“"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.”

“The word "child" in this place denotes not age but understanding; meaning that God had from the beginning designed for us these gifts, but, as we yet continued childish, He let us be under the elements of the world, that is, new moons and sabbaths, for these days are regulated by the course of sun and moon. If then also now they bring you under law they do nothing else but lead you backward now in the time of your perfect age and maturity. And see what is the consequence of observing days; the Lord, the Master of the house, the Sovereign Ruler, is thereby reduced to the rank of a servant.”

“The infant heir … signifies the whole human race up to the advent of Christ, and, to speak more largely, right up to the end of the world. For, just as all die in Adam the first man, though they are not yet born, so all those who were born before Christ's advent are now made alive in the second Adam. And so it is that we served the law in the fathers and are saved by grace in the sons. This understanding fits the catholic church, which asserts a single providence in the Old and New Testaments and does not distinguish in time those whom it makes equal in condition.”

“After pointing out the shortcoming of the Law, the Apostle then shows here the dignity of grace. First, with a human example; secondly, with an example from Scripture (v. 21). Regarding the first he does three things: First, he shows the pre-eminence of grace over the primitive state of the Old Law by a simile taken from human law; Secondly, he shows that they have been made partakers of this pre-eminence through faith (v. 6); Thirdly, he censures them for disdaining this pre-eminence (v. 8). As to the first, he does two things: First, he lays down the simile; Secondly, he adapts it to his proposition (v. 3). It should be noted that the Apostle touches four things in the simile he proposes. First of all, eminence, because he speaks not of a servant but of an heir. Hence he says, As "long as the heir is a child." This is applied and referred both to the Jewish people—who were the heirs of the promise to Abraham: "For the Lord hath chosen Jacob unto himself; Israel for his own possession" (Ps 134:4)—and to Christ, Who is the heir of all things: "whom he hath appointed heir of all things" (Heb 1:2). Secondly, smallness; hence he says, "is a child," because the Jews were children according to the state of the Law: "Who shall raise up Jacob, for he is a little one?" (Am 7:5). Similarly, Christ, too, was become a child through the Incarnation: "For a child is born to us and a son is given to us" (Is 9:6). But note that the Apostle sometimes compares the state of the Law to a child, as he does here, and sometimes the state of the present life: "When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child" (1 Cor 13:11). The reason for this is that the state of the Old Law, because of the imperfection of knowledge, is as a child, compared to the state of grace and truth which came through Christ. In like manner, the state of the present life, in which we see through a mirror in a dark manner, is as a child, compared to the state of the future life, in which there is perfect knowledge of God, because He is seen as He is. Thirdly, subjection, when he says, "he differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all: but is under tutors and governors." For a servant is one who is subject to a lord. But a boy, as long as he is a child, because he does not have fulness of knowledge and use of free will through lack of years, is committed to the care of others who defend his possessions—and these are called tutors—and who handle his affairs—and these are called governors. Therefore, though he be lord of all his things, yet, in so far as he is subject to others, he differs nothing from a servant, because he does not have free will but is in fact constrained. And this is applied to the Jewish people: "And now hear, O Jacob, my servant" (Is 44:1). Here it should be noted that among the Jewish people some were servants in the strict sense; those, namely, who observed the Law through fear of punishment and through a desire for the temporal things which the Law promised. But there were others who were not servants in the strict sense, but living as servants, were really sons and heirs. These, although outwardly attending to temporal things and avoiding punishments, did not place their end in them but took them as a figure of spiritual goods. Hence, even though on the surface they seemed to differ nothing from servants, inasmuch as they observed the ceremonies and other commandments of the Law, they were, nevertheless, lords, because they did not use them with the same frame of mind as servants; for they used them for love of the spiritual goods they prefigured, whereas servants used them chiefly through fear of punishment and with a desire for earthly convenience. Christ, too was like a servant, because although He is the Lord of all things according to Psalm (109:1): "The Lord said to my Lord," nevertheless outwardly, as man, He seemed to differ nothing from a servant: "He emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men, and in habit found as a man" (Phil 2:7). Furthermore, he was under tutors and governors, because He was made under the Law, as is said below: made under the law (v. 4); He was also subject to men, as is said in Luke (2:51): "He was subject to them." Fourthly, he touches on the correspondence of time, when he says, "until the time appointed by the father", because just as the heir is under tutors for a definite period of time fixed by the father, so the Law had a time fixed by God determining how long it was to endure and how long the heir, i.e., the Jewish people, where to be under it. Similarly, there was a time fixed by the Father during which Christ was not to perform miracles or show the Lordship of His divine power: "My hour is not yet come" (Jn 2:4).”

“By the child, in this place, the apostle understands all the Jewish people, who, as long as they were under the childhood of the law, were subject to numerous restrictions, although they were the favorite children of God. But when the fulness of time came, they received the adoption of children, and were in possession of the liberty of the law of grace. They were no longer obliged to observe the legal rites. Whence the apostle wishes the conclusion to be drawn, that if persons once subject to the law were now exempt from it, how much more will those be excused from its yoke, who were never under its control. (Calmet)”

“For what reason? Because it was decided by the father that he should manage nothing until the lawful age. And he rightly produced the example of the infant. For just as that child, though master of all things, is prevented by his infancy from exercising control over his possessions, so we too, because our mind has long been youthful, are hindered from being deemed worthy of adoption as children of God. "when we were children." He says "children" not in respect of age but of knowledge of God, indicating that God had willed to grant these things from the beginning, that is, adoption as sons, but that we are responsible for the delay, being children in our minds. Having then been permitted, by God's patience, to be enslaved to the elements, that is, to the course of the sun and the moon. For being enslaved to Sabbaths and new moons and observances of days, which were prescribed by the law, he says that for the most part we were subject to the sun and the moon, from which come the days and the months and the Sabbaths. Very desirous indeed to reduce those things in the law, he stops and says, "Under the law we were in bondage," he said "under the elemental principles." — [THEODORET] When, he says, we were infants and immature, the law acted as a sort of guardian and steward over us. (For he spoke of the basic elements of the world, judicial observations.) Since night and day are named after the sun and moon, and from days weeks and months and years are formed, the law ordered that Sabbaths and new moons and annual festivals and the weeks of years be observed; for this reason he said: "under the elemental principles," since time is also constituted from these. [end of the excerpt by Theodoret] — — [GENNADIUS] "under the elemental principles of the world." With the oversight of guardians and managers who, for the benefit of the young, guide those not yet mature, he received the elements of the world, with which we were enslaved because our knowledge was incomplete. Therefore, I do not think he took the sun and the moon as part of the order of guardians, because submission to those would be harmful; rather he calls them the elements of the world, or the elementary and introductory law. (For he was also writing to those faithful from the Jews, and here indicates the slightly aforementioned things, and that if you are circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing.) He calls them elements: day, water, fire, which were observations of the law that brought into slavery. Days, namely Sabbaths and new moons and circumcisions. Water, in bodily purifications and baptisms. Fire, in not kindling fire on the Sabbaths, but in eating unseasoned food. See what Eusebius said about this as a foreigner in the fourth discourse of the Proof of the Gospel. [end of the excerpt by Gennadius] —”

“"Guardians and trustees" could be taken as the prophets, by whose words we were made ready, day by day, for the coming of the Savior, just as the law of Moses is described above as a custodian.… Or the phrase could be taken to refer to priests and princes, who then held power over the people and are now a reflection of God's purpose. People are correctly said to live under tutors and overseers when, having the spirit of fear, they have not yet deserved to receive the spirit of freedom and adoption. For the age of infancy feels dread in relation to sin, fears its custodian and does not believe in its own freedom, even if it is sovereign by nature.”

“Fourthly, he touches on the correspondence of time, when he says, "until the time appointed by the father," because just as the heir is under tutors for a definite period of time fixed by the father, so the Law had a time fixed by God determining how long it was to endure and how long the heir, i.e., the Jewish people, were to be under it. Similarly, there was a time fixed by the Father during which Christ was not to perform miracles or show the Lordship of His divine power: "My hour is not yet come" (Jn. 2:4).”

“tutors and governors--rather, "guardians (of the person) and stewards (of the property)." Answering to "the law was our schoolmaster" or "tutor" (Gal 3:24). until the time appointed of the father--in His eternal purposes (Eph 1:9-11). The Greek is a legal term, expressing a time defined by law, or testamentary disposition.”

“The elements of the world were thought to have in themselves at the same time their own motions and, as it were, certain necessary consequences of the motion of other beings, such as stars, by whose revolution human life was brought under necessity. And so humans served the elements as the stars ordained and the course of the world required.”

“He has used the name "elements of the world" for those whom he called tutors and overseers above.… Some hold that these are angels that preside over the four elements. … Many think that it is the heaven and earth with their inhabitants that are called the elements of the world, because the wise Greeks, the barbarians and the Romans, the dregs of all superstition, venerate the sun, the moon, … from which we are liberated by Christ's coming, knowing them to be creatures and not divinities. Others interpret the elements of the world as the law of Moses and the utterances of the prophets, because, commencing and setting out with these letters, we imbibe the fear of God, which is the beginning of wisdom.… The Mosaic law and the prophets can be taken as the elements of writing, because through them syllables and names are put together, and they are learned not so much for their own sake as for their usefulness to others.… Regarding our interpretation of the law and the prophets as the elements of the world, "world" is customarily taken to signify those who are in the world.”

“Why does Paul include his own character in this description? He says not "When you were small, you were subject to the elements of this world" but "When we were small we were in servitude under the elements of this world." This does not have any reference to the Jews, from whom Paul derived his origin. Rather it refers to his identification with the Gentiles in this place at least, since he can properly join himself with the character of those whom he was sent to evangelize.”

“"In childhood" not by age, but by knowledge of God. And by "elemental principles" of the world he means new moons and sabbaths, because these days come to us from the course of the moon and the sun. Therefore those who now subject us to the law thereby make us children and enslave us to the elements of the world, even though we have already become perfect men, and sons of God, and stewards, and lords. We also learn that God from the beginning desired to give this adoption (for in this the inheritance consists), but our immaturity hindered Him. Wishing to completely abolish the law, he did not say "we were enslaved to days," but "to the elemental principles of the world," in order to more strongly shame those who still incline toward obedience to the law. But do not be troubled that in the flow of the discourse the "elements" are conceived as masters and overseers. For, in the first place, you must understand the law as the master, just as also the pedagogue, and not them (the elements); therefore he called the new moons and sabbaths elements. Moreover, he expressed himself this way in order to completely draw them away from the law and to shame them, as he will reveal even more clearly further on. Some, however, understood by elements the natural, preparatory law.”

“He applies this simile when he says, "So we also, when we were children, were serving under the elements of the world." First, he applies it as touching the Jews; Secondly, as touching Christ (v. 4). He says therefore: I say that as long as the heir is a child he differeth nothing from a servant; so, we Jews also, when we were children in the state of the Old Law, were serving under the elements of the world, i.e., under the Law which promised temporal things—"If you be willing, and will hearken to me, you shall eat the good things of the land" (Is 1:19)—and threatened temporal punishments. Or the Old Law is called "element," because just as boys who are to be trained in a science are first taught the elements of that science and through them are brought to the fulness of science, so to the Jews was proposed the Old Law through which they would be brought to faith and justice: "the law was our pedagogue in Christ" (3:24). Or, under the elements, i.e., the corporeo-religious usages which they observed, such as days of the moon, new moons and the Sabbath. But one should not object that on this account they differed nothing from the pagans who served the elements of this world, for the Jews did not serve them or pay them worship; but under them they served and worshipped God, whereas the pagans in serving the elements rendered them divine worship: "They worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever" (Rom 1:25). Furthermore, it was necessary that the Jews serve God under the elements of this world, because such an order is in harmony with human nature which is led from sensible to intelligible things.”

“we--the Jews primarily, and inclusively the Gentiles also. For the "we" in Gal 4:5 plainly refers to both Jew and Gentile believers. The Jews in their bondage to the law of Moses, as the representative people of the world, include all mankind virtually amenable to God's law (Rom 2:14-15; compare Note, see on Gal 3:13; Gal 3:23). Even the Gentiles were under "bondage," and in a state of discipline suitable to nonage, till Christ came as the Emancipator. were in bondage--as "servants" (Gal 4:1). under the elements--or "rudiments"; rudimentary religion teaching of a non-Christian character: the elementary lessons of outward things (literally, "of the [outward] world"); such as the legal ordinances mentioned, Gal 4:10 (Col 2:8, Col 2:20). Our childhood's lessons [CONYBEARE and HOWSON]. Literally, The letters of the alphabet (Heb 5:12).”

“By the "elements" he means new moons and the sabbath. New moons are the lunar days that the Jews observe, while the sabbath is the day of rest. Therefore, before the promise came (that is, the gift of God's grace) and justified believers by purifying them, we were subject, like those who are infants and imperfect, to our fellow servants as though to custodians. Our pernicious freedom was the matrix of sin.”

“"when we were children." He says " children " not in respect of age but of knowledge of God, indicating that God had willed to grant these things from the beginning, that is, adoption as sons, but that we are responsible for the delay, being children in our minds. Having then been permitted, by God's patience, to be enslaved to the elements, that is, to the course of the sun and the moon. For being enslaved to Sabbaths and new moons and observances of days, which were prescribed by the law, he says that for the most part we were subject to the sun and the moon, from which come the days and the months and the Sabbaths. Very desirous indeed to reduce those things in the law, he stops and says, "Under the law we were in bondage," he said "under the elemental principles." — [THEODORET] When, he says, we were infants and immature, the law acted as a sort of guardian and steward over us. (For he spoke of the basic elements of the world, judicial observations.) Since night and day are named after the sun and moon, and from days weeks and months and years are formed, the law ordered that Sabbaths and new moons and annual festivals and the weeks of years be observed; for this reason he said: "under the elemental principles," since time is also constituted from these. [end of the excerpt by Theodoret] — — [GENNADIUS] "under the elemental principles of the world." With the oversight of guardians and managers who, for the benefit of the young, guide those not yet mature, he received the elements of the world, with which we were enslaved because our knowledge was incomplete. Therefore, I do not think he took the sun and the moon as part of the order of guardians, because submission to those would be harmful; rather he calls them the elements of the world, or the elementary and introductory law. (For he was also writing to those faithful from the Jews, and here indicates the slightly aforementioned things, and that if you are circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing.) He calls them elements: day, water, fire, which were observations of the law that brought into slavery. Days, namely Sabbaths and new moons and circumcisions. Water, in bodily purifications and baptisms. Fire, in not kindling fire on the Sabbaths, but in eating unseasoned food. See what Eusebius said about this as a foreigner in the fourth discourse of the Proof of the Gospel. [end of the excerpt by Gennadius] —”

“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.”

“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.”

“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."”

“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."”

“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.”

“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.”

“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.”

“(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.”

“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.”

“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.”

“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.”

“the fulness of the time--namely, "the time appointed by the Father" (Gal 4:2). Compare Note, see on Eph 1:10; Luk 1:57; Act 2:1; Eze 5:2. "The Church has its own ages" [BENGEL]. God does nothing prematurely, but, foreseeing the end from the beginning, waits till all is ripe for the execution of His purpose. Had Christ come directly after the fall, the enormity and deadly fruits of sin would not have been realized fully by man, so as to feel his desperate state and need of a Saviour. Sin was fully developed. Man's inability to save himself by obedience to the law, whether that of Moses, or that of conscience, was completely manifested; all the prophecies of various ages found their common center in this particular time: and Providence, by various arrangements in the social and political, as well as the moral world, had fully prepared the way for the coming Redeemer. God often permits physical evil long before he teaches the remedy. The smallpox had for long committed its ravages before inoculation, and then vaccination, was discovered. It was essential to the honor of God's law to permit evil long before He revealed the full remedy. Compare "the set time" (Psa 102:13). was come--Greek, "came." sent forth--Greek, "sent forth out of heaven from Himself" [ALFORD and BENGEL]. The same verb is used of the Father's sending forth the Spirit (Gal 4:6). So in Act 7:12. Compare with this verse, Joh 8:42; Isa 48:16. his--emphatical. "His own Son." Not by adoption, as we are (Gal 4:5): nor merely His Son by the anointing of the Spirit which God sends into the heart (Gal 4:6; Joh 1:18). made of a woman--"made" is used as in Co1 15:45, "The first man, Adam, was made a living soul," Greek, "made to be (born) of a woman." The expression implies a special interposition of God in His birth as man, namely, causing Him to be conceived by the Holy Ghost. So ESTIUS. made under the law--"made to be under the law." Not merely as GROTIUS and ALFORD explain, "Born subject to the law as a Jew." But "made" by His Father's appointment, and His own free will, "subject to the law," to keep it all, ceremonial and moral, perfectly for us, as the Representative Man, and to suffer and exhaust the full penalty of our whole race's violation of it. This constitutes the significance of His circumcision, His being presented in the temple (Luk 2:21-22, Luk 2:27; compare Mat 5:17), and His baptism by John, when He said (Mat 3:15), "Thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness."”

“"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.”

“"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.”

“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.”

“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.”

“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.”

“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.”

“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.”

“To--Greek, "That He might redeem." them . . . under the law--primarily the Jews: but as these were the representative people of the world, the Gentiles, too, are included in the redemption (Gal 3:13). receive--The Greek implies the suitableness of the thing as long ago predestined by God. "Receive as something destined or due" (Luk 23:41; Jo2 1:8). Herein God makes of sons of men sons of God, inasmuch as God made of the Son of God the Son of man [AUGUSTINE on Psalm 52].”

“"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 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.”

“(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.”

“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.”

“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.”

“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.”

“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.”

“because ye are sons--The gift of the Spirit of prayer is the consequence of our adoption. The Gentile Galatians might think, as the Jews were under the law before their adoption, that so they, too, must first be under the law. Paul, by anticipation, meets this objection by saying, YE ARE sons, therefore ye need not be as children (Gal 4:1) under the tutorship of the law, as being already in the free state of "sons" of God by faith in Christ (Gal 3:26), no longer in your nonage (as "children," Gal 4:1). The Spirit of God's only Begotten Son in your hearts, sent from, and leading you to cry to, the Father, attests your sonship by adoption: for the Spirit is the "earnest of your inheritance" (Rom 8:15-16; Eph 1:13). "It is because ye are sons that God sent forth" (the Greek requires this translation, not "hath sent forth") into OUR (so the oldest manuscripts read for "your," in English Version) hearts the Spirit of His son, crying, "Abba, Father" (Joh 1:12). As in Gal 4:5 he changed from "them," the third person, to "we," the first person, so here he changes from "ye," the second person, to "our," the first person: this he does to identify their case as Gentiles, with his own and that of his believing fellow countrymen, as Jews. In another point of view, though not the immediate one intended by the context, this verse expresses, "Because ye are sons (already in God's electing purpose of love), God sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts," &c.: God thus, by sending His Spirit in due time, actually conferring that sonship which He already regarded as a present reality ("are") because of His purpose, even before it was actually fulfilled. So Heb 2:13, where "the children" are spoken of as existing in His purpose, before their actual existence. the Spirit of his Son--By faith ye are one with the Son, so that what is His is yours; His Sonship ensures your sonship; His Spirit ensures for you a share in the same. "If any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His" (Rom 8:9). Moreover, as the Spirit of God proceeds from God the Father, so the Spirit of the Son proceeds from the Son: so that the Holy Ghost, as the Creed says, "proceedeth from the Father and the Son." The Father was not begotten: the Son is begotten of the Father; the Holy Ghost proceeding from the Father and the Son. crying--Here the SPIRIT is regarded as the agent in praying, and the believer as His organ. In Rom 8:15, "The Spirit of adoption" is said to be that whereby WE cry, "Abba, Father"; but in Rom 8:26, "The SPIRIT ITSELF maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered." The believers' prayer is His prayer: hence arises its acceptability with God. Abba, Father--The Hebrew says, "Abba" (a Hebrew term), the Greek, "Father" ("Pater," a Greek term in the original), both united together in one Sonship and one cry of faith, "Abba, Father." So "Even so ('Nai,' Greek) Amen (Hebrew)," both meaning the same (Rev 1:7). Christ's own former cry is the believers' cry, "Abba, Father" (Mar 14:36).”

“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.”

“"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.”

“"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?”

“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).”

“Wherefore--Conclusion inferred from Gal 4:4-6. thou--individualizing and applying the truth to each. Such an individual appropriation of this comforting truth God grants in answer to them who cry, "Abba, Father." heir of God through Christ--The oldest manuscripts read, "an heir through God." This combines on behalf of man, the whole before-mentioned agency, of THE TRINITY: the Father sent His Son and the Spirit; the Son has freed us from the law; the Spirit has completed our sonship. Thus the redeemed are heirs THROUGH the Triune GOD, not through the law, nor through fleshly descent [WINDISCHMANN in ALFORD]; (Gal 3:18 confirms this). heir--confirming Gal 3:29; compare Rom 8:17.”

“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."”

“These [heretics now referred to], being the disciples of those mentioned, render such as assent to them worse than the heathen. For the former "serve the creature rather than the Creator," and "those which are not gods," notwithstanding that they ascribe the first place in Deity to that God who was the Maker of this universe. But the latter maintain that He, [i.e., the Creator of this world,] is the fruit of a defect, and describe Him as being of an animal nature, and as not knowing that Power which is above Him, while He also exclaims, "I am God, and besides Me there is no other God." Affirming that He lies, they are themselves liars, attributing all sorts of wickedness to Him; and conceiving of one who is not above this Being as really having an existence, they are thus convicted by their own views of blasphemy against that God who really exists, while they conjure into existence a god who has no existence, to their own condemnation. And thus those who declare themselves "perfect," and as being possessed of the knowledge of all things, are found to be worse than the heathen, and to entertain more blasphemous opinions even against their own Creator.”

“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.”

“Here turning to the Gentile believers he says that it is an idolatry, this rigid observance of days, and now incurs a severe punishment. To enforce this, and inspire them with a deeper anxiety, he calls the elements "not by nature Gods." And his meaning is,-Then indeed, as being benighted and bewildered, ye lay grovelling upon the earth, but now that ye have known God or rather are known of Him, how great and bitter will be the chastisement ye draw upon you, if, after such a treatment, ye relapse into the same disease. It was not by your own pains that ye found out God, but while ye continued in error, He drew you to Himself. He says "weak and beggarly rudiments," in that they avail nothing towards the good things held out to us.”

“(Verse 8, 9) But at that time, not knowing God, you served those who by nature are not gods. But now, knowing God, or rather being known by God, how are you turning again to the weak and impoverished elemental forces, to which you desire to be enslaved again? He reproves the Galatians for having turned from the worship of idols to the true faith of God, and asks how they, after abandoning the idols which are not gods by nature, and knowing God, or rather being known by Him, and even receiving the Spirit of adoption, can return as it were to their earlier state of infancy, desiring to be under tutors and guardians, and enslaved again to weak and impoverished elemental forces, which were given to the weak and impoverished people in the desert because they could not bear greater things. However, the same elements that he now called weak and needy, he placed only above the elements of the world. And where the elements of the world are mentioned, there it is not added, weak and needy. Hence again, where they are called weak, world, as we said above, is a silent name. Therefore, I think as long as someone is little and has not fulfilled the appointed time by the father, so that he may be called a son and heir, he is under the elements of the world, namely the Law of Moses. But when he returned to the Law, which he owed to his son after his freedom, desiring to be circumcised and to follow the whole letter of Jewish superstition, then those things which had previously been the elements of the world for him are also called weak and needy beginnings. For they are so useless to their worshippers that they are not even able to provide them with what they had previously bestowed, Jerusalem, with the temple and altar destroyed. Let someone respond and say: If the laws and commandments written in the Law are weak and needy elements, and those who have come to know God, or rather, have been known by Him, should not observe the Law (so that they do not begin to worship not so much the God by whom they have been known, but rather those who are not gods by nature), then did Moses and the prophets observe the Law, and yet did not come to know God, nor were they known by Him? Or if they did come to know God, they certainly did not fulfill the commands of the Law. To say that both are dangerous: either they did not do what the Law commands, and thus they have come to know God, or they do not know God while they keep the weak and poor elements of the Law. And this can be resolved by saying that they, like Paul, became a Jew to the Jews in order to win Jews over (1 Corinthians 9), and according to a vow he had taken, he shaved his head in Cenchrea (Acts 18), and in Jerusalem he practiced barefoot and baldness in the temple to appease the jealousy of those who had been taught about him, because he was accused of acting against the Law of Moses and God's prophets. In this way, holy men also did the things that the Law required, but they followed the spirit of the Law more than the letter. Those who, like Abraham, desired to see the day of Christ and rejoiced when the veil was lifted, were made weak to make the weak people strong, so that they could separate them from the idols to which they had become accustomed in Egypt, as if they themselves were under the Law. For it is absurd to think that Moses and the other speakers of God were in such a condition that we should not believe them, and that the appointed time came from the Father, and that they were redeemed from legal bondage, and obtained the adoption of sons, and inherited with Christ. For whatever wisdom God bestowed on the entire human race like a beloved Son, He has also generously bestowed the same wisdom to each of the saints in their own order and dispensation. Heretics find an opportunity to criticize the Creator by calling the Law of Moses weak and inadequate, because He created the world and established the Law. To them, we will respond with what we have already said, that those who return to those weak and inadequate elements after the grace of the Gospel are truly weak and inadequate themselves. But before the appointed time came from the Father, the elements were called not so much weak and needy as the world. Finally, before the Gospel of Christ spread throughout the whole world, they had their own brightness with the commands of the Law. But after the greater light of the grace of the Gospel shone forth, and the sun of justice revealed itself to the whole world, the light of the stars was hidden and their rays grew dim, so that the Apostle says elsewhere: For that which was glorified had no glory in this part, by reason of the excellent glory (2 Corinthians 3). What he is now saying in other words, in order to say that the Law of Moses, which was rich, wealthy, and glorious before the Gospel, became weak, poor, diminished, and destroyed after the advent of Christ, who was greater than Solomon, the temple, and Jonah. For what is written, 'He must increase, but I must decrease' (John 3:30): I believe this is said not so much by John as by the representative of the Law, because the lesser always yield to the greater, and the perfect is always preferred to the beginnings. But indeed, we will confirm the weak and meager elements, the traditions of the Jews, and the letter of low intelligence, which are not good justifications and not good precepts. For truly, the strong and rich understanding of the Law is spiritual, so that it should not be called a mere element, or rather, it should be compared to the future age and the life in Christ Jesus, in which the angels and heavenly powers now live. But in comparison to the Jewish mind, it is called not so much the beginning as the fulfillment. And when he says, 'Now that you know God, or rather are known by Him,' he shows that after the worship of idols, the Galatians understood God, or rather were considered worthy of knowing Him. Not because God, the Creator of all things, is ignorant of anything; but because it is said that they alone know who have changed error for piety. The Lord knows those who are His (II Tim. II, 19). And the Savior in the Gospel: I am the good shepherd, and I know mine, and mine know me (John X, 14). On the other hand, to the wicked: I do not know you, depart from me, workers of iniquity (Luke XIII, 27). And to the foolish virgins: I do not know you, (Matth. XXV, 12).”

“When, however, he says, "you were in servitude to those who are by nature no gods," he sufficiently proves that one true God is God by nature, by whose name the triune God is received in the most faithful and catholic bosom of the heart. "Those who are by nature no gods" are described by him as governors and overseers. There is no creature, whether it abides in truth by giving glory to God or fails to abide in truth by seeking its own glory—there is, I say, no creature that does not willy-nilly serve divine providence.… But, just as the magistrate under the imperial law does nothing but what is permitted to him, so the governors and overseers of this world do nothing but whatever God allows.”

“Here he addresses those who believed from among the Gentiles, showing that the observance of days is idolatry and that they sin more than before. Previously, he says, you at least did not know God, since you lived in darkness and error and because of this served the sun and the moon, which by nature are not gods, but now, after coming to know the truth, if you were to observe days, this would be nothing other than service to the elements — an impiety even worse.”

“Having disclosed the pre-eminence of the gift of grace and explained it with a human example, the Apostle here censures the Galatians, who scorned this grace, for being ungrateful for so great a gift. First, he censures them for ingratitude; Secondly, he excuses himself, explaining that he does not do this out of hatred or spite (v. 12b). As to the first he does three things: First, he calls to mind their earlier state; Secondly, he extols and commends the gift they have received (v. 9); Thirdly, he amplifies the sin committed (v. 9): "how turn you again to the weak and needy elements?" He says therefore: "But then indeed, not knowing God, you served them who, by nature, are not gods." As if to say: You are now sons and heirs through God; but then indeed, when you were heathens—"You were heretofore darkness, but now light in the Lord" (Eph 5:8)—not knowing God, through lack of faith, you served with the worship of latria, them who by nature are not gods, but by the opinion of men: "You know that when you were heathens, you went to dumb idols, according as you were led" (1 Cor 12:2); "They served the creature rather than the Creator." (Rom 1:25). His statement, "who by nature are not gods," serves to refute the Arians who said that Christ, the Son of God, is not God by nature. For if this were true, it would not be right to render Him latria, and whoever rendered it would be an idolater. But someone might object that we adore the flesh and humanity of Christ; consequently, we are idolaters. I answer that even though we adore the flesh or humanity of Christ, we adore it as united to the person of the divine Word, Who is a divine hypostasis. Hence, since adoration is due to a person of the divine nature, whatever is adored in Christ is done without error.”

“You served them, who by nature are no gods. These words are to be understood of the converts, who had been Gentiles. — Known of God. That is, approved and loved by him. (Witham) — The language of the apostle in this verse is not perhaps strictly precise. The Galatians, whom he addresses, had been converted from paganism, and of course were never subject to the law of Moses. But the apostle, by these words, entreats them not to begin now to serve these weak and useless elements, (as he calls the Jewish rites) or by this expression he may mean (as St. Chrysostom and Theophylactus explain it) the tyranny of error and wickedness. (Calmet)”

“Appeal to them not to turn back from their privileges as free sons, to legal bondage again. then--when ye were "servants" (Gal 4:7). ye knew not God--not opposed to Rom 1:21. The heathen originally knew God, as Rom 1:21 states, but did not choose to retain God in their knowledge, and so corrupted the original truth. They might still have known Him, in a measure, from His works, but as a matter of fact they knew Him not, so far as His eternity, His power as the Creator, and His holiness, are concerned. are no gods--that is, have no existence, such as their worshippers attribute to them, in the nature of things, but only in the corrupt imaginations of their worshippers (see on Co1 8:4; Co1 10:19-20; Ch2 13:9). Your "service" was a different bondage from that of the Jews, which was a true service. Yet theirs, like yours, was a burdensome yoke; how then is it ye wish to resume the yoke after that God has transferred both Jews and Gentiles to a free service?”

“For as one who has been thought worthy of a divine and desirable name, in those bonds which I bear about, I commend the Churches, in which I pray for a union both of the flesh and spirit of Jesus Christ, "who is the Saviour of all men, but specially of them that believe;" by whose blood ye were redeemed; by whom ye have known God, or rather have been known by Him; in whom enduring, ye shall escape all the assaults of this world: for "He is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that which ye are able."”

“From these primary eight ten other ¦ons after them spring, and then the twelve others arise with their wonderful names, to complete the mere story of the thirty ¦ons. The same apostle, when disapproving of those who are "in bondage to elements," points us to some dogma of Hermogenes, who introduces matter as having no beginning, and then compares it with God, who has no beginning.”

“Now these same elements that he has now styled "weak and beggarly" he called above merely the "elements of the world." … And so I think that so long as someone is an infant … he is subject to the elements, namely, the law of Moses. But when after [receiving] the freedom due to an heir he reverts again to the law, desiring to be circumcised and to follow the whole letter of Jewish legal illusions, then those things that were merely the elements of the world to him before are now said to be "weak and beggarly elements." … The law of Moses, which before was rich, affluent and illustrious, became after Christ's advent and in comparison with him "weak and beggarly." … The "weak and beggarly elements" are those unworthy traditions of the Jews, which interpret according to the letter. They were poor excuses for interpretations and "commandments that were not good."”

“What follows, as it were, reintroduces a question that has already been explored. Through the whole letter he has shown that no one has disturbed the faith of the Galatians except those who were of the circumcision, who wished to lead them into carnal observations of the law as though salvation were in them. In this place alone he seems to speak to those who were attempting to return to Gentile superstitions.… For in saying "you have reverted," since he is speaking not to the circumcised but to Gentiles, as appears in the whole letter, he does not say at all that they have reverted to circumcision, in which they had never been, but he says "to the weak and beggarly elements," which you wish to serve again as before.”

“But now, he says, you have come to know God, or rather, it was not you who by your own effort found and came to know God (since you were not seeking at all), but He found you, living in darkness, and accepted you. For "you have been known" is said instead of "you have been accepted by God." How then do you turn back again to the weak and beggarly elements, that is, those having no power to obtain the promised blessings and unable to bring any spiritual benefit? And at the same time he calls them weak and beggarly because they are devoid of mind, sense, and life, even if the Greeks would not be pleased by this. So then, the false apostles, as defenders of the law, were introducing the observance of days, and he very wisely calls this practice idolatry, which even the law itself forbids. So that those who taught this were actually opponents of the law.”

“Then when he says, "But now, after that you have known God, or rather are known by God," he reminds them of the gift received. As if to say: If you had been ignorant and sinned, it could have been tolerated; for other things being equal, sin in a Christian is more grievous than in a pagan. But now, since you have known God, i.e., were brought to a knowledge of God, you sin more gravely than of old by serving and setting your hope on things you ought not: "All shall know me, from the least of them even to the greatest" (Jer 31:34). But the statement, "after you are known by God," seems to cause a difficulty, for God has known all things from eternity: "All things were known to the Lord God before they were created" (Sir 23:29). I answer that this is said causally, so that the sense is: you are known by God, i.e., God has caused you to know Him. In this way, God is said to know inasmuch as He is the cause of our knowledge. Hence, because he had previously said, "after that you have known God," which was a true statement, he immediately amends and explains it with a figure of speech by intimating that we cannot know God of ourselves save by Him: "No man hath seen God at any time: the only begotten Son, Who is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared him" (Jn 1:18). Then he upbraids them for the sin committed, saying: "how turn you again to the weak and needy elements?" It should be pointed out that this passage is interpreted in two ways: in one way, that those Galatians had turned from the faith to idolatry. For this reason he says, "how turn you" from the faith "again," i.e., a second time. "For it had been better for them not to have known the way of justice than, after they have known it, to turn back from that holy commandment which was delivered to them" (2 Pet. 2:21); "They are turned back" (Is 42:17). "To the elements," namely, of the world, which are "weak," unable by themselves to subsist, because they would lapse into nothingness unless upheld by the hand which rules all things—"Upholding all things by the word of his power" (Heb 1:3)—"and needy," because they need God and one another to fill out the universe, "which," namely, the elements, "you desire to serve" with the service of latria "again," i.e., for a second time. But although this interpretation might be upheld, it does not accord with the Apostle's intention. For since in the entire section preceding this passage, as well as in all that follows it, he is censuring the Galatians for removing themselves from the faith and turning to the observances of the Law, it is more in keeping with his intention to expound it as referring to their turning to the legal observances. Hence he says: "After that you have known God" through faith, "how turn you" from the faith "to the elements," i.e., to the literal observance of the Law? It is called an element, because the Law was the prime institution of divine worship. "To elements," I say, that are weak, because they do not bring to perfection by justifying: "For the law brought nothing to perfection" (Heb 7:19), and needy, because they do not confer virtues and grace or offer any help of themselves. But what does he mean by "are you turned?" For to say this, as well as to say, again, seems inappropriate, for they neither were Jews nor had they formerly observed the Law. I answer that the Jewish worship is midway between the worship of the Christians and that of the Gentiles: for the Gentiles worshipped the elements as though they were living things; the Jews, on the other hand, did not serve the elements but served God under the elements, inasmuch as they rendered worship to God by the observances of bodily elements: "We were serving under the elements of the world" (v. 3); but Christians serve God under Christ, i.e., in the faith of Christ. Now when a person reaches a terminus after passing through the middle, if he then decides to return to the middle, it seems to be the same as returning to the very beginning. Therefore, because they had already reached the terminus, namely, faith in Christ, and then returned to the middle, i.e., to the Jewish worship, then because of a resemblance of middle to beginning, the Apostle says that they are turned to the elements and are serving them again.”

“Wherefore knowledge was taken from them, because seeing they overlooked, and hearing they heard not. But to you, the converted of the Gentiles, is the kingdom given, because you, who knew not God, have believed by preaching, and "have known Him, or rather are known of Him," through Jesus, the Saviour and Redeemer of those that hope in Him. For ye are translated from your former vain and tedious mode of life and have contemned the lifeless idols, and despised the demons, which are in darkness, and have run to the "true light," and by it have "known the one and only true God and Father," and so are owned to be heirs of His kingdom.”

“"But now, having known God." For it is not you, he says, who find God by your own work, but He himself, while you were wandering in error, seized you. "how do you turn back again to," He discusses again concerning the sun and the moon and the stars, from which are the observations of the days. But he calls them poor and weak, as having no strength at all. The word "again" has much emphasis; after adoption, he says, and being known by God. — [CYRIL] Elements of the world, the particles of the entire cosmos. [end of the excerpt by Cyril] — — [OECUMENIUS] He calls them weak and poor, not because of their insignificance. (For what is more magnificent than heaven and earth? What more honorable than sun and moon and stars?) But because they are deprived of mind and life and sensation. [end of the excerpt by Oecumenius] —”

“So that he may be seen to say this to Jews and about Jews—that is, to the Galatians, who combine the Jews' way of life with theirs—he adds, "You observe days and months and seasons and years." … For it is one thing to observe days, as for example to rest on the sabbath, another to observe months, as for example to observe new moons, … another to observe years, another again [to observe] seasons such as fasting, the Passover, the feast of unleavened bread and other things of this kind.”

“And the proof of this is obvious, because "You observe days," auspicious and inauspicious, "and months and times, and years," i.e., the constellations and the course of the heavenly bodies, all of which observances spring from idolatry, against which Jeremias (10:2) says: "Be not afraid of the signs of heaven which the heathens fear." That observances of this sort are evil and contrary to the worship of the Christian religion is plain, because the distinction of days, months, years and times is based on the course of the sun and moon. Therefore, those who observe such distinctions of times are venerating heavenly bodies and arranging their activities according to the evidence of the stars, which have no direct influence on the human will or on things that depend on free will. By this practice they are put in grave danger. Therefore the faithful must avoid observing such things. Indeed, no suggestion of these things should be found among them, for whatever is done simply out of devotion to God can turn out prosperously. But is it never lawful to look for the influence of the stars on certain things? I answer that heavenly bodies are the cause of certain effects, namely, bodily. In such things it is lawful to consider their influence. But they are not the cause of certain other things, i.e., of things that depend on free will or on good and bad fortune. Hence in such cases to look for the influence of the stars pertains to idolatry. That this is so, he proves when he says: "You observe the days" of the Jewish rite, namely, Sabbaths and the tenth day of the month and such things, which are mentioned in a Gloss, "and months," i.e., new moons, as the first and seventh month, as is had in Leviticus (Ch. 25), "and times," namely, of the exodus from Egypt, and the practice of going to Jerusalem three times a year, "and years" of jubilee and the seventh year of remission.”

“You observe [1] days, &c. These false teachers were for obliging all Christians to observe all the Jewish feasts, fasts, ceremonies, &c. Some of the later reformers find here an occasion to blame the fasts and holydays kept by Catholics. St. Jerome, in his commentary on these words, tells us that some had made the like objection in his time: his answer might reasonably stop their rashness; to wit, that Christians keep indeed the sabbath on the Sunday, (not the Jewish sabbath on Saturdays) that they keep also divers holydays, and days on which great saints suffered martyrdom, (let our adversaries take notice of this) but that both the days are different, and the motives of keeping them. See St. Jerome, tom. iv. p. 271. (Witham) — This text cannot mean to condemn the feasts appointed to be kept holy in the Catholic Church. For on the festivals dedicated to our Lord, St. Augustine writeth thus: “We dedicate and consecrate the memory of God’s benefits with solemnities on solemn appointed days, lest in process of time they might creep into ungrateful and unkind oblivion.” And of the martyrs thus: “Christian people celebrate the memories of martyrs with religious solemnity, both to move themselves to an imitation of their virtues, and that they may be partakers of their merits, and helped by their prayers.” (Conta Faust. lib. xx. chap. 21.) And of other saints thus: “keep ye and celebrate with sobriety the nativity of saints, that we may imitate them that are gone before us, and that they may rejoice in us, who pray for us.” (In Ps. lxxxviii. Conc. 2. in fine.)”

“To regard the observance of certain days as in itself meritorious as a work, is alien to the free spirit of Christianity. This is not incompatible with observing the Sabbath or the Christian Lord's day as obligatory, though not as a work (which was the Jewish and Gentile error in the observance of days), but as a holy mean appointed by the Lord for attaining the great end, holiness. The whole life alike belongs to the Lord in the Gospel view, just as the whole world, and not the Jews only, belong to Him. But as in Paradise, so now one portion of time is needed wherein to draw off the soul more entirely from secular business to God (Col 2:16). "Sabbaths, new moons, and set feasts" (Ch1 23:31; Ch2 31:3), answer to "days, months, times." "Months," however, may refer to the first and seventh months, which were sacred on account of the number of feasts in them. times--Greek, "seasons," namely, those of the three great feasts, the Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles. years--The sabbatical year was about the time of writing this Epistle, A.D. 48 [BENGEL].”

“The observers of days are those who say, for example, "Tomorrow there must be no setting out on a journey." … The observers of months are those who watch the course of the moon, saying, for example, "Contracts must not be sealed in the seventh month." … Seasons are observed when people say, "Today is the first day of spring, it is a festival and after tomorrow is the feast of Vulcan." … People pay respect to the year when they say, "The first day of January is the new year," as though a year were not completed every day.… For if God is loved with the whole heart, there ought not to be any dread or suspicion of these phenomena so long as he is near.”

“Paul argues with those from the Jews, showing that the observance of days and months and seasons and years and whatever in the law is observance is idolatry. For this, he says, is nothing else than worshiping the moon and the sun, by which the days have their observance. He said this about property, wanting to depart from the law. For those who preach circumcision also proclaimed such observances. You observe days. From this it is clear that the false apostles proclaimed not only circumcision, but also observances of these, having taken their origin from the law, yet having deviated from the law.”

“For they ought to reflect, that as a season has been fixed suitable for planting and sowing, so days have been appointed as appropriate for cohabitation, which are carefully to be observed. Accordingly some one well instructed in the doctrines taught by Moses, finding fault with the people for their sins, called them sons of the new moons and the sabbaths. Yet in the beginning of the world men lived long, and had no diseases. But when through carelessness they neglected the observation of the proper times, then the sons in succession cohabiting through ignorance at times when they ought not, place their children under innumerable afflictions.”

“Observe the tender compassion of the Apostle; they were shaken and he trembles and fears. And hence he has put it so as thoroughly to shame them, "I have bestowed labor upon you," saying, as it were, make not vain the labors which have cost me sweat and pain. By saying "I fear," and subjoining the word "lest," he both inspires alarm, and encourages good hope. He says not "I have labored in vain," but "lest," which is as much as to say, the wreck has not happened, but I see the storm big with it; so I am in fear, yet not in despair; ye have the power to set all right, and to return into your former calm...”

“So, let the reader choose whichever interpretation he wishes, so long as he understands that such superstitious observances of times bring great peril to the soul, so much so that the apostle adds, "I am afraid, lest perhaps I should have labored in you in vain." … And yet if someone, even a catechumen, is caught observing the sabbath by the Jewish rite, the church is confused. As it is, innumerable members of the church say with great complacency in open view of us, "I do not travel on the day after the first." … Alas for human sinfulness, that we only denounce what is unfamiliar, but with familiar things we tolerate them, although they may be great and cause the kingdom of heaven to be shut against them absolutely. It is for them that the Son of God shed his blood. We come to tolerate them through frequent acquaintance with them, and through increased toleration we share in them.”

“See what a sensitive heart: they waver and Paul is afraid. The expression "lest somehow" (μή πως) shows that they were still intact and had not yet suffered complete shipwreck. And he gives them hope that if they wish to come to their senses, then the labor spent on them was not in vain. He is as if saying to them: remember my efforts for you and do not make my labors futile.”

“By this practice they are put in grave danger. Hence he says: "I am afraid lest perhaps it was in vain," i.e., fruitlessly, "that I labored" among you. Therefore the faithful must avoid observing such things. Indeed, no suggestion of these things should be found among them, for whatever is done simply out of devotion to God can turn out prosperously. From this arises a danger because faith in Christ profits nothing from it. Hence he says: "I am afraid of you, lest perhaps I have labored in vain among you"; and further on: "If you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing" (5:2).”

“"I am afraid." See, their insides are in turmoil, and Paul is afraid. The phrase "for fear that" still indicates those standing and not yet fully shipwrecked. And it gives them hope that if they are willing to recover, their labor will not be in vain for them; as he said, Remember my toil and sweat for you, and do not frustrate my anguish.”

“O trumpet of peace to the soul that is at war! O weapon that puttest to flight terrible passions! O instruction that quenches the innate fire of the soul! The Word exercises an influence which does not make poets: it does not equip philosophers nor skilled orators, but by its instruction it makes mortals immortal, mortals gods; and from the earth transports them to the realms above Olympus. Come, be taught; become as I am, for I, too, was as ye are.”

“This is addressed to his Jewish disciples, and he brings his own example forward, to induce them thereby to abandon their old customs. Though you had none other for a pattern, he says, to look at me only would have sufficed for such a change, and for your taking courage. Therefore gaze on me; I too was once in your state of mind, especially so; I had a burning zeal for the Law; yet afterwards I feared not to abandon the Law, to withdraw from that rule of life. And this ye know full well how obstinately I clung hold of Judaism, and how with yet greater force I let it go. He does well to place this last in order: for most men, though they are given a thousand reasons, and those just ones, are more readily influenced by that which is like their own case, and more firmly hold to that which they see done by others. Observe how he again addresses them by a title of honor, which was a reminder moreover of the doctrine of grace. Having chid them seriously, and brought things together from all quarters, and shown their violations of the Law, and hit them on many sides, he gives in and conciliates them speaking more tenderly. For as to do nothing but conciliate causes negligence, so to be constantly talked at with sharpness sours a man; so that it is proper to observe due proportion everywhere. See then how he excuses to them what he has said, and shows that it proceeded not simply because he did not like them, but from anxiety. After giving them a deep cut, he pours in this encouragement like oil; and, showing that his words were not words of hate or enmity, he reminds them of the love which they had evinced toward him, mixing his self-vindication with praises. Therefore he says, "ye did me no wrong."”

“He is saying something like this: "Just as I was made weak for your weakness and could not speak as to spiritual people … so you should also be as I am, that is, understand more spiritually." … This he says indeed as an imitator of the Savior, who … "was found in fashion as a man," that we might come to the divine life from being men.”

“To the believers from among the Jews he speaks thus: imitate me. For I too was very devoted to the law, as you are, but I left it and now contend for Christ and the faith. Be such as these yourselves. He expressed this beautifully in conclusion. For people are more readily drawn by kindred examples than by arguments. After strong reproaches, he again displays gentleness. For harsh censure is no more beneficial than extreme leniency. Therefore he calls them brethren, reminding them at the same time of the grace of baptism, by which we all became brethren, as born of one Father – God. He also justifies the reproaches he has expressed, namely that they did not arise from hatred. For you have done me no injustice that I should become hostile toward you, but rather, you have shown me countless signs of honor and affection. How then, after this, could I be saying these things out of hatred? But I speak, without doubt, out of concern for you and out of deep gratitude toward you.”

“Then when he says, "Be ye as I, because I also am as you," he guides them back to the state of salvation. As if to say: I am afraid for you, lest I have labored in vain among you. But lest this be so, "Be ye as I." In a Gloss this is taken in three ways. In the first way thus: "Be ye as I," namely, abandon the Law as I have abandoned it. In a second way thus: "Be ye as I," namely, correcting the old error, as I have corrected mine. And this you can do, because I am as you, and yet I have been corrected of my error. In the third way thus: "Be ye as I," i.e., live without the Law, "because I," who had the Law and was born in the Law, "am now as you" formerly were, namely, without the Law. After censuring the Galatians, the Apostle here shows that he did not do so out of hatred. First, he shows that he has no true cause of hatred toward them; Secondly, that he has no supposed cause (v. 16); Thirdly, he tells precisely why he rebuked them (v. 19). As to the first, he does two things: First, he shows that he has no reason for hating them; Secondly, that contrariwise he has reason for loving them (v. 13). With respect to the first it should be noted that it is customary for a good pastor in correcting his subjects to mingle gentleness with severity, lest they be discouraged by too great severity. For it is written in Luke (10) that the Samaritan in caring for the wounded man poured in oil and wine. On the other hand, it is written of evil pastors in Ezechiel (34:4): "You ruled over them with vigor." Therefore, as a good prelate, the Apostle shows that he does not rebuke them in a spirit of hatred, for his words are gentle in three respects. First, as to the charitable name he uses, for he says, "Brethren": "Behold how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity" (Ps 132:1). Secondly, as to his suppliant language, when he says: "I beseech you": "The poor will speak with supplications" (Prov 18:28). Thirdly, as to freeing them of blame; hence he says, "You have not injured me at all," and I am not the type of person who hates those who do not offend me.”

“Be ye as I, for I also am as you. I add no word in the translation, because it is uncertain what is to be understood: some give this construction, be you as I am, because I also was, as you now are; and they expound them thus: lay aside your zeal for the Jewish ceremonies as I have done, who was once as zealous for them as you seem now to be. Others would have the construction and sense to be: be you as I am, because I am as you; that is, be affected to me, and love me, as I have still a true affection and love for you, which is agreeable to what follows, you have not offended me at all. (Witham)”

“be as I am--"As I have in my life among you cast off Jewish habits, so do ye; for I am become as ye are," namely, in the non-observance of legal ordinances. "The fact of my laying them aside among Gentiles, shows that I regard them as not at all contributing to justification or sanctification. Do you regard them in the same light, and act accordingly." His observing the law among the Jews was not inconsistent with this, for he did so only in order to win them, without compromising principle. On the other hand, the Galatian Gentiles, by adopting legal ordinances, showed that they regarded them as needful for salvation. This Paul combats. ye have not injured me at all--namely, at the period when I first preached the Gospel among you, and when I made myself as you are, namely, living as a Gentile, not as a Jew. You at that time did me no wrong; "ye did not despise my temptation in the flesh" (Gal 4:14): nay, you "received me as an angel of God." Then in Gal 4:16, he asks, "Have I then, since that time, become your enemy by telling you the truth?"”

“"Become as I am." Yet the words are addressed to those from Judea. Become as I am. "Be imitators of me," Paul says, "for I also, having set aside the law, ran to faith." For even I, he says, was as you are, observing the law and carefully practicing it in many respects. "for I also am as you are." I longed intensely for the law as well, but see how I have been changed. "You also," he says, "envy that change." — [PHOTIUS] He appeals to them, considering their salvation as his own. He passes through their acts of gratitude, and the honors by which they honored him, and how greatly they regarded him, wishing to set this right, namely, that the insults now uttered against them by him were not spoken out of any dislike or hatred (for how, he says, could he have been hostile toward you, having treated you with great consideration?); but that what was said came from a mind that was anxious and loving.”

“Not to have injured one is indeed no great thing, for no man whatever would choose to hurt wantonly and without object to annoy another who had never injured him. But for you, not only have ye not injured me, but ye have shown me great and inexpressible kindness, and it is impossible that one who has been treated with such attention should speak thus from any malevolent motive. My language then cannot be caused by ill-will; it follows, that it proceeds from affection and solicitude. "Ye did me no wrong; ye know that because of an infirmity of the flesh I preached the Gospel unto you." What can be gentler than this holy soul, what sweeter, or more affectionate! And the words he had already used, arose not from an unreasoning anger, nor from a passionate emotion, but from much solicitude. And why do I say, ye have not injured me? Rather have ye evinced a great and sincere regard for me. For "ye know," he says, "that because of an infirmity of the flesh I preached the Gospel unto you; and that which was a temptation to you in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected." What does he mean? While I preached to you, I was driven about, I was scourged, I suffered a thousand deaths, yet ye thought no scorn of me; for this is meant by that which was a temptation to you in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected." Observe his spiritual skill; in the midst of his self-vindication, he again appeals to their feelings by showing what he had suffered for their sakes. This however, says he, did not at all offend you, nor did ye reject me on account of my sufferings and persecutions; or, as he now calls them, his infirmity and temptation. But ye received me as an Angel of God. Was it not then absurd in them to receive him as an Angel of God, when he was persecuted and driven about, and then not to receive him when pressing on them what was fitting?”

“This is an obscure passage and demands closer attention. "I preached to you initially," he says, "as if to infants and sucklings on account of your bodily weakness.… This economy and pretense of weakness in preaching was my own policy. You were trying to decide whether things that were rather small in themselves and were presented by me as of little account would be acceptable." … The passage could also be explained another way: "When I came to you … as a lowly and despised man … you perceived that my lowliness and the plainness of my dress were meant to try you." … Or we might suppose that the apostle was sick when he came to the Galatians.… And this could also be said, that in his first coming to the Galatians he was subject to abuse and persecution and physical beatings from the adversaries of the gospel.”

“Secondly, he shows that he has reason to love them, when he says: "you know how, through infirmity of the flesh, I preached the gospel to you heretofore." Here he touches on three things that usually cause men to love one another. The first is the mutual help of fellowship, and this is also the cause of love being consolidated among men, according to Luke (22:28): "And you are they who have continued with me in my temptations; and I dispose to you as my Father hath disposed to me, a kingdom." Touching this he says: "And you know how, through infirmity of the flesh, I preached the gospel to you heretofore." Herein he does two things: First, he recalls the tribulation he suffered among them; Secondly, he shows how they stood by him (v. 13). He says, therefore, with respect to the first: I say that "You have not injured me at all"; rather you have come to my aid. "For you know," i.e., are able to recall, "that I preached the gospel to you heretofore," i.e., in times past, "through infirmity of the flesh," i.e., with infirmity and affliction in my flesh, or with the many tribulations I suffered from the Jews who are of my flesh and persecuted me: "And I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much tribulation" (1 Cor 2:3); "Power is made perfect in infirmity" (2 Cor 12:9). And although this infirmity might have been reason for scorning me and a cause of temptation for you, according to Zacharias (13:7): "Strike the shepherd and the sheep will be scattered": nevertheless, "your temptation," which was "in my flesh," i.e., my tribulation, which was a source of temptation for you, "you despised not": "Despise not a man for his look" (Sir 11:2) because as the Lord says in Luke (10:16): "He that despiseth you, despiseth me." "Neither did you reject me" and my teaching, but you were willing to share my tribulations: "Woe to you that despisest, shall you not also be despised?" (Is 33:1).”

“Through infirmity of the flesh….and your temptation in my flesh. St. Jerome thinks the apostle had some bodily infirmity upon him. St. Chrysostom understands his poverty, and want, and persecutions, and that some were inclined to contemn him and his preaching on these accounts. Yet others among them did not esteem him less: they received him, respected him as an Angel of God, as Christ Jesus; they would have given him their eyes, as one may say, and all that was dear to them. He puts them in mind how happy then they thought themselves, and asketh why they are now so much changed? (Witham)”

“how through infirmity--rather, as Greek, "Ye know that because of an infirmity of my flesh I preached," &c. He implies that bodily sickness, having detained him among them, contrary to his original intentions, was the occasion of his preaching the Gospel to them. at the first--literally, "at the former time"; implying that at the time of writing he had been twice in Galatia. See my Introduction; also see on Gal 4:16, and Gal 5:21. His sickness was probably the same as recurred more violently afterward, "the thorn in the flesh" (Co2 12:7), which also was overruled to good (Co2 12:9-10), as the "infirmity of the flesh" here.”

“The weakness in my body was no obstacle for you, but you received me as an angel of God, that is, as a messenger, a preacher sent from God (for that is an angel of God); and you received me like Christ Jesus, whom I was preaching to you. And so you truly received Christ Jesus, if you received me as an angel of God, in the same way you received Christ Jesus.”

“(Verse 14.) And you did not despise or reject your temptation, which was in my flesh, but you received me as an angel of God, as Christ Jesus. It is a perplexing passage and requires careful attention. Indeed, I have preached to you like little ones and infants through the weakness of your flesh, starting from the least and speaking almost stammeringly. This arrangement and the feigned appearance of a weak proclamation were my doing, but your temptation was whether you would be pleased and consider great those things which, considering their nature, were smaller, and which I presented to you as humble. Indeed, you, who not taking them as small things but as great things, were so amazed that you received me, who was speaking them, as an angel and, if I may say more, as the Son of God. Therefore, your temptation, by which I was testing you in the announcement of my fleshly speech, was not despised or trivial; rather, it had more dignity than I estimated. And this place can be explained in this way: when I came to you, I did not come in the speech of wisdom, but as a humble and despised man, not bringing anything great, but the Crucified. Therefore, when you saw me in a body subject to weaknesses, promising heavenly kingdoms, you did not mock or consider me worthy of contempt. For you understood the lowliness of my flesh and the lowly state of my appearance, which was made for your temptation. Or perhaps you despised me, who was regarded as miserable by the unbelievers; but on the contrary, you received him who was humble, lowly, and despised, as if he were an angel, and more than an angel. Certainly, we can suspect that the Apostle, at the time when he first came to the Galatians, was sick; and though his body was weak, he did not cease, nor did he silence his voice, from preaching the Gospel that he had begun. For it is reported that he often suffered from a severe headache: and this was the angel of Satan, who was assigned to him, to strike him in the flesh, so that he would not be exalted. This weakness and illness of his body was a temptation among those to whom the Gospel was preached: whether they would despise him, who promised sublime things, when they saw him subject to bodily weaknesses. And also it can be said that, at the beginning of his coming to the Galatians, he endured insults, persecutions, and bodily afflictions from those who opposed the Gospel: and this was perhaps the greatest temptation for the Galatians, seeing the Apostle of Christ being beaten. But what he says, that you received me as an angel, as Christ Jesus: and by saying that Christ is greater than the angel, he shows that the one whom the Psalmist sang about as being a little lower than the angels according to the order of the flesh, is now revealed to be greater, and his words in the beginning were so powerful that they were thought to be those of angels and of Christ.”

“And you, however, did not turn away from me; these trials of mine, that is, persecutions, wounds, and the like, did not lead you into temptation and did not cause you to despise and abhor me. And at the same time, in a subtle way, he also shames them, showing how much he endured for their sake from his opponents. You so honored me, he says, as if I were more than a man. Is it not strange that at the time when I was being persecuted and driven out, you received me as an angel and as Christ, and were not offended, but now, when I counsel what is proper, you consider me an enemy and do not accept me?”

“The second thing that strengthens love among men is mutual love and affection toward one another, according to Proverbs (8:17): "I love them that love me." As to this he says: "but you received me as an angel of God," i.e., with the honor accorded to a messenger announcing God's words: "When you received of us the word of the hearing of God, you received it not as the word of men but (as it is indeed) the word of God" (1 Thes 2:13). For this reason preachers are called angels: "They shall seek the law at the priest's mouth, because he is the angel of the Lord of hosts" (Mal 2:7). And not only as an angel did you receive me, but "even as Christ Jesus," i.e., as though Christ Himself had come, Who, indeed, had come to them in him and spoke in him, according to 2 Corinthians (13:3): "Do you seek a proof of Christ that speaketh in me?" "He that receiveth you receiveth me" (Mt 10:40).”

“my temptation--The oldest manuscripts read, "your temptation." My infirmity, which was, or might have been, a "temptation," or trial, to you, ye despised not, that is, ye were not tempted by it to despise me and my message. Perhaps, however, it is better to punctuate and explain as LACHMANN, connecting it with Gal 4:13, "And (ye know) your temptation (that is, the temptation to which ye were exposed through the infirmity) which was in my flesh. Ye despised not (through natural pride), nor rejected (through spiritual pride), but received me," &c. "Temptation does not mean here, as we now use the word, tendency to an evil habit, but BODILY TRIAL." as an angel of God--as a heaven-inspired and sent messenger from God: angel means "messenger" (Mal 2:7). Compare the phrase, Sa2 19:27, a Hebrew and Oriental one for a person to be received with the highest respect (Zac 12:8). An angel is free from the flesh, infirmity, and temptation. as Christ--being Christ's representative (Mat 10:40). Christ is Lord of angels.”

“The ailment of the apostle was a temptation to the Galatians. But they were found constant, not doubting as to his faith. For they could have stumbled and said, "What virtue or hope is there in this faith when its minister is so humiliated?" But when he had inspired their minds with future hopes, they did not fear present death for the sake of Christ's name.… This caused them later to blush, because after these laudable acts they became again entrapped so as to deserve reproach.”

“Here he shows perplexity and amazement, and desires to learn of themselves the reason of their change. Who, says he, hath deceived you, and caused a difference in your disposition towards me? Are ye not the same who attended and ministered to me, counting me more precious than your own eyes? what then has happened? whence this dislike? whence this suspicion? Is it because I have told you the truth? You ought on this very account to pay me increased honor and attention; instead of which "I am become your enemy, because I tell you the truth,"-for I can find no other reason but this. Observe too what humbleness of mind appears in his defence of himself; he proves not by his conduct to them, but by theirs to him that his language could not possibly have proceeded from unkind feeling. For he says not; How is it supposable that one, who has been scourged and driven about, and ill-treated a thousand things for your sakes, should now have schemes against you? But he argues from what they had reason to boast of, saying, How can one who has been honored by you, and received as an Angel, repay you by conduct the very opposite?”

“(Verse 15,16.) So where is your happiness then? I testify to you: if it were possible, you would gouge out your eyes and give them to me. So have I become your enemy by telling you the truth? Blessed is the one who walks on the path of virtues, but only if they have reached the virtues. It is not enough to have turned away from vices, unless you embrace the best. For the beginnings of good pursuits are not as commendable as the ends. For just as in a vineyard there are many stages of grapes until the winepress, and first it is necessary for the vine to bud on the vines, to promise hope in the blossoms; then, after the flower has fallen off, for the form of future clusters to be deformed, and gradually swelling, for the grape to give birth, so that it may sweat sweet musts when pressed in the winepresses. Similarly, in learning, there are individual stages of blessings, so that one may hear the word of God, conceive it, let it grow in the womb of their soul, and reach childbirth. So that when he has given birth to him, she may nourish him with milk, and throughout infancy, childhood, adolescence, and youth, she may lead him to perfect manhood. Therefore, since each, as we have said, has happiness according to their progress: if the end, and so to speak, the final touch is lacking to the work, the entire effort will be in vain; and it will be said: Where, then, is your happiness? Although, he says, at that time when you received the Gospel according to the flesh, I would call you blessed because you were fervent in your beginnings: nevertheless, now that I do not see the pinnacle of the building placed, and almost no foundation even laid, I am compelled to say: Where, then, is your happiness, which I used to praise you as blessed for? Truly, I myself also confess it, that when I was preaching to you in lowly terms, and was assailed by persecutions, you loved me in the beginning: And you would have plucked out your own eyes, if it were possible (but hyperbole must be understood in what he says), and have given them to me: You wished indeed to be blind for my sake, through the inexpressible charity you bore me, that more light of the Gospel might arise in my heart, and my advantage might increase by your loss: And this during that time, when I was preaching to you as it were to babes and sucklings, either from the infirmity of your flesh, because I announced to you things lowly and humble, or from the wrongs offered to me in my flesh, I seemed unworthy of your faith. But now because I have begun to challenge you to greater studies from the elements and syllables and childish reading, so that you may hold books in your hands, so that you may learn the words of full erudition and understanding, you resist, you get angry, you find the perfection of learning to be burdensome; and to such an extent have your feelings turned towards others, that you, who had received me as if I were an angel and Christ, to whom you wanted to entrust your eyes, now consider me an enemy, because I announce to you the full truth. But he elegantly concluded his statement, saying: So have I become your enemy by telling you the truth? to show that at the beginning of his preaching, it was not so much the truth, but rather the shadow and image of truth. Similar to this is that famous saying of the Roman poet (Terence in Andria I, 1): Obedience begets friends, but truth begets hatred. But see how much better this is than that; for the Apostle tempered and made special this sentiment when he directed it specifically to the Galatians. However, the person he denounced, claiming to have a general principle and to hold it against everyone, greatly erred. For obedience, without truth, is not so much obedience as flattery and assentation: which it is clear should be called secret enmities rather than friendships. However, at the same time, we must also consider that today, as long as they remain small and infants and in whose hearts Christ never grows, they do not progress in age, wisdom, and grace before God and men, as we explain according to the literal sense of Scripture, we are praised, suspected, admired. But when we begin to challenge them a little so that they may advance to greater things, our opponents become enemies of our preachers; and they would rather follow the Jews than the apostles, who, departing from the doctrine and traditions of the Pharisees, entered into Christ Himself, the propitiation and perfection of the Law: and they do not deign to receive the divine word, which commands the teachers of the Church to ascend to higher doctrines, and to elevate their voice with all their might, without fearing the noise of barking dogs, saying: 'Go up to a high mountain, you who evangelize Zion.' Exalt your voice in strength, you who bring good news to Jerusalem. Exalt, do not be afraid. (Isaiah XL, 9).”

“In bewilderment and amazement he says: what has become of your former blessedness? That is, where has all that gone for which everyone called you blessed, as those devoted to your teacher? What is it now? What has your former blessedness turned into? Now I do not see it, since you are hostile toward me. Previously, on account of my preaching, you considered me dearer even than your own eyes; so what has happened now that you suspect me as an enemy? For it would be strange if the one whom you so honored were to say these things to you with hostile intent.”

“But he then rebukes them for their change of heart; hence he says, "Where is then your blessedness?" As if to say: Did not men think you blessed for honoring me and accepting my preaching? "Where is thy fear, thy fortitude, thy patience and the perfection of thy ways?" (Job 4:6). The third thing that strengthens love is doing good to one another. As to this he says: "For I bear you witness that, if it could be done," i.e., had been just to do so (for that can be done which it is just to do) or had been to the advantage of the Church, "you would have plucked out your own eyes and would have given them to me." As if to say: You loved me so much that you would have given me not only your external goods but your very eyes.”

“Where, &c.--Of what value was your congratulation (so the Greek for "blessedness" expresses) of yourselves, on account of your having among you me, the messenger of the Gospel, considering how entirely you have veered about since? Once you counted yourselves blessed in being favored with my ministry. ye would have plucked out your own eyes--one of the dearest members of the body--so highly did you value me: a proverbial phrase for the greatest self-sacrifice (Mat 5:29). CONYBEARE and HOWSON think that this particular form of proverb was used with reference to a weakness in Paul's eyes, connected with a nervous frame, perhaps affected by the brightness of the vision described, Act 22:11; Co2 12:1-7. "You would have torn out your own eyes to supply the lack of mine." The divine power of Paul's words and works, contrasting with the feebleness of his person (Co2 10:10), powerfully at first impressed the Galatians, who had all the impulsiveness of the Celtic race from which they sprang. Subsequently they soon changed with the fickleness which is equally characteristic of Celts.”

“— [PHOTIUS] "Who then was the blessing to you?" He was someone, not asked as a question, but as if marveling and lifting up their former faith and the blessing upon that faith. What it was, how great it was, wondrous, he says: from what great blessedness you have fallen. Or by interrogation, What was it? Remember, he says, how great your blessedness was: for I was blessing you very greatly; but now what? I reproach; therefore I am held in hatred. But why do I reproach? For your salvation. For if this were not so, how could I, without offering any other pretext of yours, the one who praises and blesses, have come to reproach?" [end of the excerpt by Photius] — "the blessing to you." Who was, he says, the blessing to you, whom I and many others blessed you for, concerning obedience and submission to the Gospel? Who then was he? he says; for now I do not see him. Where, he says, are the zealously accomplished works of faith? for he has put the who instead of where. "your eyes." I know, Paul says, that you regard me as more precious than your own eyes because of my long-standing preaching.”

“Wherefore the apostle himself also in every case uses stringent language to the Churches, after the Lord's example; and conscious of his own boldness, and of the weakness of his hearers, he says to the Galatians: "Am I your enemy, because I tell you the truth?" Thus also people in health do not require a physician, do not require him as long as they are strong; but those who are ill need his skill. Thus also we who in our lives are ill of shameful lusts and reprehensible excesses, and other inflammatory effects of the passions, need the Saviour. And He administers not only mild, but also stringent medicines. The bitter roots of fear then arrest the eating sores of our sins. Wherefore also fear is salutary, if bitter.”

“Therefore, dearest brother, endeavour that the undisciplined should not be consumed and perish, that as much as you can, by your salutary counsels, you should rule the brotherhood, and take counsel of each one with a view to his salvation. Strait and narrow is the way through which we enter into life, but excellent and great is the reward when we enter into glory. Let those who have once made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven please God in all things, and not offend God's priests nor the Lord's Church by the scandal of their wickedness. And if, for the present, certain of our brethren seem to be made sorry by us, let us nevertheless remain in our wholesome persuasion, knowing that an apostle also has said, "Am I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth? " But if they shall obey us, we have gained our brethren, and have formed them as well to salvation as to dignity by our address. But if some of the perverse persons refuse to obey, let us follow the same apostle, who says, "If I please men, I should not be the servant of Christ." If we cannot please some, so as to make them please Christ, let us assuredly, as far as we can, please Christ our Lord and God, by observing His precepts.”

“He has finished his sentence elegantly, asking: "Have I become an enemy for preaching the truth to you?" He says this to show that his initial bodily ailment in preaching was not so much truth as a shadow and image of truth.… He has tempered this sentence and made it personal because he has addressed it to the Galatians in person.… Today also, so long as we … explain the Scripture according to the letter, we are praised and respected and held in admiration. But when we make a small attempt to provoke people personally to pass on to greater things, they stop acclaiming us and become resistant.”

“Then when he says: "Am I then become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?", he states the cause of a supposed hatred. First, the cause on the part of the Apostle; Secondly, on the part of the false brethren (v. 17). He says therefore: If you have done me so much good, are you to believe that "I am become your enemy because I tell you the truth?" The word "enemy" used here can be interpreted in two ways: in one way as meaning that he hates them; in this case the interpretation is "have I become your enemy," i.e., hate you? Hence what follows, namely, "because I tell you the truth," can be taken as an indication of hatred, even though telling the truth at the proper time and place is a sign of love. In another way, the word "enemy" can be taken in a passive sense, i.e., so that he is hated by them; then "have I become your enemy" is interpreted as "Do you hate me?" and this because I tell you the truth, so that telling the truth is set down as the cause of hatred. For men who tell the truth are hated by evil men, since the truth engenders hatred: "They have hated him that rebuketh in the gate: and I have abhorred him that speaketh perfectly" (Am 5:10). But on the other hand, it is said in Proverbs (28:23): "He that rebuketh a man shall afterward find favor with him more than he that by a flattering tongue deceiveth him." I answer that the solution to this can be gathered from what is said in Proverbs (9:9): "Rebuke not a scorner, lest he hate thee. Rebuke a wise man and he will love thee." For if the one corrected loves the corrector, it is a sign of virtue; conversely, it is a sign of malice, if he should hate him. For since a man naturally hates what is contrary to what he loves, then if you hate one who corrects you for evil, it is obvious that you love the evil; but if you love him, you indicate that you hate sin. For at first, when men are corrected, they are attached to their sins—that is why a sinner's first reaction is to hate the one correcting him; but after the correction he puts aside his attachment to sin and loves the one correcting him. And therefore the passage from Proverbs expressly says that later he will find favor with him.”

“Translate, "Am I then become your enemy (an enemy in your eyes) by telling you the truth" (Gal 2:5, Gal 2:14)? He plainly did not incur their enmity at his first visit, and the words here imply that he had since then, and before his now writing, incurred it: so that the occasion of his telling them the unwelcome truth, must have been at his second visit (Act 18:23, see my Introduction). The fool and sinner hate a reprover. The righteous love faithful reproof (Psa 141:5; Pro 9:8).”

“Since emulate signifies two things—one when someone emulates what he finds pleasing because it is good and another when people are emulators because they feel envy—these people, he says, emulate you in a bad way, by which he means that they are imitators through envy.… When he adds the phrase "so that you may emulate them" [meaning] "that you may follow them," he has thus used the double sense of emulation in different places, since emulation is imitation, and especially when it is also directed to what is good.… [He continues: ] "Emulate therefore better gifts—not those of Jewish law, which are not gifts and are not better; but emulate those things which are good and better gifts. That is, whatever belongs to faith and love, emulate that with regard to Christ and follow it. It is always good to emulate better things. Emulation as such is not good, but the emulation of better things is always good, and not only when I am present."”

“It is a wholesome emulation which leads to an imitation of virtue, but an evil one, which seduces from virtue him who is in the right path. And this is the object of those persons, who would deprive you of perfect knowledge, and impart to you that which is mutilated and spurious, and this for no other purpose than that they may occupy the rank of teachers, and degrade you, who now stand higher than themselves, to the position of disciples. For this is the meaning of the words "that ye may seek them." But I, says he, desire the reverse, that ye may become a model for them, and a pattern of a higher perfection: a thing which actually happened when I was present with you...”

“(Verse 17, 18.) They imitate you, but not in a good way: rather, they want to exclude you so that you may imitate them. But always imitate the good in what is good, and not only when I am present with you. Those imitate well who, when they see that others have gratitude, gifts, virtues, desire to possess those themselves: and they strive to imitate their faith, life, and industry through which they have earned those things, so that they may also attain those things which are worthy of good emulation. Of these things, the Apostle also says: Envy spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy. And further: So also you, since you are eager for spiritual gifts, seek to excel for the edification of the church. And again: Therefore, brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. But those who envy do not do so well, for they do not desire to be better themselves in order to imitate those who are worthy of envy, but rather they want to make them worse and backwards with perverse envy. For example, let it be said: a Christian is someone who reads Moses and the prophets; he knows that everything in the shadow and the image preceded that people; but that the scriptures were written for us on whom the ends of the ages have come. He understands circumcision not so much of the foreskin, but of the ears and the heart. He has risen with Christ: he seeks the things that are above. He is freed from the burden and slavery of the Law, of not touching, not tasting, not handling, which commands: if someone wants to persuade him with the words of the Scriptures, that he should receive them not through a figure of speech, but as they are written in a literal sense, so that he may become a Jew openly, not secretly, he imitates him not well: but he quickly rushes to pull him back as he moves towards greater things; so that he may rather imitate him who goes backward: or indeed he does not advance him much further."+ "n" +"Liberated from the burden and slavery of the Law, of not touching, not tasting, not handling, which commanded, being able to read the scriptures in their literal sense, an individual who is a Christian demonstrates the true meaning of these commandments. They understand that the Old Testament accounts serve as types and foreshadows of Christ and that the observance of these commandments no longer holds the same significance as it did for the Jewish people. They are no longer bound by the strict regulations of the Law but are free to seek the things above and live according to the spirit of the New Covenant. Therefore he speaks to the Galatians who had been led astray by the advocates of the Law, urging them to imitate the advocates of the Law, when rather the Galatians should have imitated them. For it is natural for the greater to be made from the lesser, not the lesser from the greater, and he says: 'Imitate what is good in what is good,' that is, do not imitate the advocates of Jewish observance, but imitate those things which are good. For just as someone who imitates someone else in riches, power, or dignity, not only imitates good things, but also imitates things that should be avoided; so likewise, you in turn, imitate what is good in what is good: seeking spiritual things more than carnal things; so that you may not teach them to be Jews, but to be Christians. But do this always, so that you may be able to reach the end of a good work with a persevering step. For I emulated good in you when I was with you, but after I left, you lost everything that I had handed over to you, from a secure station and a trustworthy port, and you were carried away again in the high waves. And it is not surprising that, with the Apostle departing, the Galatians were changed from a chosen vessel and one in which Christ the Lord spoke: for even now we see the same thing happening in the churches. For whenever a doctor happens in the Church, adorned with eloquence of speech and with a virtuous life, who, like some sort of spur, incites those who hear him to virtues, we see all people hasten, fervor, and run about concerning almsgiving, fasting, chastity, receiving the poor, burials, and other similar things. But when he has departed, they gradually wither away, and with food removed, they grow thin, pale, weak, and death follows all those things which were previously flourishing. Therefore, because the harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few (Matthew 9:37), let us pray to the Lord of the harvest to send laborers to reap the ears of the Christian people, which are prepared for the future wheat in the Church, to gather and carry them into the barns so that they may not perish. This is about that zeal and perverse emulation, of which it is also said elsewhere: Do not emulate the wicked (Psalm 37:1), and here: They emulate you, but not for good. But we find another kind of zeal, with which the sons of Jacob were zealous for their brother Joseph (Gen. XXXVII seqq.); and Mary and Aaron were zealous for their friend the Lord Moses (Num. XII). Neither Joseph nor Moses were incited to zeal in order to be better than others, but because they were grieved that they were better. This kind of zeal is akin to envy. It would be long if I wished to enumerate all the kinds of zeal, whether good or bad, found in the treasure of the Scriptures. We read of the righteous zeal of Phinehas (Num. XXV), Elijah (III Kings XIX), Matthias (I Macc. II), and the Apostle Judas (but not the traitor), who received the name Zealot for his outstanding virtue of zeal (Acts I). But we also read of the evil zeal, like that of Cain towards Abel (Gen. IV), and others towards one another. And there is the zeal of a man, of whom it is written: 'And if the spirit of jealousy comes upon him' (Num. V). Perhaps this is the middle kind of zeal, which cannot be taken on either the good or the bad side; rather, it is called zealotry between the two. Otherwise: Seeing that those who were from circumcision, the Galatians from the Gentiles, were abundantly filled with the virtues of the Holy Spirit, but indeed did not speak in tongues, did not have the gifts of healings; did not have the gift of prophecy, they eagerly desired to incite them with the stings of zeal, to transfer them to the burdens of the Law, so that they would begin to become like them.”

“Zeal is a praiseworthy thing when someone imitates the virtue of another, but it becomes bad when someone strives to remove the virtuous person from perfection. And these people are trying to exclude you, that is, to deprive you of the more perfect state and knowledge in Christ and to cast you into the less perfect, which consists in the law, so that you would regard them as teachers, be zealous for and imitate them as disciples. But I wished that you would be guides to perfection both for them and for all. And so it was when I was with you. He points to this very same thing below as well.”

“Then when he says, "They are zealous in your regard not well," he states another supposed cause, namely, on the part of the false brethren. First, he states it; Secondly, he refutes it (v. 18). As to the first it should be noted that, as has been said above, certain false brethren, converted from Judaism, went about the churches of the Gentiles, preaching the observance of the Law. Because Paul opposed them, they slandered him. They did this not so much with an eye to their salvation as to get rid of Paul. Hence the Apostle says, "They are zealous in your regard," i.e., they do not allow you (whom they love with a love not of friendship but of self-interest) to associate with us. For jealous rivalry is zeal that arises from any love whatsoever and does not brook what is loved to be shared. But because their love for them was not good: first of all, because they did not love them so as to advantage them but for their own gain—and this is obvious from the fact that they wanted to keep the Apostle away from them as one opposed to their own advantage—and secondly, because this was a source of harm to the Gentiles—for they sought from them an advantage by which the latter would suffer harm; for these reasons he says, "They are zealous in your regard but not well," because they are not interested in your welfare. And this is obvious, because "they would exclude you that you might be zealous for them," i.e., that you might admit none but them: "Envy not the unjust man and do not follow his ways" (Prov 3:31); "Let not thy heart envy sinners" (Prov 23:17).”

“He tells them this change comes from the false teachers among them, who with a false zeal would exclude them from a friendship and a submission to St. Paul, and deprive them again of that Christian liberty by which Christ, and the faith of Christ, had freed them from the yoke of the Mosaical law. On this account I must labor and travail, as it were to bring you forth a second time. How do I now wish to be with you, to change my voice, to exhort you, to reprehend you, to use all ways and means to regain you to Christ? — I am in confusion about you, [2] I am perplexed, as the Greek signifies, as not knowing what to say or do. (Witham)”

“They--your flatterers: in contrast to Paul himself, who tells them the truth. zealously--zeal in proselytism was characteristic especially of the Jews, and so of Judaizers (Gal 1:14; Mat 23:15; Rom 10:2). affect you--that is, court you (Co2 11:2). not well--not in a good way, or for a good end. Neither the cause of their zealous courting of you, nor the manner, is what it ought to be. they would exclude you--"They wish to shut you out" from the kingdom of God (that is, they wish to persuade you that as uncircumcised Gentiles, you are shut out from it), "that ye may zealously court them," that is, become circumcised, as zealous followers of themselves. ALFORD explains it, that their wish was to shut out the Galatians from the general community, and attract them as a separate clique to their own party. So the English word "exclusive," is used.”

“— [OECUMENIUS] "They envy you." He says they do not welcome the same faith in Christ for your benefit, but in order to exclude you from it and persuade themselves to follow, because such a plan has been formulated against your deception. [end of the excerpt by Oecumenius] — "not rightly." For there is also good envy, when someone so envies that he imitates virtue. And there is also bad envy, when someone envies in such a way as to drive the virtuous person out of virtue. "but they desire to exclude you." Paul says, They wish to shut you off and to carry you away from the true knowledge, so that having become your teachers themselves, they may lead you to the same envy and imitation. For this reason they carry you away from true knowledge and bring you to the law.”

“No wonder indeed that on the apostle's departure … the Galatians were changed, since even now we witness the same occurrence in the church. For never was there a teacher in the church so distinguished in speech and life.… We see people busy with haste and fervor about alms, fasting, sexual abstinence, relief of the poor, taking care of graves, etc. But when he departs we see that they waste away and, from loss of their food, grow thin, pale and languid. Then follows the death of all that was thriving before.”

“Do you not see, he hints at the fact that they rivaled everyone in perfection when Paul was among them? And he also gives to understand that his absence gave rise to this evil. It would be excellent, he therefore says, if not only in the presence of the teacher, but also in his absence, the disciples thought what was proper.”

“But he rejects this when he says, "But be zealous for that which is good in a good thing always." As if to say: You ought not to be zealous for them in their teaching; but be zealous for a good teacher, i.e., for me and those like me: "And who is he that can hurt you if you be zealous of the good?" (1 Pet. 3:13). But because there can be evil in a good teacher, he adds, "be zealous of the good" teacher, yet say "in a good thing," i.e., in that which is good: "Follow after charity and be zealous for spiritual goods" (1 Cor 14:1). Now, although the Apostle speaks of himself, according to a Gloss, when he says, "be zealous of the good," yet he adds "in a good thing," because as he says: "I am not conscious of any thing, yet I am not hereby justified" (1 Cor 4:4). But because some are zealous for a good teacher in his presence alone, he adds: "always, and not only when I am present with you"; because zeal for the good, if it continues even when the teacher is absent, is an indication that it proceeds from love and fear of God Who sees all: "Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh, not serving to the eye, as pleasing men, but in simplicity of heart, fearing God" (Col 3:22).”

“good to be zealously affected--rather, to correspond to "zealously court" in Gal 4:18, "to be zealously courted." I do not find fault with them for zealously courting you, nor with you for being zealously courted: provided it be "in a good cause" (translate so), "it is a good thing" (Co1 9:20-23). My reason for saying the "not well" (Gal 4:17; the Greek is the same as that for "good," and "in a good cause," in Gal 4:28), is that their zealous courting of you is not in a good cause. The older interpreters, however, support English Version (compare Gal 1:14). always--Translate and arrange the words thus, "At all times, and not only when I am present with you." I do not desire that I exclusively should have the privilege of zealously courting you. Others may do so in my absence with my full approval, if only it be in a good cause, and if Christ be faithfully preached (Phi 1:15-18).”

“He wishes to show that those who now are overturning them, and persuading them to observe to the law, and by this preparing them to become zealous imitators of it, had long ago envied them in the knowledge of the Gospel, when Paul was present and was teaching them. "It is good, however," he says, "to strive enthusiastically in what is good always, and not only when I am present with you." And he shows that they have been deceived during his absence.”

“"Little children," says our teacher, "a little while longer I am with you." That is why Paul also instructs the Galatians in these words: "My little children, with whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you." And again he writes to the Corinthians: "For though you may have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet you have not many fathers. For in Christ I have begotten you through the gospel." On this account "a eunuch shall not enter into God's assembly," that is, the man who is unproductive and unfruitful both in conduct and in word; but blessed are those who have made themselves eunuchs, free from all sin, for the sake of the kingdom of heaven by their abstinence from the world.”

“"For," says he, "I have begotten you through the gospel; " and "Ye are my children, of whom I travail again in birth." Now was absolutely fulfilled that promise of the Spirit which was given by the word of Joel: "In the last days will I pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh, and their sons and their daughters shall prophesy; and upon my servants and upon my handmaids will I pour out of my Spirit.”

“For he says, "My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you; ". Receive the features, and the image, and the manliness of Christ, the likeness of the form of the Word being stamped upon them, and begotten in them by a true knowledge and faith, so that in each one Christ is spiritually born. And, therefore, the Church swells and travails in birth until Christ is formed in us,”

“Sons are spoken of in many senses, sometimes as by love, sometimes as by nature, sometimes as by blood, sometimes even as by religion. This is what Paul means now by "my sons," either because when the new birth occurs through faithful baptism, he who guides the baptized toward maturity or receives them when fully ready is called their father, or because when he calls them back into Christ he makes them his own sons.”

“Observe his perplexity and perturbation, "Brethren, I beseech you:" "My little children, of whom I am again in travail:" He resembles a mother trembling for her children. "Until Christ be formed in you." Behold his paternal tenderness, behold this despondency worthy of an Apostle. Observe what a wail he utters, far more piercing than of a woman in travail;-Ye have defaced the likeness, ye have destroyed the kinship, ye have changed the form, ye need another regeneration and refashioning; nevertheless I call you children, abortions and monsters though ye be. However, he does not express himself in this way, but spares them, unwilling to strike, and to inflict wound upon wound. Wise physicians do not cure those who have fallen into a long sickness all at once, but little by little, lest they should faint and die. And so is it with this blessed man; for these pangs were more severe in proportion as the force of his affection was stronger. And the offense was of no trivial kind. And as I have ever said and ever will say, even a slight fault mars the appearance and distorts the figure of the whole.”

“Humans are conceived in their mother's womb in order to be formed, yet only when fully formed do they go into labor. One might be surprised by his statement: "You with whom I am again in travail until Christ be formed in you." We are to understand this travail to stand for the agonies of concern that they might be born in Christ. Then he labors for them once again because of the dangers of their seduction, by which he sees them being disturbed.”

“He imitates a mother trembling for her children. You, he says, have distorted the image of Christ which you had within you from baptism, and you require a new rebirth and re-creation, so that the image of Christ may again appear in you and His character be imprinted upon you. Again I am in the pangs of birth, again I am regenerating you through teaching. But I do not despair. Therefore I also call you children, so that you too would not lose hope. And this is against the Novatians: Paul regenerates and renews the Galatians, but they (the Novatians) do not accept correction through repentance.”

“Above, the Apostle dismissed the false cause of his correcting the Galatians; here he discloses the true cause, which is sorrow for their imperfection. First, he expresses the heartfelt sorrow of which he spoke; Secondly, a desire to manifest this sorrow (v. 20); Thirdly, he gives the cause of the sorrow (v. 20): "because I am ashamed for you." This sorrow proceeded from charity, because he grieved for their sins: "I beheld the transgressors and I pined away; because they kept not thy word" (Ps 118:158). And so he addresses them in words of charity, saying, "My little children." He purposely does not call them sons, but little children, to indicate the imperfection whereby they had become small: "As unto little ones in Christ, I gave you milk to drink, not meat" (1 Cor 3:1). It should be noted that during parturition a child is called a little one. And this is what they were, because they needed to be born again, even though parents according to the flesh bring forth their child only once. Accordingly he says to them, "of whom I am in labor again." For he was in labor of them during their first conversion; but since they had now turned from the one who called them, to another gospel, they needed to be brought forth anew. Hence he says, "I am in labor," i.e., with labor and pain I bring them forth into the light of faith. In these words the Apostle bares his grief. Hence a man's conversion is called a birth: "They bow themselves to bring forth young" (Job 39:3); "And being with child she cried, travailing in birth and was in pain to be delivered" (Rev 12:2). Therefore it is because of his pain that he rebukes them so sharply, as a woman cries aloud because of the pains of childbirth: "I will speak now as a woman in labor" (Is 42:14). The reason for the iterated travail is that you are not perfectly formed. Hence he says: "until Christ be formed in you," i.e., until you receive His likeness, which you have lost through your sin. He does not say, "That you may be formed in Christ," but "until Christ be formed in you," to make it resound more terrifyingly on their ears. For Christ is formed in the heart by "formed faith": "That Christ might dwell in your hearts by faith" (Eph 3:17). But when one does not have "formed faith," Christ has already died in him: "Until the day dawn and the day star arise in your hearts" (2 Pet. 1:19). Thus Christ grows in a man according to his progress in the faith; conversely, as it diminishes, He recedes. Therefore, when the faith of a man is rendered "unformed" by sin, Christ is not formed in him; and so, because there was not a formed faith in them, they needed to be brought forth in the womb again until Christ be formed in them through faith, i.e., "formed faith," which works through love. Or, "until Christ be formed in you," i.e., through you Christ appear finely formed to others.”

“My little children-- (Ti1 1:18; Ti2 2:1; Jo1 2:1). My relation to you is not merely that of one zealously courting you (Gal 4:17-18), but that of a father to his children (Co1 4:15). I travail in birth--that is, like a mother in pain till the birth of her child. again--a second time. The former time was when I was "present with you" (Gal 4:18; compare Note, see on Gal 4:13). Christ be formed in you--that you may live nothing but Christ, and think nothing but Christ (Gal 2:20), and glory in nothing but Him, and His death, resurrection, and righteousness (Phi 3:8-10; Col 1:27).”

“"My little children." Even if, Paul says, you have corrupted the form of Christ and the image upon you, yet you are still my little children. And he says "little children," those small and unbegotten, or aborted infants, and lacking birth. For this reason he did not say "children," but "my little children." "until Christ be formed in you." You have corrupted, he says, the image of Christ in you, which you wore through baptism. As many as were baptized into Christ, you have clothed yourselves with Christ, and you have lost his form, and his being as members. There is therefore need of another birth, which will again imprint upon you the divine form of Christ. What then? Again I labor you by teaching. Again I beget, through catechesis, until you are again imprinted with the divine form of Christ. What then do the Novatians say in response to these things? For behold, I write these things plainly to the faithful. — [CYRIL] Those whom I labor, until the great and excellent characters of the divinity of Christ be formed into your minds. [end of the excerpt from Cyril of Alexandria] —”

“Observe his warmth, his inability to refrain himself, and to conceal these his feelings; such is the nature of love; nor is he satisfied with words, but desires to be present with them, and so, as he says, to change his voice, that is, to change to lamentation, to shed tears, to turn every thing into mourning. For he could not by letter show his tears or cries of grief, and therefore he ardently desires to be present with them. I know not, says he, what to say, or what to think. How is it, that ye who by dangers, which ye endured for the faith's sake, and by miracles, which ye performed through faith, had ascended to the highest heaven, should suddenly be brought to such a depth of degradation as to be drawn aside to circumcision or sabbaths, and should rely wholly upon Judaizers? Hence in the beginning he says, "I marvel that ye are so quickly removing," and here, "I am perplexed about you," as if he said, What am I to speak? What am I to utter? What am I to think? I am bitterly perplexed. And so he must needs weep, as the prophets do when in perplexity; for not only admonition but mourning also is a form in which solicitous attention is often manifested. And what he said in his speech to those at Miletus, "By the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one with tears, he says here also, "and to change my voice." (Acts 20:31.) When we find ourselves overcome by perplexity and helplessness which come contrary to expectation, we are driven to tears; and so Paul admonished them sharply, and endeavored to shame them, then in turn soothed them, and lastly he wept. And this weeping is not only a reproof but a blandishment; it does not exasperate like reproof, nor relax like indulgent treatment, but is a mixed remedy, and of great efficacy in the way of exhortation. Having thus softened and powerfully engaged their hearts by his tears, he again advances to the contest, and lays down a larger proposition, proving that the Law itself was opposed to its being kept. Before, he produced the example of Abraham, but now (what is more cogent) he brings forward the Law itself enjoining them not to keep itself, but to leave off. So that, says he, you must abandon the Law, if you would obey it, for this is its own wish: this however he does not say expressly, but enforces it in another mode, mixing up with it an account of facts.”

“Holy Scripture edifies even when read but is much more profitable if one passes from written characters to the voice.… Knowing, then, that speech has more force when addressed to those who are present, the apostle longs to turn the epistolary voice, the voice confined within written characters, into actual presence.”

“I am not satisfied with letters, but would wish to be with you and to change my voice, that is, to turn it into lamentation and weeping. I am at a loss what to say about you, how you who had risen so high that you even underwent dangers for the faith and performed signs through it, are now retreating to the weakness of the law. Therefore I would wish to lament over you in your presence. For when he found himself in difficult circumstances, he would usually give himself over to tears.”

“Here someone might say: "Away from us you say these things, but if you were with us, you would not say them," according to 2 Corinthians (10:10): "His bodily presence is weak and his speech contemptible." Therefore, he expresses a desire to manifest his grief more vividly, saying, "I would willingly be present with you now and change my voice." As if to say: I use gentle language now, calling you friends and sons, in my absence; but if I were present among you, I would correct you more sharply. For if I were present and speaking the things I am now writing in a letter, the correction would be more severe; because I would then be able to express the scolding tones of my rebuke and the cries of my anger and the pain in my heart, much better than I can convey them by letter. And a living voice would more effectively stir your hearts to shame for your error and my anxiety. And the cause of this sorrow is that "I am ashamed for you," i.e., I blush for you in the presence of others; for as it is said in Sirach (22:3): "A son ill taught is the confusion of the father." For since a son is a thing of the father, and a disciple as such is a thing of his master, a master rejoices in the good he sees reflected in him and glories in it as though it were his own. Conversely, he is pained at evil and is ashamed. Hence because they had been turned from good to evil, for that reason the Apostle is ashamed.”

“Translate as Greek, "I could wish." If circumstances permitted (which they do not), I would gladly be with you [M. STUART]. now--as I was twice already. Speaking face to face is so much more effective towards loving persuasion than writing (Jo2 1:12; Jo3 1:13-14). change my voice--as a mother (Gal 4:19): adapting my tone of voice to what I saw in person your case might need. This is possible to one present, but not to one in writing [GROTIUS and ESTIUS]. I stand in doubt of you--rather, "I am perplexed about you," namely, how to deal with you, what kind of words to use, gentle or severe, to bring you back to the right path.”

“"I would indeed be present with you now." — [OECUMENIUS] See love. "I am not content," he says, with letters; I sought to be present with you, and to exchange weeping and mourning for teaching delivered in words, so that, he says, I taught you with weeping. For I too am at a loss what to say about you. How is it that you who were exalted by the knowledge of the Gospel have been cast down and dragged to the ground, again held by the law? [end of the excerpt by Oecumenius] — "and to change my tone." For some, to turn it into weeping; for others, to marvel at the certainty.”

“"For (it is written) that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bond maid, the other by a free woman; but he who was of the bond maid was born after the flesh, but he of the free woman was by promise: which things are allegorized" (that is to say, they presaged something besides the literal history); "for these are the two covenants," or the two exhibitions (of the divine plans), as we have found the word interpreted," the one from the Mount Sinai," in relation to the synagogue of the Jews, according to the law, "which gendereth to bondage"-"the other gendereth" (to liberty, being raised) above all principality, and power, and dominion, and every name that is l named, not only in this world, but in that which is to come, "which is the mother of us all," in which we have the promise of (Christ's) holy church; by reason of which he adds in conclusion: "So then, brethren, we are not children of the bond woman, but of the free." In this passage he has undoubtedly shown that Christianity had a noble birth, being sprung, as the mystery of the allegory indicates, from that son of Abraham who was born of the free woman; whereas from the son of the bond maid came the legal bondage of Judaism.”

“Nay, verily, the Holy Spirit is not given by measure, but is poured out altogether on the believer. For if the day rises alike to all, and if the sun is diffused with like and equal light over all, how much more does Christ, who is the true sun and the true day, bestow in His Church the light of eternal life with the like equality! Of which equality we see the sacrament celebrated in Exodus, when the manna flowed down from heaven, and, prefiguring the things to come, showed forth the nourishment of the heavenly bread and the food of the coming Christ. For there, without distinction either of sex or of age, an omer was collected equally by each one. Whence it appeared that the mercy of Christ, and the heavenly grace that would subsequently follow, was equally divided among all; without difference of sex, without distinction of years, without accepting of persons, upon all the people of God the gift of spiritual grace was shed. Assuredly the same spiritual grace which is equally received in baptism by believers, is subsequently either increased or diminished in our conversation and conduct; as in the Gospel the Lord's seed is equally sown, but, according to the variety of the soil, some is wasted, and some is increased into a large variety of plenty, with an exuberant fruit of either thirty or sixty or a hundred fold. But, once more, when each was called to receive a penny, wherefore should what is distributed equally by God be diminished by human interpretation?”

“After he had already sufficiently softened them and drawn them to himself, he again enters into dispute, pointing out that the law itself does not wish to be observed: answer me, he says. He also said beautifully: "those who desire," because such a situation depended not on the demand of things, but on their inappropriate passion for disputes. And by the law he means the book of Genesis, since it is his custom to call the entire Old Testament the law.”

“Above, the Apostle showed the pre-eminence of grace by a human example; here he proves it on the authority of the Scripture. First, he proposes a fact; Secondly, he expounds its mystery (v. 24); Thirdly, he concludes his proposition (v. 31). As to the first, he does two things: First, he elicits their attention; Secondly, he sets forth his intention (v. 22). He says therefore: "Tell me, you that desire to be under the law, have you not read the law?" As if to say: If you are wise, consider my objections; if you cannot answer them, yield: "Answer, I beseech you, without contention: and speaking that which is just, answer me" (Job 6:29). Now I raise this objection to you. You have either read the Law or not. If you have read it, you ought to know the things written in it. But those things prove that it should be abandoned. If you have not read it, you ought not accept what you do not know: "Let thy eyelids go before thy steps" (Prov 4:25). He says "under the law," i.e., under the burden of the Law. For to shoulder something light is not a feat; but to assume a heavy burden, such as the burden of the Law, seems to be a mark of exceeding stupidity: "This is a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear" (Acts 15:10); which is to be understood of those who wish to live according to the flesh under the Law.”

“desire--of your own accord madly courting that which must condemn and ruin you. do ye not hear--do ye not consider the mystic sense of Moses' words? [GROTIUS]. The law itself sends you away from itself to Christ [ESTIUS]. After having sufficiently maintained his point by argument, the apostle confirms and illustrates it by an inspired allegorical exposition of historical facts, containing in them general laws and types. Perhaps his reason for using allegory was to confute the Judaizers with their own weapons: subtle, mystical, allegorical interpretations, unauthorized by the Spirit, were their favorite arguments, as of the Rabbins in the synagogues. Compare the Jerusalem Talmud [Tractatu Succa, cap. Hechalil]. Paul meets them with an allegorical exposition, not the work of fancy, but sanctioned by the Holy Spirit. History, if properly understood contains in its complicated phenomena, simple and continually recurring divine laws. The history of the elect people, like their legal ordinances, had, besides the literal, a typical meaning (compare Co1 10:1-4; Co1 15:45, Co1 15:47; Rev 11:8). Just as the extra-ordinarily-born Isaac, the gift of grace according to promise, supplanted, beyond all human calculations, the naturally-born Ishmael, so the new theocratic race, the spiritual seed of Abraham by promise, the Gentile, as well as Jewish believers, were about to take the place of the natural seed, who had imagined that to them exclusively belonged the kingdom of God.”

“"Tell me," Paul says, "you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law." But "desire" is fitting; for the matter was one of ill-timed quarrelsomeness on their part. "do you not hear the law." What, he says, does he say about himself? and furthermore he brings testimony from Genesis. For it is his habit to call the entire Old Testament "the law." "do you not hear the law," that is, the book of Genesis? and see how he constructs his argument. "you who desire," he says, "to be under the law, do you not hear the law." For therefore you will be convinced by him. The law itself, he says (if you know what is in it), advises that you depart from it. If then you are persuaded by it, withdraw from it. But observe the construction.”

“But why enlarge on such a subject? When the very apostle whom our heretics adopt, interprets the law which allows an unmuzzled mouth to the oxen that tread out the corn, not of cattle, but of ourselves; and also alleges that the rock which followed (the Israelites) and supplied them with drink was Christ; teaching the Galatians, moreover, that the two narratives of the sons of Abraham had an allegorical meaning in their course; and to the Ephesians giving an intimation that, when it was declared in the beginning that a man should leave his father and mother and become one flesh with his wife, he applied this to Christ and the church.”

“He returns again to Abraham, not in the way of repetition, but, inasmuch as the Patriarch's fame was great among the Jews, to show that the types had their origin from thence, and that present events were pictured aforetime in him. Having previously shown that the Galatians were sons of Abraham, now, in that the Patriarch's sons were not of equal dignity, one being by a bondwoman, the other by a free-woman, he shows that they were not only his sons, but sons in the same sense as he that was freeborn and noble. Such is the power of Faith.”

“(Verse 22, 23.) For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by a slave woman and one by a free woman. But the son of the slave was born according to the flesh, while the son of the free woman was born through the promise. It is of great difficulty to demonstrate that only Isaac, who was born of Sarah, was generated through the promise, and not also Ishmael, who was born of the Egyptian slave Hagar. For the Scripture refers that when Hagar, fleeing from Sarah, who was mistreating her, came to her in the desert, an angel appeared to her and instructed her to submit to her mistress's authority. This same angel also spoke these words: "I will surely multiply your offspring exceedingly, so that they will not be counted for multitude" (Genesis 16:10). And afterwards concerning Ishmael (of which surely no one doubted the words of the promise): He will be a rustic man, his hand against everyone, and everyone's hand against him, and he will dwell opposite the face of all his brothers. But it can be answered that the promise of an angel is of less authority than that of God himself. For just as a star, when the sun rises, does not shine: so the words of angels are obscured, and vanish, and are considered as nothing in comparison to the promise of God. Indeed, this response seems to have some importance; but it is immediately countered by the authority of the following Scripture. For it is written: And Abraham said to God: May Ismael live in your sight (Ibid., XVII, 18 seqq.); and God answered him as follows: Behold, your wife Sara shall bear you a son, and you shall name him Isaac, and I will establish my covenant with him, as an everlasting covenant, and with his descendants after him. And regarding Ismael: Behold, I have heard you, and behold, I have blessed him, and I will multiply him, and increase him greatly. Twelve nations will he beget, and I will make him into a great nation. But my covenant I will establish with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you at this time next year. From these statements of God it is evident that Ishmael was also born according to the promise. But this is how it is resolved: the promise is properly fulfilled in the giving of the covenant, and it is different to bless, increase, and multiply greatly, which is written concerning Ishmael. It is different to make someone an heir through the covenant, which is said regarding Isaac: I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant, and with his descendants after him. And in the following: But my covenant I will establish with Isaac, whom Sarah shall bear to you (Gen., XVII, 19). And how different are gifts from assets: different are bequests from inheritance (for we read that gifts were given to the sons of Abraham by his concubines, but the inheritance of all his assets was left to the son of Sarah); so, as we have said, blessings and bequests are different from a covenant. But this can also be said of Ishmael, after his conception, whether by an angel or by God speaking. But concerning Isaac, before he was conceived in Sarah's womb, God had promised. These things, however, let them be said as much as the modesty of our intelligence allows. But if anyone can find something greater, how is it that Ishmael, who was born of a slave woman, is not the son of the promise, but Isaac, who was born of a free woman: he should rather be heard. And if anything, says the Apostle, you think differently, and God has revealed this to you. Now, briefly, we must strive for higher things, so that we may say that each one of us is born first, not according to the promise, as long as he is instructed by the simple words of the Scriptures and still delights in Jewish explanations: but when he surpasses to higher things and understands the spiritual law, then he is generated from the promise: and, to speak more clearly, every day those who do the works of Abraham are born from Abraham. But those who have the spirit of slavery, again in fear, are born of the Egyptian servant girl; but those who have received the spirit of adoption, are free through Sarah: by this freedom we are given by Christ. The Lord speaks to the Jews who still preferred to be the sons of the servant girl: If you remain in my word, you will truly be my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free (John 8:31-32). So, those ignorant of the mystery that was being spoken, say: We are descendants of Abraham, and we have never been slaves to anyone: how can you say that we will be set free? Jesus answered them: Amen, amen I say to you, whoever commits sin is the slave of sin. But a slave does not remain in the house forever; but the son remains forever. If therefore we are the servants of sin, Agar has begotten us, the Egyptian: if sin reigns not in our mortal body, we are the sons of God indeed.”

“And concerning the allegory of the body: "It is written that Abraham had two sons, the one by a slave-girl and the other by a free woman. And the son of the slave-girl was born according to the flesh, but the son of the free woman in virtue of the promise. This is said by way of allegory. For these are the two covenants." There is no need for further explanations, for two peoples are understood here.”

“Then when he says, "It is written that Abraham had two sons," he sets forth his intention, saying: The reason I ask whether you have read the Law is that it contains certain things which clearly indicate that the Law must not be retained. And the Apostle mentions specifically the two sons of Abraham. First, he states one point in which they are alike. Secondly, two points in which they differ. They are alike in having the same father. Hence he says, "It is written that Abraham had two sons." In fact he had more than two, because after Sara's death, he fathered other sons of Cetura, as is stated in Genesis (Ch. 25). But the Apostle does not mention them because they have no role in this allegory. Now two peoples, the Jews and the Gentiles, can be signified by those two, i.e., the son of the bondwoman and the son of the free woman—and by the other sons of Cetura, schismatics and heretics. These two peoples are alike in having one father, for the Jews are the children of Abraham according to the flesh, but the Gentiles, by imitating him in faith. Or, they are the sons of Abraham, i.e., of God, Who is the Father of all: "Have we not all one father?" (Mal 2:10); "Is he the God of the Jews only?" (Rom 3:29). But they differ in two respects: namely, in the condition of their mother, because one is of a bondwoman, as is said in Genesis (Ch. 21) (yet Abraham did not sin by lying with her, because he approached her in conjugal affection and under God's ordinance); the other, namely, Isaac, whom Sara, his wife, begot unto him was born of a free woman: "I will return and come to thee at this time, life accompanying, and Sara thy wife shall have a son" (Gen 18:10).”

“It is written in the law, that is, in Genesis, (chap. xvi. and chap. xxi.) that Abraham had two sons, &c. that his two sons, Ismael, born of his servant, Agar, and Isaac of his wife, Sara, in an allegorical sense, represent the two testaments or covenants, which God made with his people: that by Ismael was represented that covenant of the former law delivered to Moses on Mount Sina, by which the Jews were made his elect people, yet as it were his servants, to be kept to their duty by fear of punishments; but by Isaac is represented the new covenant or testament of Christ, given at Jerusalem, where he suffered, where the new law was first published; by which law, they who believe in Christ were made the spiritual children of Abraham, the sons of God, and heirs of the blessings promised to Abraham: that Sina, the mountain in Arabia, hath[3] an affinity with Jerusalem, and with her children, who remain under the servitude of the law of Moses: we cannot understand a conjunction, or an affinity, as to place and situation, Sina and Jerusalem being near twenty days’ journey distant from each other; therefore it can only be an affinity in a mystical signification, inasmuch as Jerusalem was the capital of the Jews, where the children of those who received the law on Mount Sina lived still under the servitude of the same law: but Christians, who believe in Christ, must look upon themselves as belonging to Jerusalem, and not to the city of Jerusalem upon earth, but to the celestial Jerusalem in heaven, which is our mother, now no longer servants and slaves to the former law, but free, being made the sons of God by the grace of Christ, and heirs of heaven. And these blessings were promised to all nations, not only to the Jews, of which the much greater part remained obstinate, and refused to believe in Christ, but also particularly to the Gentiles, according to the prophecy of Isaias, (chap. liv.) rejoice thou that hast been barren, like Sara, for a long time; i.e. rejoice, you Gentiles, hitherto left in idolatry, without the knowledge or worship of the true God, now you shall have more children among you than among the Jews, who were his chosen people. (Witham)”

“"Abraham had two sons." He wishes to show that those who are Abraham's offspring by physical kinship, that is, the Jews, are related by flesh, while those who are brought into Abraham's offspring by faith, that is, the Christians, are offspring of Abraham by promise. But even then, he says, the son according to the flesh, Ishmael, was cast out, just as now his fleshly kin, the Jews, have been. And he calls the son according to the promise, Isaac, who remained inside, just as now, he says, the kin according to the promise, the Christians. Do you see that the law knows how to expel those who belong to it alone, that is, the Jews?”

“What is the meaning of "after the flesh?" Having said that Faith united us to Abraham, and it having seemed incredible to his hearers, that those who were not begotten by Abraham should be called his sons, he proves that this paradox had actually happened long ago; for that Isaac, born not according to the order of nature, nor the law of marriage, nor the power of the flesh, was yet truly his own son. He was the issue of bodies that were dead, and of a womb that was dead; his conception was not by the flesh, nor his birth by the seed, but the Word of God fashioned Him. Not so in the case of the bondman; He came by virtue of the laws of nature, and after the manner of marriage. Nevertheless, he that was not according to the flesh was more honorable than he that was born after the flesh. Therefore let it not disturb you that ye are not born after the flesh; for from the very reason that ye are not so born, are ye most of all Abraham's kindred. The being born after the flesh renders one not more honorable, but less so, for a birth not after the flesh is more marvellous and more spiritual. And this is plain from the case of those who were born of old time; Ishmael, for instance, who was born according to the flesh, was not only a bondman, but was cast out of his father's house; but Isaac, who was born according to the promise, being a true son and free, was lord of all.”

“From God's own Scripture it is evident that the birth of Ishmael also was according to promise. But the answer is that a promise is truly fulfilled in the giving of a covenant. It is one thing to bless, increase and multiply greatly, as is written in Ishmael's case, but another to make an heir through a covenant.”

“Now the fact that Isaac was born of a free wife is not enough to make him signify the people who inherit the New Covenant. What is more important is that he was born according to the promise. For he could have been born according to nature's norms from a slave and in the same way from a free woman, just as Abraham received from Katurah, whom he subsequently married, sons not according to a promise but according to nature.”

“Since his words that they are sons of Abraham seemed incredible — whether those who were not born from him according to the flesh are truly children of Abraham — Paul says that even Isaac, Abraham's own son, was not born from him according to the flesh — for how could this be, when nature had become dead? — but the word of God and the promise formed him. Ishmael, on the other hand, was born according to the natural order. This is precisely what the expression "according to the flesh" means. But despite this, the one born according to the flesh is a slave and excluded from the inheritance, while the one born not according to the flesh is the master and heir. What then prevents you, even though you were not born from Abraham according to the flesh, from being his sons? For you too received a new form of existence through the pronouncement of words at the baptismal font.”

“Also, they differ as to the manner of procreation, because the son of the bondwoman, i.e., Ishmael, was born according to the flesh, but the one of the free woman, i.e., Isaac, according to the promise. Here a twofold misinterpretation must be avoided. The first is lest we understand "born according to the flesh" as though "flesh" refers here to an act of sin, as it does in Romans (8:13): "If you live according to the flesh, you shall die," and 2 Corinthians (10:3): "For although we walk in the flesh, we do not war according to the flesh"—as though Abraham sinned in begetting Ishmael. The other is lest we suppose, when it is said, "by promise," that Isaac was not born according to the flesh, i.e., through a carnal union, but by the Holy Spirit. Therefore, it must be said that Ishmael was born according to the flesh, i.e., according to the nature of the flesh. For it is natural among men that from a fertile young woman, such as Hagar was, and a man advanced in years a son be born. But that Isaac be born according to promise is beyond the nature of the flesh: for the nature of the flesh cannot achieve that a son be born of an old man and a barren old woman, as Sara was. In Ishmael are signified the Jewish people, who were born according to the flesh; in Isaac are signified the Gentiles, who were born according to the promise, in which Abraham was promised that he would be the father of many nations: "In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed" (Gen 22:18).”

“after the flesh--born according to the usual course of nature: in contrast to Isaac, who was born "by virtue of the promise" (so the Greek), as the efficient cause of Sarah's becoming pregnant out of the course of nature (Rom 4:19). Abraham was to lay aside all confidence in the flesh (after which Ishmael was born), and to live by faith alone in the promise (according to which Isaac was miraculously born, contrary to all calculations of flesh and blood).”

“"But the one of the bondwoman." Properly he speaks of Ishmael according to the flesh. For by the law of nature he was born of the flesh; for Isaac was not by the law of the flesh (How could a hundred-year-old man beget?) but by the individual promise. — [PHOTIUS] Therefore do not assume that being related to Abraham according to the flesh is enough; let this be corrected and let it be believed that unless you are born as children by the promise of Abraham, that is, members and fellow-body of Christ (for he is, by promise, the seed of Abraham), you are outside the promise. [end of the excerpt by Photius] —”

“Thus, after their simplicity and innocence, did these daughters [of Lot] so speak, imagining that all mankind had perished, even as the Sodomites had done, and that the anger of God had come down upon the whole earth. Wherefore also they are to be held excusable, since they supposed that they only, along with their father, were left for the preservation of the human race; and for this reason it was that they deceived their father. Moreover, by the words they used this fact was pointed out-that there is no other one who can confer upon the elder and younger church the [power of] giving birth to children, besides our Father. Now the father of the human race is the Word of God, as Moses points out when he says, "Is not He thy father who hath obtained thee [by generation], and formed thee, and created thee?" At what time, then, did He pour out upon the human race the life-giving seed-that is, the Spirit of the remission of sins, through means of whom we are quickened? Was it not then, when He was eating with men, and drinking wine upon the earth? For it is said, "The Son of man came eating and drinking;" and when He had lain down, He fell asleep, and took repose. As He does Himself say in David, "I slept, and took repose." And because He used thus to act while He dwelt and lived among us, He says again, "And my sleep became sweet unto me." Now this whole matter was indicated through Lot, that the seed of the Father of all-that is, of the Spirit of God, by whom all things were made-was commingled and united with flesh-that is, with His own workmanship; by which commixture and unity the two synagogues-that is, the two churches-produced from their own father living sons to the living God.”

“Contrary to usage, he calls a type an allegory; his meaning is as follows; this history not only declares that which appears on the face of it, but announces somewhat farther, whence it is called an allegory. And what hath it announced? no less than all the things now present. For these women are two covenants; one from mount Sinai, bearing children unto bondage, which is Hagar. "These:" who? the mothers of those children, Sarah and Hagar; and what are they? Two covenants, two laws. As the names of the women were given in the history, he abides by this designation of the two races, showing how much follows from the very names. How from the names?”

“Allegory is properly a term in the art of grammar. How it differs from metaphor and other figures of speech we learn as children. It presents one thing in words and signifies another in sense. … Understanding this, Paul (who had a certain knowledge of secular literature also) used the name of the figure of speech and called it allegory according to the usage of his own circle.”

“Those who are at great pains to pervert the meaning of the divine Scriptures … abuse this saying of the apostle's, as though they thought that they could derive from it the power to suppress the entire sense of holy Scripture in their aspirations to speak "allegorically," as if in the manner of the apostle. They fail to see how great a difference there is between their own position and that of the apostle in this passage. For the apostle does not deny the history or pick apart the events of the distant past, but he has stated them as they happened at the time, while using for his own purpose the interpretation of these events.… He would not have said "referred to one who was born" if he had not believed that person had really existed. There cannot be a simile if one takes away the historical reality itself.”

“Under the sure guidance of the apostle we see how clearly he shows that these two are to be taken allegorically. One may also consider the sons of Keturah under some figure of things to come. The fact that such people did these things is recorded not without purpose but under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. We will perhaps find that heresies and schisms are signified in this allegory. For these are sons of the free woman, that is, of the church, and yet they again revert to life according to the flesh, not spiritually according to a promise.”

“That is, this history not only narrates about this, but points to something else as well. Therefore it is also called an allegory. That was a figure of the present. These two wives allegorically represent the New and Old Testaments. In what way? Hagar represents the Old Testament. For the law was given from Mount Sinai.”

“And concerning the allegory of the body: "It is written that Abraham had two sons, the one by a slave-girl and the other by a free woman. And the son of the slave-girl was born according to the flesh, but the son of the free woman in virtue of the promise. This is said by way of allegory. For these are the two covenants." There is no need for further explanations, for two peoples are understood here.”

“Then he discloses the mystery when he says, "Which things are said by an allegory." First, he tells what sort of mystery it is; Secondly, he explains it (v. 24). He says therefore: These things which are written about the two sons "are said by an allegory," i.e., the understanding of one thing under the image of another. For an allegory is a figure of speech or a manner of narrating, in which one thing is said and something else is understood. Hence "allegory" is derived from "alos" (alien) and "goge" (a leading), leading, as it were, to a different understanding. Here it should be noted that "allegory" is sometimes taken for any mystical meaning: sometimes for only one of the four, which are the historical, allegorical, mystical and the anagogical, which are the four senses of Sacred Scripture, all of which differ in signification. For signification is twofold: one is through words; the other through the things signified by the words. And this is peculiar to the sacred writings and no others, since their author is God in Whose power it lies not only to employ words to signify (which man can also do), but things as well. Consequently, in the other sciences handed down by men, in which only words can be employed to signify, the words alone signify. But it is peculiar to Scripture that words and the very things signified by them signify something. Consequently this science can have many senses. For that signification by which the words signify something pertains to the literal or historical sense. But the signification whereby the things signified by the words further signify other things pertains to the mystical sense. There are two ways in which something can be signified by the literal sense: either according to the usual construction, as when I say, "the man smiles"; or according to a likeness or metaphor, as when I say, "the meadow smiles." Both of these are used in Sacred Scripture; as when we say, according to the first, that Jesus ascended, and when we say according to the second, that He sits at the right hand of God. Therefore, under the literal sense is included the parabolic or metaphorical. However, the mystical or spiritual sense is divided into three types. First, as when the Apostle says that the Old Law is the figure of the New Law. Hence, insofar as the things of the Old Law signify things of the New Law, it is the allegorical sense. Then, according to Dionysius in the book On The Heavenly Hierarchy, the New Law is a figure of future glory; accordingly, insofar as things in the New Law and in Christ signify things which are in heaven, it is the anagogical sense. Furthermore, in the New Law the things performed by the Head are examples of things we ought to do—because "What things soever were written were written for our learning" (Rom 15:3)—accordingly insofar as the things which in the New Law were done in Christ and done in things that signify Christ are signs of things we ought to do, it is the moral sense. Examples will clarify each of these. For when I say, "Let there be light," referring literally to corporeal light, it is the literal sense. But if it be taken to mean "Let Christ be born in the Church," it pertains to the allegorical sense. But if one says, "Let there be light," i.e., "Let us be conducted to glory through Christ," it pertains to the anagogical sense. Finally, if it is said "Let there be light," i.e., "Let us be illumined in mind and inflamed in heart through Christ," it pertains to the moral sense. Above, the Apostle spoke of the mystical sense; here he discloses the mystery: First, as to the mothers; Secondly, as to the sons (v. 28). By the two mothers he understands the two testaments. He says therefore, "These," i.e., the two wives, the bondwoman and the free woman, "are the two testaments," the Old and the New: "I will make with the house of Israel a new covenant" (behold, the New Testament), "not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers" (behold the Old Testament) (Jer 31:31). For the free woman signifies the New Testament and the bondwoman the Old. To understand what a testament is, we should consider that a testament is a pact or agreement dealing with matters which are confirmed by witnesses. Hence in Scripture in many places in lieu of testament is put pact or agreement. Now, whenever a pact or agreement is struck, a promise is made. Therefore, according to the diversity of promises there is a diversity of testaments. But two things have been promised to us: temporal things in the Old Law, and eternal things in the New: "Rejoice and be glad because your reward is great in heaven" (Mt 5:12). Hence these two promises are the two testaments. Hence the Apostle, when he says, "The one from mount Sinai, engendering unto bondage," explains them. To understand this text, it must be noted with respect to the first that a citizen of a city is called its son, and the city itself his mother: "Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me" (Lk 23:28); "The noble sons of Sion" (Lam 4:2). Therefore, by the fact that certain ones become citizens of a city, they are made its sons. Now there is a twofold city of God: the one of earth, called the earthly Jerusalem, and the other of Heaven, called the heavenly Jerusalem. Furthermore, men were made citizens of the earthly city through the Old Testament, but of the heavenly through the New. He says therefore first: I say that it signifies the two Testaments, namely, the Old and the New. And with respect to this he says: "The one from mount Sinai, engendering unto bondage." Wherein is mentioned first of all the place in which it was given, namely, on Mount Sinai, as is recorded in Exodus (Ch. 20). According to a Gloss the mystical rendition of this is that Sinai is interpreted "Commandment." Hence in Ephesians (Ch. 2) the Old Law is called by the Apostle the law of the Commandments. Now a mountain signifies pride: "Before your feet stumble upon the dark mountains" (Jer. 13:16). Hence by this mountain on which the Law was given a twofold pride of the Jews is signified: one by which they were arrogant against God: "I know thy obstinacy and thy most stiff neck" (Deut 31:27); the other by which they boasted at the expense of other nations, thus perverting what is said in Psalm (147:20): "He hath not done in like manner to every nation; and his judgments he hath not made manifest to them." Secondly, he explains the end for which it was given, namely, not to make them free, but to make them children of a bondwoman, "engendering unto bondage, which is Hagar," i.e., which is signified by Hagar, who engenders unto bondage, namely, the Old Testament. And this it does with respect to three things; namely, feeling, understanding and fruit. As to understanding, indeed, according to knowledge: because in man is a twofold knowledge. One is free, when he knows the truth of things according to themselves; the other is servile, i.e., veiled under figures, as was the knowledge of the Old Testament. As to feeling, the New Law engenders the feeling of love, which pertains to freedom: for one who loves is moved by his own initiative. The Old, on the other hand, engenders the feeling of fear in which is servitude; for one who fears is moved not by his own initiative but by that of another: "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 as to the fruit, the New Law begets sons to whom is owed the inheritance, whereas to those whom the Old Law engenders are owed small presents as to servants: "The servant abideth not in the house forever; but the son abideth forever" (Jn 8:35).”

“are an allegory--rather, "are allegorical," that is, have another besides the literal meaning. these are the two covenants--"these [women] are (that is, mean; omit 'the' with all the oldest manuscripts) two covenants." As among the Jews the bondage of the mother determined that of the child, the children of the free covenant of promise, answering to Sarah, are free; the children of the legal covenant of bondage are not so. one from--that is, taking his origin from Mount Sinai. Hence, it appears, he is treating of the moral law (Gal 3:19) chiefly (Heb 12:18). Paul was familiar with the district of Sinai in Arabia (Gal 1:17), having gone thither after his conversion. At the gloomy scene of the giving of the Law, he learned to appreciate, by contrast, the grace of the Gospel, and so to cast off all his past legal dependencies. which gendereth--that is, bringing forth children unto bondage. Compare the phrase (Act 3:25), "children of the covenant which God made . . . saying unto Abraham." Agar--that is, Hagar.”

“These women represent the two covenants. Moses, taking the blood of a calf in a vessel, sprinkled the people, saying "this is the blood of the covenant, etc." … The law was given on Mount Sinai. In reciting it to the people, Moses called this the book of the testament. He then sprinkled the people with blood, as I have said. This law held sinners as offenders. They soon began to be slaves of sin, as if they had been made sons of Hagar, as if returning to slavery.”

“"which things are spoken allegorically." That is, they were types of the future covenants: the births of these two children. For not only the visible things, but also other matters are signified by the births. "which things are spoken allegorically." Instead of what is otherwise meant. For it does not recount the history, but teaches the things foreshadowed in the history. For he introduces: "She is born into slavery." That of the law. "or is someone named Hagar." He says: "someone" is a covenant, which has the form of Hagar. And therefore: for the mountain Sinai in the language of the Arabs is called Hagar.”

“The bond-woman was called Hagar, and "Hagar" is the word for Mount Sinai in the language of that country. So that it is necessary that all who are born of the Old Covenant should be bondmen, for that mountain where the Old Covenant was delivered hath a name in common with the bondwoman. And it includes Jerusalem, for this is the meaning of, "And answereth to Jerusalem that now is." That is, it borders on, and is contiguous to it. "For she is in bondage with her children." What follows from hence? Not only that she was in bondage and brought forth bondmen, but that this Covenant is so too, whereof the bondwoman was a type. For Jerusalem is adjacent to the mountain of the same name with the bondwoman, and in this mountain the Covenant was delivered. Now where is the type of Sarah?”

“Hagar, who is interpreted as "sojourning," "wandering" or "tarrying," gives birth to Ishmael.… No wonder that the Old Covenant, which is on Mount Sinai, which is in Arabia and nearby to Jerusalem, is stated and alleged in writing to be ephemeral and not perpetual. The sojourning of Hagar stands in contrast with perpetual possession. The name of Mount Sinai means "tribulation," while Arabia means "death."”

“And Sinai is located in Arabia, and in the Arabic language it is called "Hagar." It corresponds to Jerusalem, that is, it is in the vicinity of, borders upon, or is likened to the earthly Jerusalem; it is compared with it, is transferred to it, since there is a resemblance between the two. Just as Hagar was a slave and bore children into slavery, so also the law, given from Mount Sinai, which is called Hagar and is likened to Jerusalem, bears into slavery those who hold to it. For in the law there is much that is unfree and slavish, because virtue too was grounded upon perishable reward — upon earthly blessings, I say — and the avoidance of evil was instilled through punishments and fear.”

“Then he gives the explanation of the mystery when he says: "Sinai is a mountain in Arabia, which hath affinity to that Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children." But here a difficulty arises: for since Sinai is almost twenty days journey from Jerusalem, it seems false that Sinai has affinity to [borders on] Jerusalem, as the Apostle says here. To this a Gloss responds in a mystical manner that Sinai is in Arabia, which stands for the abjection or affliction under which the Old Testament was given, because the men under it were oppressed by carnal observances after the manner of slaves and foreigners: "This is a yoke which neither we nor our fathers were able to bear" (Acts 15:10). This mountain neighbors on Jerusalem not by a spatial continuity but by a likeness "to that Jerusalem which now is," i.e., to the Jewish people, because just as they love earthly things and for the sake of temporal things are under the bondage of sin, so that mountain engendered unto bondage. But this does not seem to be the Apostle's intention. For he wants to bring out that from the very place of bondage the Old Testament, which was given on Mount Sinai, engenders unto bondage, because it was given on Sinai not as a place where the children of Israel were to remain, but as a stage in their journey to the promised land. For Jerusalem, too, engenders sons unto bondage. Hence it is with respect to this that Mount Sinai is continuous with her. And this is what he says: which hath affinity to that (i.e., by being part of the continuous route followed by those going to Jerusalem) "Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children," i.e., the bondage of legal observances (from which Christ redeemed us) and of various sins—"He that commits sins is the servant of sin" (Jn 8:34)—and, literally, from bondage under the Romans who were their masters.”

“Translate, "For this word, Hagar, is (imports) Mount Sinai in Arabia (that is, among the Arabians--in the Arabian tongue)." So CHRYSOSTOM explains. Haraut, the traveller, says that to this day the Arabians call Sinai, "Hadschar," that is, Hagar, meaning a rock or stone. Hagar twice fled into the desert of Arabia (Gen. 16:1-16; Gen 21:9-21): from her the mountain and city took its name, and the people were called Hagarenes. Sinai, with its rugged rocks, far removed from the promised land, was well suited to represent the law which inspires with terror, and the spirit of bondage. answereth--literally, "stands in the same rank with"; "she corresponds to." Jerusalem which now is--that is, the Jerusalem of the Jews, having only a present temporary existence, in contrast with the spiritual Jerusalem of the Gospel, which in germ, under the form of the promise, existed ages before, and shall be for ever in ages to come. and--The oldest manuscripts read, "For she is in bondage." As Hagar was in bondage to her mistress, so Jerusalem that now is, is in bondage to the law, and also to the Romans: her civil state thus being in accordance with her spiritual state [BENGEL].”

“Mount Sinai is in Arabia. There the law was given to Moses. It is near Jerusalem. That mountain Sinai itself, in the language of the Arabs, is called Hagar. And, it is said, therefore: Hagar and Sarah were types of the two covenants. The slave-girl was a type of the Old Covenant, for she begets servants of the law. The free woman is a type of the New Covenant, for she bears those freed from the yoke of the law. For, it is said, Mount Sinai, where the law was given, is neighboring to Jerusalem, and in the Arabs' tongue it has the same name as Hagar the slave, Hagar herself being likewise called, as from the name, the type becoming near to the truth: "corresponds to," that is, it touches, it borders. — [PHOTIUS] "to Jerusalem." That is, to the one here on earth. So the upper and the free one, both stand apart. [end of the excerpt by Photius] — "And she serves." This, he says, is the old covenant given on Mount Sinai; it serves with her children, the Jews. It serves under the law.”

“These things, brethren, I write to you concerning righteousness, not because I take anything upon myself, but because ye have invited me to do so. For neither I, nor any other such one, can come up to the wisdom of the blessed and glorified Paul. He, when among you, accurately and stedfastly taught the word of truth in the presence of those who were then alive. And when absent from you, he wrote you a letter, which, if you carefully study, you will find to be the means of building you up in that faith which has been given you, and which, being followed by hope, and preceded by love towards God, and Christ, and our neighbour, "is the mother of us all." For if any one be inwardly possessed of these graces, he hath fulfilled the command of righteousness, since he that hath love is far from all sin.”

“Now all these things being such as they are, cannot be understood in reference to super-celestial matters; "for God," it is said, "will show to the whole earth that is under heaven thy glory." But in the times of the kingdom, the earth has been called again by Christ [to its pristine condition], and Jerusalem rebuilt after the pattern of the Jerusalem above, of which the prophet Isaiah says, "Behold, I have depicted thy walls upon my hands, and thou art always in my sight," And the apostle, too, writing to the Galatians, says in like manner, "But the Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all." He does not say this with any thought of an erratic Aeon, or of any other power which departed from the Pleroma, or of Prunicus, but of the Jerusalem which has been delineated on [God's] hands. And in the Apocalypse John saw this new [Jerusalem] descending upon the new earth.”

“But we do confess that a kingdom is promised to us upon the earth, although before heaven, only in another state of existence; inasmuch as it will be after the resurrection for a thousand years in the divinely-built city of Jerusalem, "let down from heaven," [Revelation 21:2] which the apostle also calls "our mother from above;" [Galatians 4:26] and, while declaring that our πολίτευμα, or citizenship, is in heaven, he predicates of it that it is really a city in heaven. This both Ezekiel had knowledge of [Ezekiel 48:30-35] and the Apostle John beheld. [Revelation 21:10-23] And the word of the new prophecy which is a part of our belief, attests how it foretold that there would be for a sign a picture of this very city exhibited to view previous to its manifestation. This prophecy, indeed, has been very lately fulfilled in an expedition to the East. For it is evident from the testimony of even heathen witnesses, that in Judæa there was suspended in the sky a city early every morning for forty days. As the day advanced, the entire figure of its walls would wane gradually, and sometimes it would vanish instantly. We say that this city has been provided by God for receiving the saints on their resurrection, and refreshing them with the abundance of all really spiritual blessings, as a recompense for those which in the world we have either despised or lost; since it is both just and God-worthy that His servants should have their joy in the place where they have also suffered affliction for His name's sake. Of the heavenly kingdom this is the process. After its thousand years are over, within which period is completed the resurrection of the saints, who rise sooner or later according to their deserts there will ensue the destruction of the world and the conflagration of all things at the judgment: we shall then be changed in a moment into the substance of angels, even by the investiture of an incorruptible nature, and so be removed to that kingdom in heaven of which we have now been treating, just as if it had not been predicted by the Creator, and as if it were proving Christ to belong to the other god and as if he were the first and sole revealer of it.”

“"If ye hasten to fly out of Egypt, and repair beyond the Red Sea into the wilderness," that is, from earthly intercourse to the Jerusalem above, which is the mother of the living; "If, moreover, again you return into Egypt," that is, into earthly intercourse, "ye shall die as men." For mortal, he says, is every generation below, but immortal that which is begotten above, for it is born of water only, and of spirit, being spiritual, not carnal. But what (is born) below is carnal, that is, he says, what is written. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the spirit is spirit." This, according to them, is the spiritual generation.”

“One and the same Jerusalem can be understood in a fourfold way: historically as the city of the Jews, allegorically as the church of Christ, anagogically as the heavenly city of God, which is the mother of all, and tropologically as the human soul, which is often upbraided or praised under this name by the Lord.”

“The temples of our houses of prayer are of the world because the buildings thereof are derived from the world and constructed therein; but they are spiritual things above the world, because they are types of that Church of the firstborn, whose names are inscribed in heaven, which is Jerusalem the free, the mother of us all. And all the altars and all the other vessels of the service of the Mysteries, and everything with which we perform the Mysteries which have been delivered to us, according to natural origin are of the world; but by reason of the greatness of those things which are administered in them they are exalted and most high, and are esteemed by us as being above nature, for they are the likeness of the living and spiritual powers which are in heaven, in which the service of the hidden Mysteries of God and of His will are perfected.”

“In that is the type of Hagar. Look also at the type of Sarah; for she prefigured the heavenly Jerusalem. It is the city of believers, from which our law also comes: for the Gospel is from heaven. This city is free from the observances of the law, and everything in it is ordered freely and with noble dignity. For nothing among us is done for the sake of a visible reward, nor are we threatened with bodily punishments, but both the promises are more divine, and the punishments are befitting the noble — namely, excommunication from the mystical table and penances.”

“As the moon is the daughter of the sun and receives its light from it, likewise the Church Militant receives hers from that Jerusalem which is above. Wherefore the Apostle calls her our mother, for she is the mother of those influences by which we are made to be the sons of God. The heavenly hierarchy is a model of the Church Militant. It is fitting, then, that the Church Militant have orders corresponding to the model hierarchy.”

“Then when he says, "But that Jerusalem which is above is free," he discloses the mystery of the free woman. First, he discloses the mystery; Secondly, he refers to a prophecy (v. 27). The first can be understood in two ways, accordingly as we understand this mother to be the one by whom we are engendered, which is the Church Militant, or the mother whose sons we become, which is the Church Triumphant: "He hath regenerated us unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead" (1 Pet. 1:3). Hence we are so generated in the present Church Militant as to arrive at the Triumphant. Therefore in explaining it thus, our mother is described by four things: by her sublimity, when he says, "above"; secondly, by name, when he says, "Jerusalem"; thirdly by her freedom, when he says, "is free"; fourthly, by her fecundity when he says, "our mother." She is sublime on account of the face to face vision of God and the perfect enjoyment of God; and this, as to the Church Triumphant: "Then shalt thou see, and abound, and thy heart shall wonder and be enlarged" (Is 60:5); "Mind the things that are above" (Col 3:2). Again she is sublime through faith and hope as to the Church Militant: "Our conversation is in heaven" (Phil 3:20); "Who is this that cometh up from the desert, flowing with delights?" (Cant 8:5). Further, she is a peacemaker, because she is Jerusalem, i.e., vision of peace. This belongs to the Church Triumphant as having perfect peace: "Who hath placed peace in thy borders" (Ps 147:14); "My people shall sit in the beauty of peace" (Is 32:18). Likewise it pertains to the Church Militant which possesses the peace of resting in Christ: "In me you shall have peace" (Jn 16:33). Furthermore, she is free: "Because the creature also itself shall be delivered from the servitude of corruption" (Rom 8:21). And this both as to the Church Triumphant and the Church Militant according to Apocalypse (21:2): "I saw the holy city, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God." Finally, she is fruitful, because she is our mother: Militant as engendering; Triumphant as the one whose sons we become: "Shall Sion say: This man and that man is born of her" (Ps 86:5); "Thy sons shall come from afar, and thy daughters shall rise up at thy side" (Is 60:4).”

“This verse stands instead of the sentence which we should expect, to correspond to Gal 4:24, "One from Mount Sinai," namely, the other covenant from the heavenly mount above, which is (answers in the allegory to) Sarah. Jerusalem . . . above-- (Heb 12:22), "the heavenly Jerusalem." "New Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God" (Rev 3:12; Rev 21:2). Here "the Messianic theocracy, which before Christ's second appearing is the Church, and after it, Christ's kingdom of glory" [MEYER]. free--as Sarah was; opposed to "she is in bondage" (Gal 4:25). all--omitted in many of the oldest manuscripts, though supported by some. "Mother of us," namely, believers who are already members of the invisible Church, the heavenly Jerusalem, hereafter to be manifested (Heb 12:22).”

“"the upper Jerusalem." The one is the figure of Hagar; in these things, behold also the figure of Sarah. The figure of her is the upper Jerusalem, that is, the heavenly. For that city of the faithful is free from the observances of the law, and is our mother, he says. Therefore Hagar fulfills the figure of the Old Covenant and of the Jews. But Sarah of the New Covenant and of us. And he called the upper Jerusalem also the Church.”

“Do you know how, like a man, to enter "lawfully" upon this contest and "strive," [2 Timothy 2:5] that, in the might of the Holy Spirit, you choose this for yourself, that you may be crowned with a crown of light, and that they may lead you about in triumph through "the Jerusalem above"? [Galatians 4:26] If so be, then, that you long for all these things, conquer the body; conquer the appetites of the flesh; conquer the world in the Spirit of God; conquer these vain things of time, which pass away and grow old, and decay, and come to an end; conquer the dragon; [Revelation 12:7] conquer the lion; [1 Peter 5:8] conquer the serpent; [2 Corinthians 11:3] conquer Satan — through Jesus Christ, who does strengthen you by the hearing of His words and the divine Eucharist.”

“Wherefore the Church beareth much fruit of the redeemed: because no longer Moses (as) mediator nor Elijah (as) messenger, but the Lord Himself has redeemed us, granting many more children to the Church than to the first Synagogue; as Isaiah declared, saying: "Rejoice thou barren, that didst not bear." The barren is the Church, which never at all in former times presented sons to God. "Cry out and call, thou that didst not travail: for the children of the desolate are more than of her which hath an husband." Now the first Synagogue had as husband the Law.”

“He is not undone, he says, but revolves as it were, and goes round himself. Moreover, also, cities in which we dwell, because we turn and go round in them, are denominated "Poleis." In this manner, he says, the Phrygians call this one "Aipolis," inasmuch as he everywhere ceaselessly turns all things, and changes them into their own peculiar (functions). And the Phrygians style him, he says, "very fruitful" likewise, "because," says he, "more numerous are the children of the desolate one, than those of her which hath an husband; " that is, things by being born again become immortal and abide for ever in great numbers, even though the things that are produced may be few; whereas things carnal, he says, are all corruptible, even though very many things (of this type) are produced. For this reason, he says, "Rachel wept for her children, and would not," says (the prophet), "be comforted; sorrowing for them, for she knew," says he, "that they are not." But Jeremiah likewise utters lamentation for Jerusalem below, not the city in Phoenicia, but the corruptible generation below. For Jeremiah likewise, he says, was aware of the Perfect Man, of him that is born again-of water and the Spirit not carnal. At least Jeremiah himself remarked: "He is a man, and who shall know him? " In this manner, (the Naassene) says, the knowledge of the Perfect Man is exceedingly profound, and difficult of comprehension. For, he says, the beginning of perfection is a knowledge of man, whereas knowledge of God is absolute perfection.”

“Who is this who before was "barren," and "desolate?" Clearly it is the Church of the Gentiles, that was before deprived of the knowledge of God? Who, "she which hath the husband?" plainly the Synagogue. Yet the barren woman surpassed her in the number of her children, for the other embraces one nation, but the children of the Church have filled the country of the Greeks and of the Barbarians, the earth and sea, the whole habitable world. Observe how Sarah by acts, and the Prophet by words, have described the events about to befal us. Observe too, that he whom Isaiah called barren, Paul hath proved to have many children, which also happened typically in the case of Sarah. For she too, although barren, became the mother of a numerous progeny. This however does not suffice Paul, but he carefully follows out the mode whereby the barren woman became a mother, that in this particular likewise the type might harmonize with the truth. ...”

“(Verse 27.) For it is written: rejoice, O you barren one, who does not bear; break forth and cry out, you who are not in labor; for the children of the desolate one will be more than those of the one who has a husband. (Isaiah 54:1.) The Synagogue had a husband, the Law; and according to the prophecy of Anna, she who was once barren in children was fertile. (1 Samuel 1.) But the Church, barren without Christ, without any conversation with the bridegroom, lay for a long time in the desert. But after she received the book of divorce into her hands, and turned all the ornaments of the husband into the idol's adornment: then the husband, with the previous belt decaying, wove another belt for his loins from the Gentiles: as soon as she was joined to the husband, she conceived and bore a child. And the Lord cries out through the prophet: 'If a nation is born at once' (Isaiah XLIX, 54): when in one day in the Acts of the Apostles three thousand, and five thousand men believed (Acts III, etc.) I do not think it necessary to speak about the multitude of Christians and the paucity of Jews, when the banners of the cross shine throughout the whole world, and a Jew appears scarce and remarkable in cities.”

“Sarah signifies the heavenly Jerusalem, having been deserted for a long time by her husband's embraces because of her perceived sterility. For men such as Abraham did not use women to satisfy lust but for the procreation of offspring. Now to her sterility age had also been added.… The age of Isaac's parents serves to signify that, new though the people of the New Covenant are, their predestination lies nonetheless with God and is that heavenly Jerusalem of old.”

“He is not satisfied with these prefigurations, but refers to the testimony of Isaiah, who calls the church from the Gentiles barren and not having a husband; and indeed, she was deprived of the knowledge of God and childless, since she produced not a single prophet of God or teacher. And the Jewish synagogue he calls the one having a husband, either because she had the law, which guided her actions, or because she had God Himself. "Shout" is used instead of "shout with a voice of joy," because you now have a multitude of children: both prophets and teachers and sons of God have come from you; you have given birth to the whole world, and not just one nation, like the Jewish synagogue.”

“"For it is written," namely in Isaiah (54:1) according to the Septuagint. Here is mentioned the prophecy through which is proved, first of all, that the mother referred to is free, and secondly, that she is fruitful. With respect to the first, it should be noted that in a fertile woman there is first sorrow in giving birth, but this is followed by joy in beholding the child: "A woman when she is in labor hath sorrow, because her hour is come; but when she hath brought forth the child, she remembereth no more her anguish for joy that a man is born into the world" (Jn 16:21). But a barren woman neither suffers the pangs of birth nor has joy in a child. Again there is a difference between bearing and travailing. For the latter refers to the effort to bear, whereas the former refers to the releasing of the foetus now formed. Therefore the fertile woman experiences pain in travail but joy in bearing; the sterile woman, on the other hand, experiences neither the pain of travail nor the joy of bearing. But these are the two things which the prophet announces to the barren woman: "Rejoice, thou barren, that bearest not: break forth and cry, thou that travailest not." Herein he speaks of Jerusalem, which he calls free and is signified by the barren Sara. For the Church was barren, namely, the Church Militant, of the Gentiles before their conversion when they offered their sons not to God but to the devil. Hence it is said to Babylon: "Barrenness and widowhood will come upon thee, because of the multitude of thy sorceries" (Is 47:9). The Church Triumphant, too, was barren before the passion of Christ, because to her were born no sons who entered into glory, save in hope. For a mighty engine of war blocked the entrance to Paradise, so that no one might enter. To this barren one he says: "Rejoice thou that bearest not." As if to say: The barren, as has been said, are sorrowful, not because they bear, but because they bear not: "As Anna had her heart full of grief, she prayed to the Lord, shedding many tears" (1 Kg. 1:10). But you shall rejoice in the great number of your children: "Then shall thy heart wonder and be enlarged," i.e., you will show the joy in your soul outwardly (Is 60:5). For there are two things in childbirth: the pain from the rupturing of the membrane enclosing the child in the womb, and the crying from pain. Hence he says, "thou that travailest not," i.e., the Church Militant, that makes no effort to bear through desire, and the Church Triumphant, that does not cry for travail; or because the time for having sons has not yet come, "break forth," i.e., show outwardly the joy you have within and cry with sounds of praise: "Cry, cease not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet" (Is 58:1). These two things, namely, to cry and to break forth, pertain to freedom.—Thus the freedom of the mother is made manifest. He follows with the fruitfulness: "for many are the children of the desolate, more than of her that hath a husband." But since it was said above that the free Church is signified by Sara, there seems to be some doubt whether Sara was desolate. I answer that she was made desolate by Abraham, as it is said here, not by a divorce but with respect to the work of the flesh. For Abraham resorted to the work of the flesh not for the pleasure but to obtain a child. Therefore when he learned that Sara was barren, he abandoned her; not by forsaking the marriage bed, but by not resorting to her from precisely the time that Sara introduced the bondwoman to him. By this we are given to understand that the Church of the Gentiles was left desolate by Christ, because Christ had not yet come; and that the Church Triumphant was desolate of men, for whom no means of entry was open. Of this desolate woman, i.e., the Church of the Gentiles, there are many children, i.e., "more than of her," namely, the synagogue, "that hath a husband," namely, Moses: "The barren hath borne many: and she that had many children is weakened" (1 Kg. 2:5). And this is due to the coming of the spouse, namely, Christ, by Whom she had been left desolate not by want of love, but because the bearing of children had been delayed.”

“(Isa 54:1). thou barren--Jerusalem above: the spiritual Church of the Gospel, the fruit of "the promise," answering to Sarah, who bore not "after the flesh": as contrasted with the law, answering to Hagar, who was fruitful in the ordinary course of nature. Isaiah speaks primarily of Israel's restoration after her long-continued calamities; but his language is framed by the Holy Spirit so as to reach beyond this to the spiritual Zion: including not only the Jews, the natural descendants of Abraham and children of the law, but also the Gentiles. The spiritual Jerusalem is regarded as "barren" while the law trammeled Israel, for she then had no spiritual children of the Gentiles. break forth--into crying. cry--shout for joy. many more--Translate as Greek, "Many are the children of the desolate (the New Testament Church made up in the greater part from the Gentiles, who once had not the promise, and so was destitute of God as her husband), more than of her which hath an (Greek, 'THE') husband (the Jewish Church having GOD for her husband, Isa 54:5; Jer 2:2)." Numerous as were the children of the legal covenant, those of the Gospel covenant are more so. The force of the Greek article is, "Her who has THE husband of which the other is destitute."”

“"For it is written." And therefore, he says, Sarah was a type of the Jerusalem above, that is, of the Church, because she too being barren and without children, like the church once from the Gentiles, triumphed in offspring over Hagar; and the Church triumphed over the synagogue. And Isaiah is witness to these things: "Rejoice, you barren, who do not bear." (Isa. 54:1) Is Isaiah speaking to the Church composed of Gentiles? He commands her to cry out with joy. "Break forth now," either the barrenness into fruitfulness, or break forth the voice of gladness. "because many are the children of the desert." He calls the Church from among the nations a desert and barren. For it was a desert of every good thing before they believed in Christ. "more than of her who has a husband." He called him a man having or directing, governing and providing for the synagogue of the Jews: or as formerly enjoying the providence of God.”

“"Rejoice, you barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, you that travailest not; for she that is desolate has many more children than she that has an husband." In that He said, "Rejoice, you barren that bearest not," He referred to us, for our church was barren before that children were given to her. But when He said, "Cry out, you that travailest not," He means this, that we should sincerely offer up our prayers to God, and should not, like women in travail, show signs of weakness. And in that He said, "For she that is desolate has many more children than she that has an husband," [He means] that our people seemed to be outcast from God, but now, through believing, have become more numerous than those who are reckoned to possess God.”

“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.”

“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. ...”

“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.”

“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.”

“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.”

“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.”

“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.”

“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.”

“St. Paul makes another observation upon this example of Ismael and Isaac: that as Ismael was troublesome to Isaac, for which he and his mother were turned out of the family, so also now the Jews insulted and persecuted the Christians, who had been Gentiles; but God will protect them as heirs of the blessings promised: they shall be accounted the spiritual children of Abraham, while the Jews, with their carnal ceremonies, shall be cast off. (Witham) — This, says St. Augustine, is a figure of heretics, (who are the children of the bond-woman) unjustly persecuting the Catholic Church. (Ep. 48.)”

“persecuted--Ishmael "mocked" Isaac, which contained in it the germ and spirit of persecution (Gen 21:9). His mocking was probably directed against Isaac's piety and faith in God's promises. Being the older by natural birth, he haughtily prided himself above him that was born by promise: as Cain hated Abel's piety. him . . . born after the Spirit--The language, though referring primarily to Isaac, born in a spiritual way (namely, by the promise or word of God, rendered by His Spirit efficient out of the course of nature, in making Sarah fruitful in old age), is so framed as especially to refer to believers justified by Gospel grace through faith, as opposed to carnal men, Judaizers, and legalists. even so it is now-- (Gal 5:11; Gal 6:12, Gal 6:17; Act 9:29; Act 13:45, Act 13:49-50; Act 14:1-2, Act 14:19; Act 17:5, Act 17:13; Act 18:5-6). The Jews persecuted Paul, not for preaching Christianity in opposition to heathenism, but for preaching it as distinct from Judaism. Except in the two cases of Philippi and Ephesus (where the persons beginning the assault were pecuniarily interested in his expulsion), he was nowhere set upon by the Gentiles, unless they were first stirred up by the Jews. The coincidence between Paul's Epistles and Luke's history (the Acts) in this respect, is plainly undesigned, and so a proof of genuineness (see PALEY, HorÃ&brvbr PaulinÃ&brvbr).”

“— [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. ...”

“"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.”

“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."”

“gal 4:30Gen 21:10, Gen 21:12, where Sarah's words are, "shall not be heir with my son, even with Isaac." But what was there said literally, is here by inspiration expressed in its allegorical spiritual import, applying to the New Testament believer, who is antitypically "the son of the free woman." In Joh 8:35-36, Jesus refers to this. Cast out--from the house and inheritance: literally, Ishmael; spiritually, the carnal and legalists. shall not be heir--The Greek is stronger, "must not be heir," or "inherit."”

“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.”

“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?”

“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."”

“So then--The oldest manuscripts read, "Wherefore." This is the conclusion inferred from what precedes. In Gal 3:29 and Gal 4:7, it was established that we, New Testament believers, are "heirs." If, then, we are heirs, "we are not children of the bond woman (whose son, according to Scripture, was 'not to be heir,' Gal 4:30), but of the free woman (whose son was, according to Scripture, to be heir). For we are not "cast out" as Ishmael, but accepted as sons and heirs. Next: Galatians Chapter 5”