Thomas Aquinas

Here the Apostle raises another doubt, namely whether the law is harmful to grace. And first he raises the doubt, saying "Is the law then," etc., as if to say: if the law was established on account of transgressions, does the law then act against the promises of God — namely, so that what God promised he would do through the promised seed, he does through something else? God forbid. As if to say: no. For above, in the same place: "the law does not make void the covenant so as to nullify the promises," etc. Romans 7:12: "the law is holy, and the commandment holy."

Second, when he says "For if a law had been given," etc., he resolves the doubt. And first he shows that the law is not against the promises of God; second, that it is in service of the promises, at the point "but concluded," etc.

He says, therefore, that although the law was established on account of transgressions, it is nevertheless not contrary to the promise of God, because it cannot remove the transgressions themselves. For if it did remove them, then it would clearly be against the promises of God, because justice would be through another way than the one God promised — since it would be through the law and not through faith — whereas nevertheless it is said, Habakkuk 2:4: "my just one lives from faith." Romans 3:22: "the justice of God is through the faith of Jesus Christ." And therefore he says that if a law had been given of such a kind that it could give life — that is, were of such power that it could confer the life of grace and eternal blessedness — then truly, and not merely apparently, justice would be from the law, if the law did what faith is said to do; and thus faith would be in vain. But the law does not justify, because the letter — namely, of the law — kills, as is said in 2 Corinthians 3:6, and Romans 8:2: "for the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus," etc.

Then when he says "but Scripture concluded," etc., he shows that the law not only is not contrary to grace but is even in service to it. And first he shows that the law serves the promises of God; second, how this service was made manifest among the Jews, at the point "but before faith came," etc.; third, how the Gentiles too, without the law, obtained the promises of God, at the point "for you are all sons of God," etc.

Concerning the first, it must be known that the law serves the promises of God in general with respect to two things. First, because it manifests sins. Romans 3:20: "through the law, knowledge of sin." Then, because it manifests human weakness, inasmuch as man cannot avoid sin except through grace, which was not given through the law. And just as these two things — namely, knowledge of the disease and the powerlessness of the sick person — greatly induce one to seek a physician, so knowledge of sin and of one's own powerlessness induce one to seek Christ. Thus, then, the law served grace, insofar as it supplied knowledge of sin and experience of one's own powerlessness. And therefore he says "Scripture" — that is, the written law — "concluded," that is, it held the Jews shut in, "under sin" — that is, it showed them the sins that they were committing. Romans 7:7: "I did not know concupiscence," etc. Likewise it "concluded," because with the law coming they took occasion for sin. Romans 11:32: "God has concluded all things under unbelief," etc. And this was so that man might seek grace. And therefore he says "that the promise" — that is, the grace that had been promised — "might be given not only to the Jews, but to all believers," because that grace was able to free from sins, and this grace is from the faith of Jesus Christ.

Then when he says "but before it came," etc., he sets forth the experience of this service made manifest among the Jews. And first he sets forth the service rendered to the Jews; second, he draws a certain corollary, at the point "therefore the law was our pedagogue," etc.

He says, therefore: if Scripture — that is, the written law — held all things shut in under sin, what benefits did the Jews have from the law before faith came from grace? He answers and says: we Jews, before the coming of faith, were kept under the law, inasmuch as it made us avoid idolatry and many other evils; we were kept, I say, not as free men, but as it were as servants under fear, and this "under the law" — that is, under the burden and dominion of the law. Romans 7:1: "the law has dominion over a man for as long as he lives," etc. And we were kept "shut in" — that is, preserved lest we should slip away from life, but were being prepared for it — that is, for that so-good faith which was to be revealed. Isaiah 56:1: "my salvation is near, that it may come, and my justice, that it may be revealed." And he says "to be revealed," because since faith exceeds every human intellect, it cannot be had through one's own understanding, but from revelation and the gift of God. Isaiah 40:5: "the glory of the Lord shall be revealed," etc. Or: for that faith which was to be revealed in the time of grace, lying hidden in ancient times under many signs. Whence also, at the time of Christ, the veil of the temple was torn, Matthew 27:51.

Consequently, when he says "the law was our pedagogue," etc., he draws a certain corollary. And first he shows the office of the law; second, the attestation of that office, at the point "but when the fullness of time came," etc.

Now the office of the law was the office of a pedagogue, and therefore he says "the law was our pedagogue," etc. For as long as an heir cannot obtain the benefit of the inheritance, whether on account of a deficiency of age or of some due perfection, he is kept and guarded by some instructor, and this instructor indeed is called a "pedagogue," from "paidos," which means "boy," and "agoge," which means "leading." For through the law the Jews, like weak children, were held back from evil through fear of punishment, and were advanced toward the good by the love and promise of temporal things. Now to the Jews was promised the blessing of the future seed with a view to obtaining the inheritance, but the time of obtaining that inheritance itself had not yet come. And therefore it was necessary that they be preserved until the time of the future seed, and be restrained from unlawful things — which was accomplished through the law. And therefore he says "therefore," etc., as if to say: since we were kept under the law, the law was our pedagogue — that is, directing and preserving us "in Christ," that is, in the way of Christ. And this was so that we might be justified from the faith of Christ. Hosea 11:1: "Israel a child, and I loved him." Jeremiah 31:18: "you have chastised me, Lord, and I was instructed," etc. Romans 3:28: "for we reckon that a man is justified through faith," etc. And although the law was our pedagogue, it nevertheless did not lead to the perfect inheritance, because, as is said in Hebrews 7: "the law brought no one to perfection," etc.

But this office ceased after faith came. And this is what he says: "but when faith came" — namely, the faith of Christ — "we are now no longer under a pedagogue" — that is, under a coercion which is not necessary for free men. 1 Corinthians 15: "when I was a child," etc.; "but when I became a man," etc. 2 Corinthians 5:17: "if then any new creature in Christ, the old things have passed away," etc.