Galatians 4:4–7

He says "his Son," not one of many, not "a Son" but his own. When he says "his own" he confirms that he has the property of eternal generation. This is the one whom he subsequently declares to have been born from a woman, so as to ascribe the fact of being born not to the Godhead but to the assumed body. He was made from a woman by assuming flesh and made under the law by observing the law. But that heavenly birth of his is prior to the law, while the incarnation happens later.

"The fullness of time" is the completed time which had been foreordained by God the Father for the sending of his Son, so that, made from a virgin, he might be born like a man, subjecting himself to the law up to the time of his baptism, so that he might provide a way by which sinners, washed and snatched away from the yoke of the law, might be adopted as God's sons by his condescension, as he had promised to those redeemed by the blood of his Son. It was necessary, indeed, that the Savior should be made subject to the law, as a son of Abraham according to the flesh, so that, having been circumcised, he could be seen as the one promised to Abraham, who had come to justify the Gentiles through faith, since he bore the sign of the one to whom the promise had been made.

Although God could have become incarnate from the beginning, He nevertheless willed not to do so until the end of the ages, after the law of nature and the law of figure had preceded, after the Patriarchs and the Prophets, to whom and through whom the Incarnation was promised. After these He deigned to become incarnate as at the end of times and in their fullness, according to what the Apostle says: "But when the fullness of time had come, God sent His Son, made of a woman, made under the Law, that He might redeem those who were under the Law."

The Incarnation is the work of the first principle restoring, according to what is fitting and suitable with respect to the freedom of the will, with respect to the sublimity of the remedy, and with respect to the integrity of the universe.

Since freedom of the will requires that it be drawn to nothing against its will, God ought to have restored the human race in such a way that he who wished to seek the Savior would find salvation, while he who did not wish to seek the Savior would consequently not find salvation either. Now no one seeks a physician unless he recognizes his disease; no one seeks a teacher unless he recognizes himself to be ignorant; no one seeks a helper unless he recognizes himself to be powerless. Since, therefore, man at the beginning of his fall was still proud of his knowledge and strength, God first allowed the time of the law of nature, in which he would be convicted of ignorance; and afterwards, when ignorance was recognized but pride in his own strength remained, He added the Law, instructing through moral precepts and burdening through ceremonial ones, so that, having obtained knowledge and having recognized his powerlessness, man might take refuge in divine mercy and petition for grace, which was given to us in the coming of Christ.

Since the integrity and perfection of the universe requires that all things be ordered with respect to places and times, and this work of the incarnation was the most perfect among all divine works, and the process must be from the imperfect to the perfect, and not the reverse: hence it is that this work had to be accomplished in the end of times, so that, just as the first man, who was the adornment of the entire sensible world, had been created last, namely on the sixth day, for the completion of the whole world, so the second man, the complement of the entire restored world, in whom the first principle is joined with the last, namely "God with clay," would come to be in the end of times, that is, in the sixth age.

In the coming of the Son of God there is said to be the fullness of times, not because time comes to an end in his coming, but because the temporal mysteries are fulfilled.

Let us see, therefore, how the other illuminations of knowledge are to be reduced to the light of sacred Scripture. And first let us consider the illumination of sensitive cognition, which is wholly concerned with the cognition of sensible things, where three things are to be considered: the medium of cognition, the exercise of cognition, and the delight of cognition.

If we consider the medium of cognition, we shall behold therein the Word eternally generated and incarnate in time. For no sensible thing moves the cognitive power except through a likeness which proceeds from the object, as offspring from a parent; and this is necessary, whether generally, really, or exemplarily, in every sense. But that likeness does not bring about the completion of the act of sensing unless it is united with the organ and the power: and when it is united, a new perception arises, and through that perception a reduction to the object is effected by means of that likeness. And although the object is not always sensed, nevertheless it always, insofar as it is in itself, generates a likeness, when it is in its completeness.

In this same way understand that from the supreme Mind, which is knowable by the interior senses of our mind, there eternally emanated a Likeness, Image, and Offspring: and He afterwards, when the fullness of time came, was united to a mind and flesh and received the form of man, which He had never been before: and through Him all our minds which receive that Likeness of the Father through faith in the heart are reduced to God.

For if you are a Cherub contemplating the essential attributes of God, and you wonder that the divine being is at once the first and the last, eternal and most present, most simple and greatest, that is, uncircumscribed, wholly everywhere and nowhere comprehended, most actual and never moved, most perfect and having nothing superfluous nor diminished, and yet immense and infinite without limit, supremely one, and yet all-inclusive, as having all things in itself, as all power, all truth, all good: look upon the mercy seat and wonder that in it the first beginning is joined with the last, God with man formed on the sixth day, the eternal is joined with temporal man, born of the Virgin in the fullness of time, the most simple with the supremely composite, the most actual with one who supremely suffered and died, the most perfect and immense with the small, the supremely one and all-inclusive with a composite individual distinct from all others, namely the man Jesus Christ.

That although from the beginning He had been the Son of God, yet He had to be begotten again according to the flesh. In the second Psalm: "The Lord said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten Thee. Ask of me, and I will give Thee the nations for Thine inheritance, and the bounds of the earth for Thy possession." Also in the Gospel according to Luke: "And it came to pass, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and she was filled with the Holy Ghost, and she cried out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. And whence does this happen to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? " Also Paul to the Galatians: "But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent His Son, horn of a woman." Also in the Epistle of John: "Every spirit which confesses that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God. But whosoever denies that He is come in the flesh is not of God, but is of the spirit of Antichrist."

As there is a fullness in things, so there is in times. For each thing has its fullness in a full and copious perfection that abounds in everything. Christ is the fullness of things. The fullness of times is the consummation of freedom. So that his fullness may be whole and perfect Christ collects his members who are scattered, and in this way his fullness is achieved. So in the same way the fullness of times was achieved when all had become ripe for faith and sins had increased to the utmost, so that a remedy was necessarily sought in the judgment of all things. Hence Christ came when the fullness of time was completed.

Because he is brought forth from a woman he can be said to be made, but made for this temporary purpose: to be subject to the law.… The Galatians were to understand from this that they had fallen into error, for the Savior himself, in whom they believed, was made subject to the law though he remained the Lord of the law.

Paul, when writing to the Romans, has explained this very point: "Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ, predestinated unto the Gospel of God, which He had promised by His prophets in the holy Scriptures, concerning His Son, who was made to Him of the seed of David according to the flesh, who was predestinated the Son of God with power through the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead of our Lord Jesus Christ." And again, writing to the Romans about Israel, he says: "Whose are the fathers, and from whom is Christ according to the flesh, who is God over all, blessed for ever." And again, in his Epistle to the Galatians, he says: "But when the fulness of time had come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption;" plainly indicating one God, who did by the prophets make promise of the Son, and one Jesus Christ our Lord, who was of the seed of David according to His birth from Mary; and that Jesus Christ was appointed the Son of God with power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead, as being the first begotten in all the creation; the Son of God being made the Son of man, that through Him we may receive the adoption,-humanity sustaining, and receiving, and embracing the Son of God.

With Him is nothing incomplete or out of due season, just as with the Father there is nothing incongruous. For all these things were foreknown by the Father; but the Son works them out at the proper time in perfect order and sequence. This was the reason why, when Mary was urging [Him] on to [perform] the wonderful miracle of the wine, and was desirous before the time to partake of the cup of emblematic significance, the Lord, checking her untimely haste, said, "Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come"-waiting for that hour which was foreknown by the Father. This is also the reason why, when men were often desirous to take Him, it is said, "No man laid hands upon Him, for the hour of His being taken was not yet come;" nor the time of His passion, which had been foreknown by the Father; as also says the prophet Habakkuk, "By this Thou shalt be known when the years have drawn nigh; Thou shalt be set forth when the time comes; because my soul is disturbed by anger, Thou shalt remember Thy mercy." Paul also says: "But when the fulness of time came, God sent forth His Son." By which is made manifest, that all things which had been foreknown of the Father, our Lord did accomplish in their order, season, and hour, foreknown and fitting, being indeed one and the same, but rich and great. For He fulfils the bountiful and comprehensive will of His Father, inasmuch as He is Himself the Saviour of those who are saved, and the Lord of those who are under authority, and the God of all those things which have been formed, the only-begotten of the Father, Christ who was announced, and the Word of God, who became incarnate when the fulness of time had come, at which the Son of God had to become the Son of man.

Those, therefore, who allege that He took nothing from the Virgin do greatly err, [since,] in order that they may cast away the inheritance of the flesh, they also reject the analogy [between Him and Adam]. For if the one [who sprang] from the earth had indeed formation and substance from both the hand and workmanship of God, but the other not from the hand and workmanship of God, then He who was made after the image and likeness of the former did not, in that case, preserve the analogy of man, and He must seem an inconsistent piece of work, not having wherewith He may show His wisdom. But this is to say, that He also appeared putatively as man when He was not man, and that He was made man while taking nothing from man. For if He did not receive the substance of flesh from a human being, He neither was made man nor the Son of man; and if He was not made what we were, He did no great thing in what He suffered and endured. But every one will allow that we are [composed of] a body taken from the earth, and a soul receiving spirit from God. This, therefore, the Word of God was made, recapitulating in Himself His own handiwork; and on this account does He confess Himself the Son of man, and blesses "the meek, because they shall inherit the earth." The Apostle Paul, moreover, in the Epistle to the Galatians, declares plainly, "God sent His Son, made of a woman." And again, in that to the Romans, he says, "Concerning His Son, who was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, who was predestinated as the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord."

He has therefore, in His work of recapitulation, summed up all things, both waging war against our enemy, and crushing him who had at the beginning led us away captives in Adam, and trampled upon his head, as thou canst perceive in Genesis that God said to the serpent, "And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; He shall be on the watch for (observabit) thy head, and thou on the watch for His heel." For from that time, He who should be born of a woman, [namely] from the Virgin, after the likeness of Adam, was preached as keeping watch for the head of the serpent. This is the seed of which the apostle says in the Epistle to the Galatians, "that the law of works was established until the seed should come to whom the promise was made." This fact is exhibited in a still clearer light in the same Epistle, where he thus speaks: "But when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman." For indeed the enemy would not have been fairly vanquished, unless it had been a man [born] of a woman who conquered him. For it was by means of a woman that he got the advantage over man at first, setting himself up as man's opponent. And therefore does the Lord profess Himself to be the Son of man, comprising in Himself that original man out of whom the woman was fashioned (ex quo ea quae secundum mulierem est plasmatio facta est), in order that, as our species went down to death through a vanquished man, so we may ascend to life again through a victorious one; and as through a man death received the palm [of victory] against us, so again by a man we may receive the palm against death.

(Verse 4.) But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. Pay close attention to the fact that it does not say 'made through a woman,' which the heresies of Marcion and others assert, pretending that Christ's flesh was imaginary. Rather, it says 'born of a woman,' so that he may be believed to have been born not just through her, but from her. And the fact that the holy and blessed Mother of the Lord is called a woman and not a Virgin is also written in the Gospel according to Matthew: when Joseph is called her husband (Luke 2), and when the Lord Himself rebukes her as a woman (John 2). For it was not necessary to always speak cautiously and timidly of the Virgin, when the word 'woman' signifies the sex more than the union with a man. And according to the understanding of Greek, both γυνὴ can be interpreted as both 'wife' and 'woman'. But to pass over all else: just as he was made under the law, in order to redeem those who were under the law, so he wanted to be born of a woman for the sake of those who were born of a woman. For he also received baptism in the river Jordan, as though repenting, when he was free from sins, so that he could teach others that they should be cleansed through baptism and be born again as the new children of the Spirit. Not understanding at all, John the Baptist was prohibiting him from approaching the bath, saying: I owe to be baptized by you (Matt. III, 14). And immediately the sacrament is taught: Without hesitation: for thus it befits us to fulfill all righteousness, so that he who came for the salvation of men would not pass over anything concerning the conduct of men. Let someone ask and say: If he became under the Law for this reason, to redeem those who were under the Law, which indeed would have been impossible to redeem those who were under the Law unless he himself had become under the Law: or if he became without the Law, in order to redeem those who were not under the Law; or if he did not become without the Law, he does not redeem those who were not under the Law. But if it was possible to redeem those who were without the Law, so that he himself would not be without the Law, then he was made superfluous under the Law, in order to redeem those who were under the Law. He will solve this question briefly, if anyone uses that example: and he was considered with those who were without the Law. For although it may have been poorly edited in the Latin codices due to the simplicity of the interpreters, 'And he was reckoned with the transgressors' (Luke 22:37) means something different among the Greeks, which is written here, and something different 'unjust', which is found in the Latin volumes. Anomos is called that person who is without law, and is bound by no right. Unjust is also referred to as iniquitous or unjust. Hence the Apostle himself says in another place: 'When I was not, he says, without the Law of God; but I was in the Law of Christ' (I Cor. IX): and certainly in this testimony, 'anomos' is written in Greek; and the one who interprets it here correctly could have interpreted the same word there in a similar way, if ambiguity had not deceived him. But someone will examine the word itself more sharply and will say that those who were first on God's side and then ceased to be are called redeemed; but those who were not under the Law are not so much redeemed as bought. Hence, in the letter to the Corinthians, where fornication was heard of, and such fornication that not even among the Gentiles (Ibid. V), it is written: You were bought at a price, not redeemed: for they had not been under the Law. Therefore, we receive the adoption of the children of God: and having been redeemed by Christ, we cease to be under the servitude of the elements of the world and the power of guardians. Just as we have shown the difference between redeeming and buying, let us also consider what the difference is between receiving and accepting the adoption of children.

Here he states two objects and effects of the Incarnation, deliverance from evil and supply of good, things which none could compass but Christ. They are these; deliverance from the curse of the Law, and promotion to sonship. Fitly does he say, that we might "receive," "[be paid,]" implying that it was due; for the promise was of old time made for these objects to Abraham, as the Apostle has himself shown at great length. And how does it appear that we have become sons? he has told us one mode, in that we have put on Christ who is the Son; and now he mentions another, in that we have received the Spirit of adoption.

He is God in that "all things were made through him and nothing was made without him." He is human in that he was "made from a woman, made under the law." The nativity of his flesh shows his human nature. The virgin birth is an indicator of his divine nature.

But when He says, "As the years draw nigh, thou shalt be recognised "He means, as has been said before, that glorious recognition of our Saviour, God in the flesh, who is otherwise invisible to mortal eye; as somewhere Paul, that great interpreter of sacred mysteries, says: "But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons."

"But when the fullness of time had come," namely the time which it was necessary, he says, for Christ to come. For Daniel the prophet assigned the time of Christ's coming, which reached its accomplishment in the reign of Caesar Augustus, when also the incarnate economy of Christ began. (Dan. 9:24-27)

"born of a woman." Therefore he did not say "by a woman," so that you would not suppose his coming to have been by way of the Mother of God [Θεοτόκου], but "of a woman," showing that from her the Lord took his body.

— [PHOTIUS] "born under the law." For he became under the law, having also been circumcised, in order, he says, to redeem those who were under the law and under the curse, by the cross, and to be altogether made under the law. [end of the excerpt by Photius] —

Although in this place the "making" might be understood of his nativity, for there is indeed a distinction between making and generation, … the apostle spoke in this way since the flesh of the Lord was not produced from a human seed in the virgin's womb and made into a body but by the efficacy and power of the Holy Spirit. For it is one thing for blood to come together with an admixture of seed and cause birth, another to procreate by divine power.

A certain person thought that he had cleverly solved this question: that Mary was called a woman by the angel and the apostle because she was already betrothed. For a betrothed is in some sense a bride. Yet between "in some sense" and "truly" there is a great distance.… He spoke of one who was a virgin and was called woman according to a proper usage of this term with respect to the basic quality of a virgin, which is therefore vindicated by the generic term woman.

"But when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth His Son" -the God, of course, who is the Lord of that very succession of times which constitutes an age; who also ordained, as "signs" of time, suns and moons and constellations and stars; who furthermore both predetermined and predicted that the revelation of His Son should be postponed to the end of the times.

Since, then, the Creator promised the gift of His Spirit in the latter days; and since Christ has in these last days appeared as the dispenser of spiritual gifts (as the apostle says, "When the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son; " and again, "This I say, brethren, that the time is short" ), it evidently follows in connection with this prediction of the last days, that this gift of the Spirit belongs to Him who is the Christ of the predicters.

But Paul, too, silences these critics when he says, "God sent forth His Son, made of a woman." Does he mean through a woman, or in a woman? Nay more, for the sake of greater emphasis, he uses the word "made" rather than born, although the use of the latter expression would have been simpler.

"Still," He said, "I have many things to say to you, but ye are not yet able to bear them: when that Spirit of truth shall have come, He will conduct you into all truth, and will report to you the supervening (things).

It is right to point out that he has linked the sending of the eternal Son with the incarnation. For he does not say "he sent him to come into being as Godhead from a woman," so that we would misunderstand the sending to be the sending of the Godhead. Instead only the Son, not the Godhead, is born of a woman. Now this is peculiar to the incarnation.

While we were young, we were subject to new moons and sabbaths, but when the appointed time of Christ's incarnation came, when the human race, having passed through every form of evil, needed healing, then "God sent His Son" (that is, He was pleased to come), "Who was born" (γενόμενον), He did not say: "through a woman," so as not to give justification to those who say that the Lord passed through the Virgin as through a channel, in a completely phantasmal way, but: "of a woman," that is, He received a body from Her very substance and was the fruit of Her womb.

Here the Apostle applies to Christ the simile he has proposed.

First, he makes the application;

Secondly, he discloses the purpose of the reality that corresponds to the simile (v. 5).

It should be noted that above, in the simile he proposed, there were four items pointed out in order, as has been said. But now, in applying them to Christ, he begins with the last, namely, the fixing of a time. The reason for this is that the time in which Christ was humiliated and in which the faithful were exalted turns out to be the same. Hence he says: "But, when the fulness of the time was come," i.e., after the time fixed by God the Father for sending His Son had been accomplished. This is how it is taken in Luke (2:6): "Her days were accomplished, that she should be delivered." This time is called "full" because of the fulness of the graces that are given in it, according to Psalm (64:10): "The river of God is filled with water; thou hast prepared their food: for so is its preparation." Also because of the fulfillment of the figures of the Old Law: "I am not come to destroy but to fulfill" (Mt 5:17). And because of the fulfillment of the promises: "And he shall confirm the covenant with many, in one week" (Dan. 9:27). However, the fact that he likewise says, "But, when the fulness of time was come," in other places of Scripture where the time respecting Christ is said to be accomplished, should not be explained in terms of a necessity imposed by fate, but in terms of a divine ordinance, concerning which Psalm (118:91) states: "By thy ordinance the day goeth on; for all things serve thee."

Two reasons are given why that time was pre-ordained for the coming of Christ. One is taken from His greatness: for since He that was to come was great, it was fitting that men be made ready for His coming by many indications and many preparations. "God, who, at sundry times and in divers manners, spoke in times past to the fathers by the prophets, last of all in these days hath spoken to us by his Son" (Heb 1:1). The other is taken from the role of the one coming: for since a physician was to come, it was fitting that before his coming, men should be keenly aware of their infirmity, both as to their lack of knowledge during the Law of nature and as to their lack of virtue during the written Law. Therefore it was fitting that both, namely, the Law of nature and the written Law, precede the coming of Christ.

Secondly, he applies it as to His dignity as heir, when he says, "God sent his Son," namely, His own natural Son; and if a son, then an heir also. He says, "his Son," i.e., His own, natural, only begotten but not adopted, Son: "God so loved the world as to give his only begotten Son" (Jn 3:16). He sent Him, I say, without His being separated from Him, for He was sent by assuming human nature, and yet He was in the bosom of the Father: "The only begotten Son, Who is in the bosom of the Father" eternally (Jn 1:18); "And no man hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven, the Son of Man, who is in heaven," Who, although He descended by assuming flesh is, nevertheless, in heaven (Jn 3:13). Again, He sent Him, not to be where before He was not; because, although He came unto His own by His presence in the flesh, yet by the presence of His Godhead, He was in the world, as is said in John (1:14). Furthermore, He did not send Him as a minister, because His mission was the assuming of flesh, not the putting off of majesty. God, therefore, sent His Son, I say, to heal the errantry of the concupiscible part and to illumine the ignorance of the rational part: "He sent his word and healed them: and delivered them from their destructions" (Ps 106:20). He sent Him also to deliver them from the power of the devil against the infirmity of the irascible part: "He shall send them a Savior and defender to deliver them" (Is 19:20). Also as a deliverer from the chains of eternal death: "I will deliver them out of the hand of death. I will redeem them from death: O death, I will be thy death" (Hos. 13:14). Also to save them from their sins: "For God sent not his Son into the world to judge the world but that the world may be saved by him" (Jn 3:17).

Thirdly, he applies the simile as to smallness, when he says, "made of a woman": "For a child is born to us" (Is 9:6); "He emptied himself taking the form of a servant" (Phil 2:7). He made Himself small not by putting off greatness, but by taking on smallness.

In interpreting the passage, "made of woman," two errors must be avoided; namely, that of Photinus, who said that Christ was solely man and received the beginning of His existence from the Virgin; in other words, that Christ was made of a woman as though deriving his beginning entirely from her. But this is false, because it contradicts what is said in Romans (1:3): "Who was made to him of the seed of David, according to the flesh"; he does not say "according to His person," which exists from eternity, namely, the hypostasis of the Son of God. Hence, just as when a shield newly comes to be white, it is not proper to say that the very substance of the shield newly came to be, but that the whiteness newly accrued to it; so from the fact that the Son of God newly assumed flesh, it is not proper to say that the person of Christ newly came to be, but that a human nature newly accrued to that person, as when certain things affect a body without that body itself being changed. For certain items affect a thing and change it, such as forms and absolute qualities; but certain other items affect it without changing it. Of this sort is the assuming of flesh precisely as bespeaking a relationship. Hence the person of the Word is in no way changed by it. That is why in divine matters we employ in a temporal sense terms that signify a relationship; thus, we say in Psalm (89:1): "Lord, thou hast been our refuge"; or we say that God became man. But we do not thus use forms and absolute qualities, so as to say: God was made good or wise and so on.

Secondly, one must avoid the error of Ebion, who said that Christ was born of the seed of Joseph, and who was led to this by the saying, born of a woman. For according to him the word "woman" always implies defloration. But this is erroneous, for in Sacred Scripture "woman" also denotes the natural sex, according to Genesis (3:12): "Adam said: The woman who thou gavest me to be my companion gave me of the tree." Here he calls her a woman while she was still a virgin.

Furthermore, by saying "made of a woman" two errors are destroyed, namely, that of Nestorius saying that Christ did not take His body of the Virgin but of the heavens and that He passed through the Blessed Virgin as through a corridor or channel. But this is false, for if it were true, He would not, as the Apostle says, have been made of a woman. By the preposition "of" [ex] the material cause is denoted. Likewise, the error of Nestorius saying that the Blessed Virgin is not the mother of the Son of God but of the son of a man. But this is shown to be false by the words of the Apostle here, that God sent his Son made of a woman. Now one who is made of a woman is her son. Therefore, if the Son of God was made of a woman, namely, of the Blessed Virgin, it is obvious that the Blessed Virgin is the Mother of the Son of God.

Moreover, although he might have said "born of a woman," he distinctly says "made," and not "born." Indeed, for something to be born it must not only be produced of a principle conjoined to it but be made from a principle separate from it. Thus a wooden chest is made by an artisan, but fruit is born from a tree. Now the principle of human generation is twofold, namely, material—and as to this, Christ proceeded from a conjoined principle, because He took the matter of His body from the Virgin; and it is according to this that He is said to be born of her: "Of whom [Mary] was born Jesus Who is called Christ" (Mt 1:16).—The other is the active principle, which in the case of Christ, so far as He had a principle, i.e., as to the forming of the body, was not conjoined but separate, because the power of the Holy Spirit formed it. And with respect to this He is not said to have been born of a woman, but made, as it were, from an extrinsic principle. From this it is obvious that the saying, "of a woman," does not denote a defloration; otherwise he would have said "born" and not "made."

Fourthly, he applies the simile as to its aspect of subjection when he says, "made under the law." But here a difficulty comes to mind from what is said below, namely: "If you are led by the spirit, you are not under the law" (5:18). Hence if Christ is not only spiritual but the giver of the Spirit, it seems unbecoming to say that He was made under the Law. I answer that "to be under the Law" can be taken in two ways: in one way so that "under" denotes the mere observance of the Law, and in this sense Christ was made under the Law, because He was circumcised and presented in the temple: "I am not come to destroy but to fulfill" (Mt 5:17). In another way so that "under" denotes oppression. And in this way one is said to be under the Law if he is oppressed by fear of the Law. But neither Christ nor spiritual men are said to be under the Law in this way.

He says "adoption" so that we may clearly understand that the Son of God is unique. For we are sons of God through his generosity and the condescension of his mercy, whereas he is Son by nature, sharing the same divinity with the Father.

Although God could have become incarnate from the beginning, He nevertheless willed not to do so until the end of the ages. After these He deigned to become incarnate as at the end of times and in their fullness, according to what the Apostle says: "But when the fullness of time had come, God sent His Son, made of a woman, made under the Law, that He might redeem those who were under the Law."

Since freedom of the will requires that it be drawn to nothing against its will, God ought to have restored the human race in such a way that he who wished to seek the Savior would find salvation. Now no one seeks a physician unless he recognizes his disease; no one seeks a teacher unless he recognizes himself to be ignorant; no one seeks a helper unless he recognizes himself to be powerless. Since, therefore, man at the beginning of his fall was still proud of his knowledge and strength, God first allowed the time of the law of nature, in which he would be convicted of ignorance; and afterwards, when ignorance was recognized but pride in his own strength remained, He added the Law, instructing through moral precepts and burdening through ceremonial ones, so that, having obtained knowledge and having recognized his powerlessness, man might take refuge in divine mercy and petition for grace, which was given to us in the coming of Christ.

Since the law by its precepts held people bound, as it were, only to decency of life but not to the hope of deliverance and eternity, God sent his own Son. He sent him subject to the law, that is, the law of Israel, that he might redeem those who were there and lived under the law. Now this is a great thing, that he says [Christ came] not merely to show them the way of life or to stir them up toward eternity with harsh commands but to redeem them. This is the mystery of what he performed, the redemption of all who believed in him, that they might become sons by adoption. When, therefore, such a great benefit came from Christ, nothing was to be added beside this. The law was no longer a matter of servitude.

Someone might raise the problem: "If then he was made subject to the law to redeem those who were subject to the law … if he himself was not made also outside the law, he did not redeem those who had not been subject to the law." Another, however, will scrutinize the word redeemed more closely and will say that by the "redeemed" are meant those who were once of God's party and later ceased to be so, whereas those who were not subject to the law were not so much redeemed as purchased.

"so that we might receive adoption as sons." For he not only freed us from evil, having removed the curse of the law, but also bestowed adoption. And by saying "we might receive" he showed it to be appointed from above, and that we are not able to receive it because of the childishness of our understanding.

But as for that idle god, who has neither any work nor any prophecy, nor accordingly any time, to show for himself, what has he ever done to bring about the fulness of time, or to wait patiently its completion? If nothing, what an impotent state to have to wait for the Creator's time, in servility to the Creator! But for what end did He send His Son? "To redeem them that were under the law," in other words, to "make the crooked ways straight, and the rough places smooth," as Isaiah says -in order that old things might pass away, and a new course begin, even "the new law out of Zion, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem," and "that we might receive the adoption of sons," that is, the Gentiles, who once were not sons.

And He was under the law, received circumcision, and fulfilled everything, in order to deliver us from the curse to which He Himself was not subject. And he points to two saving effects in the incarnation of Christ: our liberation from the curse of the law and the granting of adoption. And he said "receive" in order to show that adoption was destined for us from of old by promise, although on account of our immaturity it was not given to us. For the inheritance promised to Abraham was adoption. Because a son inherits.

Then when he says, "that he might redeem them who were under the law," he sets down the fruit of the reality in which the simile is applied, namely, that the reason why He willed they be subject during that time was that they might become heirs great and free. And he mentions both of these things. First, the fruit of freedom as against subjection; hence he says, "that he might redeem them who were under the law," i.e., under the curse and burden of the Law; "Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us" (3:13). Secondly, the fruit of being made great, inasmuch as we are adopted as sons of God by receiving the Spirit of God and being conformed to Him: "Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His" (Rom 8:9). This adoption belongs in a special way to Christ, because we cannot become adopted sons unless we are conformed to the natural son: "For whom he foreknew, he also predestinated to be made conformable to the image of his Son" (Rom 8:29). With this in mind, he says, "that we might receive the adoption of sons," i.e., that through the natural Son of God we might be made adopted sons according to grace through Christ.

He says of the Gentiles who believed in Christ, "You are sons," having previously been enemies. There can be no doubt that believing Jews were also said to be sons of God, since they had long been called by that name. They had received the name of sons at one time as though by anticipation in order that this sonship might subsequently be understood in Christ, being incomplete without the Spirit.

But this is God's kindness to man, that of whom He is Maker, of them according to grace He afterwards becomes Father also; becomes, that is, when men, His creatures, receive into their hearts, as the Apostle says, 'the Spirit of His Son, crying, Abba, Father.' And these are they who, having received the Word, gained power from Him to become sons of God; for they could not become sons, being by nature creatures, otherwise than by receiving the Spirit of the natural and true Son. Wherefore, that this might be, 'The Word became flesh,' that He might make man capable of Godhead. This same meaning may be gained also from the Prophet Malachi, who says, 'Hath not One God created us? Have we not all one Father?' for first he puts 'created,' next 'Father,' to shew, as the other writers, that from the beginning we were creatures by nature, and God is our Creator through the Word; but afterwards we were made sons, and thenceforward God the Creator becomes our Father also. Therefore 'Father' is proper to the Son; and not 'creature,' but 'Son' is proper to the Father. Accordingly this passage also proves, that we are not sons by nature, but the Son who is in us; and again, that God is not our Father by nature, but of that Word in us, in whom and because of whom we 'cry, Abba, Father.' And so in like manner, the Father calls them sons in whomsoever He sees His own Son, and says, 'I begat;' since begetting is significant of a Son, and making is indicative of the works. And thus it is that we are not begotten first, but made; for it is written, 'Let Us make man;' but afterwards, on receiving the grace of the Spirit, we are said thenceforth to be begotten also; just as the great Moses in his Song with an apposite meaning says first 'He bought,' and afterwards 'He begat;' lest, hearing 'He begat,' they might forget their own original nature; but that they might know that from the beginning they are creatures, but when according to grace they are said to be begotten, as sons, still no less than before are men works according to nature.

There are two words that he has set down so that the former may be interpreted by the latter, "for Abba" means the same as "Father." Now we see that he has elegantly, and not without reason, put together words from two languages signifying the same thing because of the whole people, which has been called from Jews and Gentiles into the unity of faith.

Felicitous, however, is this kiss of participation that enables us not only to know God but to love the Father, who is never fully known until he is perfectly loved. Are there not surely some among you who at certain times perceive deep within their hearts the Spirit of the Son exclaiming: "Abba, Father"? Let that man who feels that he is moved by the same Spirit as the Son, let him know that he too is loved by the Father. Whoever he be let him be of good heart, let his confidence never waver. Living in the Spirit of the Son, let such a soul recognize herself as a daughter of the Father, a bride or even a sister of the Son, for you will find that the soul who enjoys this privilege is called by either of these names.

Behold the whole array of those three powers through one power and one Godhead. For God, he says, who is the Father, sent his own Son, who is Christ, and again Christ, who himself being the power of God is God, … sent the spirit of his Son, who is the Holy Spirit.

(Verse 6.) But because you are sons of God, God has sent the spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying out, Abba, Father. Clearly the Apostle Paul mentions three spirits, the Spirit of the Son of God, as in this present place, God has sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts (Rom. VIII, 14). And the Spirit of God, as in that place: For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. And the Holy Spirit, as in that place: Your bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you (I Cor. VI, 19). That the Holy Spirit is distinct from the Son of God is clearly and convincingly confirmed in the Gospel: Whoever speaks a word against the Son of man will be forgiven. But whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, neither in this age nor in the age to come will be forgiven (Luke 12:10). This is because many, due to their lack of knowledge of the Scriptures (as Firmianus also states in the eighth letter to Demetrianus), assert that the Holy Spirit is often referred to as the Father and sometimes as the Son. And while we believe clearly in the Trinity, removing the third person, they do not want to be his substance, but his name. But in order not to take too long (for this is not a dialogue, but a commentary), I will briefly show the three spirits named in the fiftieth psalm, as the prophet says: Create a clean heart in me, O God, and renew a right spirit within me. Do not cast me away from your presence, and do not take your Holy Spirit from me. Give me the joy of your salvation, and strengthen me with your principal spirit. He calls the principal spirit Father, because the Son is from the Father, and not the Father from the Son. But the spirit of righteousness, truth, and justice signifies Christ the Lord: for the Father has given all judgment to the Son (John V, 22), as David says: O God, give your judgment to the king, and your power to the son of the king (Psalm LXXI, 1). Moreover, he calls the Holy Spirit by its explicit name. These things, although they differ in terms and persons, are associated by substance and nature: and the same Spirit, due to the fellowship of nature, is now called the Father, now the Son. However, the argument by which he endeavors to assert that we are no longer under the Law, but under the grace of the Lord Jesus, concludes with such a purpose. He had said above that we should receive the adoption of sons: now he proves that we are children of God by the Spirit whom we have in us. For never, he says, would we dare to say: Our Father who art in heaven: Hallowed be thy name, unless from the consciousness of the Spirit dwelling within us, and with a great voice of senses and teachings crying out: Abba, Father (Rom. VIII, 15). Abba is a Hebrew word, signifying the same as Father. And Scripture preserves this custom in several places, putting the Hebrew word in its own interpretation. Aser, riches. Tabitha, Dorcas (Acts IX): and in Genesis, Mesech, a slave (Gen. XV), and so on and so forth. However, since Abba Father is said in both Hebrew and Syriac language, and our Lord in the Gospel commands that only God should be called Father (Matt. XXIII), I do not know by what license we either call others by this name in monasteries, or consent to be called by it. And certainly, he himself commanded this when he said there should be no swearing (Matt. V). If we do not swear, we should not even mention anyone's father. If we interpret the father differently, we will be forced to have different opinions about swearing. It should also be noted that in the Scriptures, a shout is not understood as a loud voice, but as an expression of knowledge and the magnitude of teachings. For in Exodus, the Lord responded to Moses: Why do you cry out to me (Exodus 14:15)? when Moses' voice did not go before him. However, Scripture called it a shout when his heart was deeply moved and he groaned for the people with tears. Therefore, just as one who has the Spirit of the Son of God is a son of God, so in reverse, one who does not have the Spirit of the Son of God cannot be called a son of God.

Had not we been first made sons, we could not have called Him Father. If then grace hath made us freemen instead of slaves, men instead of children, heirs and sons instead of aliens, is it not utter absurdity and stupidity to desert this grace, and to turn away backwards?

"For you are sons." And from where, he says, have we been deemed worthy of adoption as sons? From where? From the adoption by the Spirit who descended to prepare us and to teach (for this the One Crying indicates): to call God Father; which would not have been, if we had not been deemed worthy of adoption. And therefore have courage, O man, that you are no longer a slave, but a son of God and his heir. Because of the Son by nature having been incarnate and having taken on our whole humanity, you are no longer a slave and under the yoke of the law. How then is it not absurd for those who have become sons of God, through Christ and through the Spirit, to turn back again to the law? And behold the emphasis of the holy Trinity. The Father sent, the Son became incarnate, and the Spirit cooperated, who also having come into our hearts, teaches to say, Abba, Father. "also an heir through God by Christ Jesus." Through his cross.

That we may have, therefore the assurance that we are the children of God, "He hath sent forth His Spirit into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father." For "in the last days," saith He," I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh.

From where is it evident, he says, that we have been deemed worthy of adoption? Although he showed this before as well, when he declared that we have put on Christ, Who is the Son, he also proves it now by the fact that we have received the Spirit, Who, divinely and extraordinarily touching our hearts, teaches us to call God Father. And this could not be so if we had not been deemed worthy of adoption.

Above, the Apostle revealed the gift bestowed on the Jews; here he shows that this gift pertains also to the Gentiles.

First, he mentions the gift;

Secondly, the means of obtaining it (v. 6);

Thirdly, he discloses the fruit of this gift (v. 7).

He says therefore that the gift of adoption of sons pertains not only to those who were under the Law but to the Gentiles as well. Hence he says: "because you are sons of God," i.e., you are the sons of God, because not only the Jews but all others who believe in the Son of God are adopted as sons: "He gave them power to be made sons of God, to them that believe in his name" (Jn 1:12). The manner in which that gift is obtained is by the sending of the Spirit of the Son of God into your hearts.

Augustine says, however, that Christ, existing in the flesh, preached in a principal manner to the Jews, but to the Gentiles as a matter of course: "For I say that Christ Jesus was minister of the circumcision for the truth of God to confirm the promises made unto the fathers" (Rom 15:8). Accordingly, whatever pertains to the condition of the Jews is fittingly adapted to Christ.

And because they might have said that the Galatians had not been adopted as sons of God, since Christ did not assume flesh from them or preach to them, for that reason the Apostle, elucidating the manner of this adoption, says that although they were not related to Christ according to the flesh, i.e., according to race, or by reason of preaching, yet they were united to him through the Spirit and thereby adopted and made sons of God. Hence the conversion of the Gentiles is in a special way attributed to the Holy Spirit. Consequently, Peter, when he was blamed by the Jews for going to preach to the Gentiles, excused himself through the Holy Spirit, saying (Acts 11) that he could not resist the Holy Spirit by Whose inspiration he had done this. And so, because God the Father sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, i.e., the hearts of the Jews and Gentiles, we are united to Christ and by that fact are adopted as sons of God.

But it should be noted that if in certain passages of Scripture the Holy Spirit is said to be sent by the Father—"But the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name" (Jn 14:26)—and in others to be sent by the Son—"But when the Paraclete cometh, whom I will send you from the Father" (Jn 15:26)—the Holy Spirit is none the less common to Father and Son and proceeds from Both and is sent by Both. Accordingly, wherever it is said that the Father sends the Holy Spirit, mention is made of the Son, as in the aforesaid passage: "Whom the Father will send in my name"; and where He is said to be sent by the Son, mention is made of the Father; hence He says, "Whom I will send to you from the Father." Even here, when he says, God the Father hath sent the Holy Spirit, mention is made at once of the Son, for he adds, "of his Son." Nor does it matter that at times the Holy Spirit is only said to proceed from the Father, for the fact that the Son sends Him shows that He proceeds from Him. Accordingly, the Holy Spirit is called the Spirit of the Son as of the One sending and as of the One from Whom He proceeds, as well as of the One from Whom the Holy Spirit has whatever He has, just as of the Father: "He shall glorify me, because He shall receive of mine" (Jn 16:14).

But he says, "into your hearts," because there is a twofold generation: one is carnal and comes about through fleshly seed sent to the place of generation. This seed, small as it is, contains in effect the whole. The other is spiritual, which comes about by spiritual seed transmitted to the place of spiritual generation, i.e., man's mind or heart, because they are born sons of God through a renewal of the mind. Furthermore, the spiritual seed is the grace of the Holy Spirit: "Whosoever is born of God sinneth not: but the generation of God preserveth him and the wicked one toucheth him not" (1 Jn 5:18). This seed contains, in effect, the whole perfection of beatitude; hence it is called the pledge and earnest of beatitude (Eph 1:14); "I will put a new spirit within you" (Ez 36:26).

"Crying," i.e., making us cry, "Abba, Father," not with a loudness of voice but with a great fervor of love. For we cry, "Abba, Father," when our affections are kindled by the warmth of the Holy Spirit to desire God: "You have not received the spirit of bondage again in fear; but you have received the spirit of adoption of sons, whereby we cry, Abba (Father)" (Rom 8:15). "Abba" in Hebrew and "Pater" in Greek have the same meaning of "father." And he makes mention of both to show that the grace of the Holy Spirit, as such, is related in a common way to both.

There is no doubt that one adopts a son in order to leave him an heir; but inheritance depends on the death of someone. How then can mortals be called the heirs of him who lives forever? The fact is that Scripture speaks in our own manner so that we may understand. In order to show that the Father will give from his goods those things that he is going to give his sons, it calls this "inheritance."

To us a human is primarily food; our aim is the absorption of its will into ours, the increase of our own area of selfhood at its expense. But the obedience which the Enemy demands of men is quite a different thing. One must face the fact that all the talk about His love for men, and His service being perfect freedom, is not (as one would gladly believe) mere propaganda, but an appalling truth. He really does want to fill the universe with a lot of loathsome little replicas of Himself--creatures whose life, on its miniature scale, will be qualitatively like His own, not because He has absorbed them but because their wills freely conform to His. We want cattle who can finally become food; He wants servants who can finally become sons. We want to suck in, He wants to give out. We are empty and would be filled; He is full and flows over. Our war aim is a world in which Our Father Below has drawn all other beings into himself: the Enemy wants a world full of beings united to Him but still distinct.

"So also we, when we were children, were in bondage under the rudiments of the world: but when the fulness of the time was came, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons" by Him. See how He has admitted those to be children who are under fear and sins; but has conferred manhood on those who are under faith, by calling them sons, in contradistinction from the children that are under the law: "For thou art no more a servant," he says, "but a son; and if a son, then an heir through God." What, then, is lacking to the son after inheritance?

What we say in this place we should also observe in others, that the whole human race is being treated under a single term. For all we who believe are one in Christ Jesus and members of his body.

(Verse 7) So then, you are no longer a slave but a son. And if a son, then an heir through Christ. And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, 'Abba! Father!' So you are no longer a slave, but a son, and if a son, then an heir through God. Ask of me and I will give you the nations for your inheritance, and the ends of the earth for your possession (Psalm 2:7-8). But what we say in this place, we should also observe in other cases, that in the whole human race, discussions should be conducted in the singular number. For all believers, we are one in Christ Jesus, and members of his body, and brought into a perfect man, who is our head, for the head of the man is Christ (1 Corinthians 11:2).

Therefore, when we are children and heirs not of a simple inheritance, but of a divine one, and co-heirs with the Only-Begotten, why then do we again become slaves and, holding to the law, reject the faith that granted us adoption?

Then when he says, "Therefore, now he is not a servant, but a son," he mentions the fruit of this gift. First, as to removing all evil, from which we are freed through adoption by the Holy Spirit. This is freedom from bondage. With respect to this he says: "Therefore," i.e., because the Spirit cries "Father" in us, "now," from the time of grace, "he," i.e., each one of us who believes in Christ, "is not a servant," i.e., serving in fear—"I will not now call you servants but friends" (Jn 15:15); "You have not received the spirit of bondage again in fear: but you have received the spirit of adoption of sons" (Rom 8:15)—"but a son": "For the Spirit himself giveth testimony to our spirit that we are the sons of God" (Rom 8:16). For although we be in the condition of servants (because it is said in Luke (17:10): "When you shall have done all these things that are commanded you, say: We are unprofitable servants"), we are not ill-disposed servants, i.e., serving in fear—for such a servant is deserving of torture and chains—but we are good and faithful servants, serving out of love. For that reason we obtain freedom through the Son: "If, therefore, the son shall make you free, you shall be free indeed" (Jn 8:36).

Secondly, he mentions the fruit as to its effect of attaining every good. With regard to this he says: "And, if a son, an heir also through God": "And if sons, heirs also: heirs indeed of God and joint heirs with Christ" (Rom 8:17). Now this inheritance is the fulness of all good, for it is nothing other than God Himself, according to Psalm (15:5): "The Lord is the portion of my inheritance." He said to Abraham: "I am thy reward exceeding great" (Gen 15:1). He says, "through God," because as the Jews obtained the inheritance through the promise and justice of God, so the Gentiles too received it through God, i.e., through the mercy of God: "But the Gentiles are to glorify God for his mercy" (Rom 15:9). Or, "through God," i.e., through the working of God: "Thou hast wrought all our works for us, O Lord" (Is 26:12).