in the rank of teachers, have not even continued in the position of disciples. What has happened? who could do this? these are rather the words of one who is exclaiming and lamenting, as he said before, "Who did bewitch you?" (Gal. iii: 1.)

"who hindered you?" The "who" is not of one asking, but of one sorrowful, as if he had said: You were reaching perfection, what has happened? Who has had such power as to prevent you from obeying the truth of the Gospel?

They bear in mind how the churches were rebuked by the apostle: "O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you? " and, "Ye did run so well; who hath hindered you? " and how the epistle actually begins: "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from Him, who hath called you as His own in grace, to another gospel.

This is not a question, but a lament. He says: you had attained perfection, but what happened? Who gained such power as to hinder you from obeying not the evangelical truth, but the abolished law?

Then when he says, "You did run well. Who hath hindered you that you should not obey the truth?" he deals with the obstacle to standing. First, he mentions the obstacle; Secondly, he teaches its removal (v. 8).

The obstacle to their standing fast was great and harmful, for the harmfulness of anything is reckoned according to the greater good it hinders. Therefore, when someone is kept from many spiritual goods, it is an indication that he is faced with a great obstacle. Accordingly, in order to show them that they have a great obstacle, he reminds them of the spiritual goods they have lost, when he says: "You did run well," namely, by means of the works of faith formed by charity, which incites one to run: "I have run the way of thy commandments, when thou didst enlarge my heart" (Ps 118:32). And this did indeed apply to you formerly; but while you were thus running, you came upon an obstacle. Therefore he says: "Who hath bewitched you?" (This has been discussed already in Chapter 3, hence we pass over it now).

Therefore, who has bewitched you, i.e., "hindered the truth," namely, of the Gospel, "that you should not obey it?" This is appropriately said: for obedience is the application of the will to the edict of the one who commands. That is why faith is a science of the will and of the understanding. It is suitable, therefore, for the will to obey the faith. But this is done by willing to believe that the grace of Christ is sufficient for salvation without the legal observances.

The truth is that the Jews imposed the yoke of the law on them by a human decision, not by the judgment of God, who was calling them to grace through his apostle.

(Verse 8) Your persuasion is not from the one who called you. In the Latin manuscripts, I found it written as follows: Your persuasion is from God, who called you. Indeed, I think that 'from the one' was originally written and gradually, due to similarity, 'from God' became more frequent, because it is 'from the one.' But even so, the meaning cannot stand, as he had just accused them of not obeying the truth, showing that it is within their power to obey or not to obey, now on the contrary he asserts that their persuasion and obedience come not so much from those who are called, as from the one who calls. Therefore it is better and truer to read as follows: Your persuasion is not from the one who called you. For one thing is the work of God, another is the work of men. The work of God is to call; the work of men is either to believe or not to believe. And wherever the free will of man is affirmed from the Scriptures, there is quoted the passage: If you will and hear me (Exod. XIX, 5). And again: And now, Israel, what does the LORD your God ask of you? (Deut. X, 12), which is especially confirmed from this place. But those who think themselves simpler and believe that they should defer to God, so that even our belief is in His power, have removed a part of the prayer and have rendered a sense contrary to the Apostle. So, whether for good or for ill, neither God nor the devil is the cause, because our belief is not from Him who called us, but from us, who either consent or do not consent to the calling. Otherwise: This belief which you now follow is not from God who called you in the beginning, but from those who have troubled you afterwards.

He who called you, called you not to such fluctuations, he did not lay down a Law, that you should judaize. Then, that no one might object, "Why do you thus magnify and aggravate the matter by your words; one commandment only of the Law have we kept, and yet you make this great outcry?" hear how he terrifies them, not by things present but future.

"This persuasion," that is, being persuaded to be circumcised by those who tell you.

"This does not come from Christ, who calls you to His faith." So he said. You are not called by Christ for that reason, so as to be persuaded by those who give such counsel. For calling belongs to God alone, but the being persuaded belongs to those who hear.

It is for God to call and hearers to obey.

That is, this attention to deceivers is not from Christ; for He did not call you to that end, that you should give heed to those who incline toward Judaism.

Then when he says, "Consent to no one," he removes the obstacle. First, on their part; Secondly, on God's part (v. 10); Thirdly, on the Apostle's part (v. 11).

On their part when he says, "Consent to no one." Herein he shows what is required on their part to overcome this obstacle, namely, that henceforth they not give their consent to any deceiver: "We are not of the night nor of the darkness; therefore, let us not sleep" (1 Thes 5:5); "Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness but rather reprove them" (Eph 5:11); "And their speech spreadeth like a canker" (2 Tim 2:17). From this it can be gathered that they were not yet corrupted, but he was concerned.

Secondly, he gives an explanation of this, when he says, "This persuasion is not from him that calleth you," and it is twofold. First, because a man, when he gives himself to someone, ought to do nothing save what is of advantage to the latter. But you have been given to Christ. Therefore, you should not heed or consent to anyone but those who come from Him. Hence because "this persuasion," by which they wish to set you under the yoke of the Law, "is not from him," i.e., from God "who calleth you" to life, but from the devil, for it is degrading, you should not consent to them. Or, "not from him," i.e., against Him.

For an offender, when he sees any other doing as bad as himself, will be encouraged to do the very same things; and then the wicked one, taking occasion from a single instance, works in others, which God forbid: and by that means the flock will be destroyed. For the greater number of offenders there are, the greater is the mischief that is done by them: for sin which passes without correction grows worse and worse, and spreads to others; since "a little leaven infects the whole lump," and one thief spreads the abomination over a whole nation and "dead flies spoil the whole pot of sweet ointment;" and "when a king hearkens to unrighteous counsel, all the servants under him are wicked." So one scabbed sheep, if not separated from those that are whole, infects the rest with the same distemper; and a man infected with the plague is to be avoided by all men; and a mad dog is dangerous to every one that he touches. If, therefore, we neglect to separate the transgressor from the Church of God, we shall make the "Lord's house a den of thieves."

All leaven corrupts the bread, and the corrupted bread is flour. When the mass of flour is left, it sours, and then comes the leavening. Now when a small amount of the leaven is put into the mass, the mass is corrupted. "You," he says, "must be unleavened bread. Therefore that little addition of yours, which you thought a small amount, namely, your observing of circumcision and the rest, because it is corrupt, corrupts the mass of o ur gospel. If so, you do not have full hope in Christ, and neither does Christ regard you as his own or people whose hope depends on him. For it is faith that sets free, and, as I have said, he has no faith who hopes for any sort of help apart from Christ, even along with Christ."

(Verse 9.) A little yeast leavens the whole batch of dough. It is incorrectly translated in our codices: A little yeast corrupts the whole lump, and the translator has conveyed the sense of the interpreter rather than the words of the Apostle. However, Paul himself uses this same statement to the Corinthians: where he commands that the one who had his father's wife be removed from their midst, and be handed over to destruction and affliction of the flesh through fasting and sickness, so that the spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord Jesus Christ (some manuscripts add: our Lord). He says indeed: Not good is your boasting. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? (I Cor. 5:5, 6, and following)? Or (as we have now corrected) leavens the whole mixture? And immediately he adds: Purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new mixture, as you are unleavened. For Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us. Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. But now, according to this same sentiment, He teaches that the spiritual bread of the Church, which came down from heaven, should not be violated by Jewish interpretation; and the Lord Himself commanded the same to His disciples, that they should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees (John VI). And the evangelist, making this more clear, added: But He had spoken to them concerning the doctrine of the Pharisees (Matthew XVI). Moreover, what is this other doctrine of the Pharisees, if not the observance of the Law according to the flesh? Therefore, this is the meaning: Do not think lightly of men who come from Judea and teach another doctrine, for they despise danger. A spark is a small thing, and when it is barely seen, it is not noticed; but if it catches hold of tinder and finds any small bit of fuel, it consumes walls, cities, vast forests, and regions. Likewise, the yeast in this parable in the Gospel (Luke 13) seems small and insignificant; but when it is mixed with flour, it corrupts the whole mass with its power, affecting everything that is mixed in. Similarly, a perverse teaching, starting from one foolish person, finds only two or three listeners at first; but gradually, like cancer spreading in the body, it contaminates the entire flock, as the common saying goes, the scabies of one animal infects the whole herd. Therefore, as soon as a spark appears, it must be extinguished, and the leaven must be removed from the vicinity of the dough, the rotten flesh must be cut away, and the scabrous animal must be driven away from the sheepfold, so that the whole house, mass, body, and livestock do not burn, decay, rot, and perish. Arius was a spark in Alexandria; but because he was not immediately suppressed, the flame of his spread throughout the entire world.

(Verse 9.) I trust in you in the Lord, that you will understand nothing else. Not by conjecture, as some would have it, but by the prophetic spirit, Paul declares that the Galatians will return to the way of truth they had lost (I Cor. XII). For indeed, he who encouraged others to emulate the charisms, especially prophecy, himself spoke with the same abundant grace: For we know in part, and we prophesy in part (Ibid., XIII, 9). Therefore, foreseeing in spirit that they would believe nothing else except what they were taught through the Epistle, he said: I have confidence in you, in the Lord, that you will understand nothing else. For even the addition of the name of the Lord signifies the same thing. For if he had estimated this through conjecture, he could have said: I have confidence in you. But now, adding in the Lord, with a certain divine confidence in spirit, which he had known would come to pass, he prophesied.

And thus this slight error, he says, if not corrected, will have power (as the leaven has with the lump) to lead you into complete Judaism.

So that they might not say, "What great thing have we done by keeping only one commandment of the law?" he says, "One?" and what is that?

"A little yeast infuses the whole batch of dough." For just as that infuses the whole batch, he says, so your circumcision will certainly bring in Judaism to perfection, unless you are corrected.

Lest they say: "why do you rebuke us so strongly (for we have violated only one commandment) and exaggerate our guilt?" – he says that this seemingly insignificant circumstance causes substantial harm. For, just as leaven, even a small amount, by itself leavens and transforms the entire lump of dough, so too circumcision, although it constitutes only one commandment, draws you into Judaism in all its fullness.

The second explanation is that they might suppose that consenting to a few is not a great matter, since it constitutes no danger. But he says that they must not consent to them at all, nor underestimate their artifices; rather they must oppose them at the start, because "a little leaven corrupteth the whole lump," i.e., those few who are persuading you. Or, "This persuasion" small in the beginning "corrupts the whole lump," i.e., the congregation of the faithful: "Neither shall any leaven or honey be burnt in the sacrifice to the Lord" (Lev. 2:11).

He says that he has this ground for trusting in them, that they had entered on the path of error not of their own accord, but they had been taken unawares. Thus he trusts that when they are shown the true road they will easily be able to return.

Some say that Paul is tacitly attacking Peter, whom he says he "opposed to his face" … but Paul would not speak with such offensive aggression of the head of the church, nor did Peter deserve to be held to blame for disturbing the church. Therefore it must be supposed that he is speaking of someone else who had either been with the apostles, or was from Judea, or was one of the believing Pharisees, or at any rate was reckoned important among the Galatians.

(Verse 10) But whoever disturbs you will bear judgment, whoever he may be. Secretly, they say, he attacks Peter, to whom he himself writes that he resisted him to his face, because he did not walk uprightly according to the truth of the Gospel. But neither did Paul speak with such insolent cursing against the leader of the Church (Galatians 2), nor did Peter deserve to be accused as the disturber of the Church. Therefore, it must be concluded that someone else is being referred to, who either was with the Apostles, or came from Judea, or believed of the Pharisees, or is certainly highly esteemed among the Galatians, so that he bears judgment upon the disturbed Church, whoever he may be. But he was referring to judgment, that is, what he said in other words: Each person will bear their own burden. And I think in the Scriptures, burden can be understood in both a good and a bad sense, that is, both for those oppressed by grave sins, and for those who sustain the light burdens of virtues. Concerning sins, the penitent speaks in the psalm: My iniquities have risen above my head, like a heavy burden they weigh me down (Psalm 38:5). Concerning virtues and the doctrine of virtues, the Savior says: For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light (Matthew XI, 30). And that doctrine is also understood as a burden, is clear in the Gospel. For the Pharisees impose heavy burdens, which cannot be carried, and they place them on the shoulders of others, but they themselves are unwilling to touch them with one finger (Ibid., XXIII). How grave it is to disturb someone's tranquility and to agitate calm hearts with certain disturbances, the words of the Savior to the apostles testify, saying: Let not your hearts be troubled, neither let them be afraid (John XIV). For it is expedient that he who disturbs and scandalizes someone in the Church should have a millstone hung around his neck and be thrown into the sea, rather than he should scandalize one of these little ones who are shown by the Savior (Luke 17). Therefore, the Galatians were troubled between the spirit and the letter, circumcision and incision, hidden and manifest Judaism, not knowing what to do. However, it can be understood more briefly as follows: Whoever is the one who leads you back to the doctrine of the Pharisees and desires to be circumcised in the flesh, though he may be eloquent and boast in the knowledge of the Law, I say nothing more except this (which you cannot deny) that he will be judged for this work and will receive reward for his labor.

He does not say, "ye are not minded," but, "ye will not be minded;" that is, you will be set right. And how does he know this? he says not "I know," but "I trust in God, and invoking His aid in order to your correction, I am in hopes;" and he says, not merely, "I have confidence in the Lord," but, "I have confidence towards you in the Lord." Every where he connects complaint with his praises; here it is as if he had said, I know my disciples, I know your readiness to be set right. I have good hopes, partly because of the Lord who suffers nothing, however trivial, to perish, partly because of you who are quickly to recover yourselves. At the same time he exhorts them to use diligence on their own parts, it not being possible to obtain aid from God, if our own efforts are not contributed.

Not only by words of encouragement, but by uttering a curse or a prophecy against their teachers, he applies to them an incentive. And observe that he never mentions the name of these plotters, that they might not become more shameless. His meaning is as follows. Not because "ye will be none otherwise minded," are the authors of your seduction relieved from punishment. They shall be punished; for it is not proper that the good conduct of the one should become an encouragement to the evil disposition of the other. This is said that they might not make a second attempt upon others. And he says not merely, "he that troubleth," but, "whosoever he be," in the way of aggravation.

"I have confidence in you in the Lord." "Be of good courage," he says, "be of good courage in the Lord, for you will be corrected, and you will take no thought contrary to my teaching." This is by way of encouragement.

"But the one who is troubling you." You may be disturbed, yet nevertheless those who brought you into this will not thereby be freed from punishment, but will bear and undergo this condemnation.

"But he that troubleth you shall have to bear judgment." From what God? From (Marcion's) most excellent god? But he does not execute judgment.

I am confident in you, he says, because I know my disciples, I know your capacity for correction. So then, I hope that you can be corrected. I also hope in the Lord, Who does not desire the destruction of any person whatsoever. Thus, he urges them both to apply their own efforts and to hope in the Lord. For it is otherwise impossible to receive anything from God — if you do not apply, he says, your own diligence.

Though you, he says, will be corrected, those who deceived you will not on account of this be freed from punishment, but will be subjected to judgment, no matter how great and worthy of trust they may seem. For this is what the words mean: whoever he may be. And he says this so that others too would not believe them.

Then when he says, "I have confidence in you in the Lord that you will not be of another mind," he removes the obstacle on the part of God Who offers His help to this end. And he mentions a twofold help: one as to the deceivers; the other as to the trouble makers. He says therefore, "I have confidence in you in the Lord that you will not be of another mind." As if to say: I have told you not to obey the deceivers and "I have confidence in you:" "I rejoice that in all things I have confidence in you" (2 Cor 7:16); "But, dearly beloved, we trust better things of you and nearer to salvation" (Heb 6:9). I have confidence, I say, in this, namely, "that you will not be of another mind" than what I have taught you—"but though we or an angel from heaven preach a Gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema" (1:8); "Fulfill ye my joy, that you be of one mind" (Phil 2:2)—and this with God's help. Hence he says, "in the Lord" God working: "And such confidence we have through Christ towards God" (2 Cor 3:4), because the Lord will give you a mind according with the standard of the Catholic Faith: "It is good to have confidence in the Lord rather than to have confidence in a man" (Ps 117:8).

As to the trouble makers, he says, "he that troubleth you shall bear the judgment, whosoever he be," i.e., he that perverts you from right order so as to be turned from spiritual to corporeal things, whereas it should be the contrary: "Yet that was not first which was spiritual, but that which is natural; afterwards that which is spiritual" (1 Cor 15:46).

Therefore, "he shall bear the judgment", i.e., he will undergo damnation. For as one who urges another to good is rewarded—"They that instruct many to justice shall shine as stars for all eternity" (Dan. 12:3)—so one who urges another to evil is condemned: "Because thou hast troubled us, the Lord trouble thee this day" (Jos. 7:25); "Curst be he that maketh the blind to wander out of his way" (Deut 27:18). And this, "whosoever he be", i.e., whatever his dignity, he will not be spared.

But Porphyry and Julian censure Paul for presumption, and assert that in saying this he defames Peter (since he wrote above that he withstood him to his face) so that the meaning would be: "whosoever he be", i.e., even if it be Peter, he would be punished. But as Augustine says, one should not believe that Paul was calling down a curse on the Prince of the Church—for it is written in Exodus (22:28): "Thou shalt not curse the prince of thy people"—or that Peter committed an offence worthy of damnation. Therefore the Apostle is speaking of someone else who, coming from Judea, claimed to be a disciple of the important apostles and with that authority he and other false teachers were subverting the Galatians, "because of false brethren unawares brought in" (2:4).