I would they were even cut off, who trouble you.

“Observe how bitterly he speaks here against their deceivers. At the outset he directed his charge against those who were deceived, and called them foolish, once and again. Now, having sufficiently corrected and instructed them, he turns to their deceivers. And you should remark his wisdom in the manner in which he admonishes and chastens the former as his own children, and as capable of receiving correction, but their deceivers he cuts off, as aliens and incurably depraved. And this he does, partly, when he says, "he shall bear his judgment whosoever he be;" partly when he utters the imprecation against them, "I would that they which unsettle you would even cut themselves off." And he says well "that unsettle you." For they had compelled them to abandon their own fatherland, their liberty, and their heavenly kindred, and to seek an alien and foreign one; they had cast them out of Jerusalem which is above and free, and compelled them to wander forth as captives and emigrants. On this account he curses them; and his meaning is as follows, For them I have no concern, "A man that is heretical after the first and second admonition refuse." (Tit. iii: 10) If they will, let them not only be circumcised, but mutilated. Where then are those who dare to mutilate themselves; seeing that they draw down the Apostolic curse, and accuse the workmanship of God, and take part with the Manichees? For the latter call the body a treacherous thing, and from the evil principle; and the former by their acts give countenance to these wretched doctrines, cutting off the member as being hostile and treacherous. Ought they not much rather to put out the eyes, for it is through the eyes that desire enters the soul? But in truth neither the eye nor any other part of us is to blame, but the depraved will only. But if you will not allow this, why do you not mutilate the tongue for blasphemy, the hands for rapine, the feet for their evil courses, in short, the whole body? For the ear enchanted by the sound of a flute hath often enervated the soul; and the perception of a sweet perfume by the nostrils hath bewitched the mind, and made it frantic for pleasure. Yet this would be extreme wickedness and satanic madness. The evil spirit, ever delighting in slaughter, hath seduced them to crush the instrument, as if its Maker had erred, whereas it was only necessary to correct the unruly passion of the soul. How then does it happen, one may say, that when the body is pampered, lust is inflamed? Observe here too that it is the sin of the soul, for to pamper the flesh is not an act of the flesh but of the soul, for if the soul choose to mortify it, it would possess absolute power over it. But what you do is just the same as if one seeing a man lighting a fire, and heaping on fuel, and setting fire to a house, were to blame the fire, instead of him who kindled it, because it had caught this heap of fuel, and risen to a great height. Yet the blame would attach not to the fire but to the one who kindled it; for it was given for the purpose of dressing food, affording light, and other like ministries, not for burning houses. In like manner desire is implanted for the rearing of families and the ensuring of life, not for adultery, or fornication, or lasciviousness; that a man may become a father, not an adulterer; a lawful husband, not a seducer; leaving heirs after him, not doing damage to another man's. For adultery arises not from nature, but from wantonness against nature, which prescribes the use not the misuse. These remarks I have not made at random, but as a prelude to a dispute, as skirmishing against those who assert that the workmanship of God is evil, and who neglecting the sloth of the soul, madly inveigh against the body, and traduce our flesh, whereof Paul afterwards discourses, accusing not the flesh, but devilish thoughts.”

“The Apostle has explained according to the teaching, namely, that the yoke of the servitude of the law should not be undergone; here, however, he returns to the first point, showing that they ought to stand firm. And first he sets forth an example of standing; second he removes an impediment to standing, at the words you were running well, etc.; third he assigns the cause of standing, at the words but we, in the Spirit, by faith, etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the example of standing; second he assigns its cause, at the words for in Christ Jesus, etc. He says therefore: those who wish to be justified in the law, Christ profits them nothing, because they fall away from grace. But we — namely, the apostles — stand by hope, because, that is, we await the hope of justice, that is, justice and hope, namely, eternal blessedness. 1 Peter 1:3: he has regenerated us unto a living hope, etc. Or, the hope of justice, that is, Christ, through whom there is for us the hope of justice, because through him we are justified. Philippians 3:20: we await a savior, etc. 1 Corinthians 1:30: who is made unto us wisdom, and justice, and sanctification, and redemption, etc. Or the hope of justice, that is, the hope which is concerning justice, namely, that they be justified not by the law, but by faith. Romans 3:28: we reckon that man is justified by faith without the works of the law. Or the hope of justice, that is, the thing hoped for, toward which justice tends, namely, eternal life. 2 Timothy, last chapter: for the rest, there is laid up for me a crown of justice, etc. And this from faith, because the justice of God is through the faith of Jesus Christ, as is said in Romans 3:22. And this faith indeed is not from man, but from the Holy Spirit who inspires it. Romans 8:15: you have received the spirit of adoption of sons, whereby we cry: Abba, Father, etc. Therefore, just as faith is from the Spirit, so from faith is hope, from hope justice, through which we arrive at eternal life. But this hope does not come from circumcision, nor from being a Gentile, because these things contribute nothing to it. And therefore he says for in Christ Jesus, that is, in those who are in the faith of Christ, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision, etc., that is, they are matters of indifference. But faith — not unformed faith, but that which works through love — James 2:26: faith without works is dead, etc. For faith is a knowledge of the word of God, Ephesians 3:17: that Christ may dwell through faith, etc. And this word is neither perfectly possessed nor perfectly known unless there is also possessed the love which it hopes for. Here there are two doubts concerning the Gloss. The first is, that it says that uncircumcision and circumcision are matters of indifference, whereas above it said if you are circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing. But it must be said that from the genus of the work they are matters of indifference, namely for those who do not place their hope in them; but from the intention of the one acting they are not matters of indifference. For to those who place their hope in them, they are deadly. The second doubt concerns this, that it says that those who do not believe are worse than the demons, since the demons believe and tremble. I respond. It must be said that they are indeed worse as regards the species of the deed, but not as regards the affection. For it displeases the demons that they believe; nor is there so great a wickedness of will in the man who does not believe as there is in the demon who hates what he believes. Consequently, when he says you were running well, etc., he deals with the impediment to standing. And first he sets down the impediment; second he teaches its removal, at the words let no one persuade you, etc. The impediment to their standing was great and harmful; for a thing is harmful in proportion as it deprives one of a greater good. When, therefore, someone is deprived of many spiritual goods, it is a sign that he has had a great impediment. And therefore, that the Apostle might show that they had a great impediment, he reminds them of the spiritual goods which they had lost, when he says you were running well, etc., namely, through the works of faith formed by charity, which spurs one on to run. Psalm 118:32: I have run the way of your commandments, when you enlarged my heart. And this indeed was formerly in you, but while you were thus running, you were hindered, and therefore he adds: who has bewitched you? Concerning which it was spoken above in chapter 3:1; and therefore I pass over it for the present. Who, then, has bewitched you, that is, hindered you from obeying the truth, namely, the evangelical truth? And this he says fittingly; for to obey is a matter of the will applying itself to the consent of one who commands. And therefore faith is a knowledge of the will and of the intellect. It is necessary, therefore, that the will obey faith; and this consists in willing to believe that the grace of the faith of Christ suffices for salvation without the observances of the law. He excludes the impediment, however, when he says let no one, etc., and this from a threefold source. First on the part of themselves; second on the part of God, at the words I am confident, etc.; third on the part of the Apostle, at the words but I, brethren, etc. On the part of themselves, when he says let no one, etc. Here he first shows what is required on their part, that they might avoid this harm, namely, that they no longer consent to any false apostle. 1 Thessalonians 5:5: let us not be of the night, nor of darkness, etc. Ephesians 5:11: have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, etc., and 2 Timothy 2:17: and their speech spreads like a cancer, etc. From this it is given to understand that they were not yet corrupted, but were being solicited concerning this. Second, he assigns the reason for this when he says for this persuasion, etc. And this is twofold. The first is, that when a man gives himself to someone, he ought to do nothing except what he has judged useful to himself. But you have been handed over to Christ; therefore you ought not to hear or consent except to those things which are from him; therefore this persuasion, by which they wish to send you under the yoke of the law, since it is not from him, namely, from God who called you unto life, but from the devil, insofar, namely, as he is deficient, and therefore you should not consent to them. Or not from him, that is, against him. The second reason is, because it could be said that it is not a great matter if a few consent, since from this there is no danger; and therefore he says that they ought not to consent to them, nor should their snares be despised, but they ought to resist at the beginnings, because a little leaven, etc., that is, those few who are persuading you. Or: this persuasion, small at the beginning, corrupts the whole lump, that is, the congregation of the faithful. Leviticus 2:11: neither shall any leaven or honey be burned in the sacrifice of the Lord. Consequently, when he says I am confident in you, etc., he removes the impediment on the part of God, who supplies help toward this. And he sets down a twofold help: one with respect to those who seduce; the other with respect to those who trouble, at the words but he who troubles you, etc. He says therefore I am confident, etc., as if to say: I have said that you should not consent to a false apostle, and I am confident in you. 2 Corinthians 7:16: I rejoice that in all things I have confidence in you. Hebrews 6:9: but we are confident of you, beloved, better things, and things nearer to salvation. I am confident, I say, in this, namely, that you will taste nothing else than what I have taught you. Above, 1:8: although we, or an angel from heaven, should preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached, let him be anathema. Philippians 2:2: fulfill my joy, that you may taste the same thing, etc. And this from divine help. And therefore he says in the Lord, namely, God working. 2 Corinthians 3:4: such confidence we have through Christ toward God, etc. Because the Lord will give you to taste according to the sobriety of Catholic truth. Psalm 91: it is good to trust in the Lord, etc. But as to those who trouble, he says but he who troubles, etc., that is, who removes you from the due order, so that, namely, you are turned from spiritual things to bodily things, when the contrary ought to be the case. 1 Corinthians 15:46: not first that which is spiritual, but that which is animal, then that which, etc. And since such an order is perverse, as is said above, 3:3: are you so foolish, that whereas you began in the Spirit, etc., therefore he shall bear the judgment, that is, he shall undergo condemnation. For just as one who leads another to good is rewarded, Daniel 12:3: they who instruct many unto justice, shall shine as stars for all eternity, etc., so one who leads another to evil is condemned. Joshua 7:25: because you have troubled us, may the Lord trouble you this day. Deuteronomy 27:18: cursed be he who makes the blind to wander out of the way. And this, whosoever he be, that is, of whatever authority he be, he shall not be spared. But Porphyry and Julian reproach Paul in this matter for presumption, saying that he says this tearing at Peter — since above he wrote that he had resisted him to his face — so that the meaning would be: whosoever he be, that is, even if it were Peter, he would be punished. But, as Augustine says, it is not to be believed that Paul would speak with a curse concerning the prince of the Church, since it is written in Exodus 22:28: you shall not speak ill of the prince of your people. Nor even that Peter had so offended that he was worthy of condemnation. The Apostle, therefore, speaks of a certain other man who, coming from Judea, said that he had been a disciple of the great apostles, and under that authority, together with other false preachers, was corrupting the Galatians. Above, 2:4: because of false brethren unawares brought in, etc. Consequently, when he says but I, brethren, etc., he removes the impediment on his own part. And first he sets down his own excuse; second the rebuke of those who were defaming him, at the words would that they were cut off, etc. He excludes, however, the falsehood that was imputed to him. And first something pertaining to himself alone; second something pertaining to all, at the words therefore the scandal of the cross is made void, etc. It must be known concerning the first that, the false apostles excusing the Galatians for the fact that they did not keep the legal observances — because they had been so taught by the Apostle — they said that the Apostle had deceived them, and that he had persuaded them to this unto their own servitude; and they confirmed this, saying that Paul had preached in Judea, and had taught that the legal observances ought to be kept. And therefore the Apostle excuses himself concerning this, saying but I, brethren, if I still preach circumcision, as the false apostles impute to me, why do I still suffer persecution? Namely, from the Jews. 1 Corinthians 4:12: we suffer persecution, etc. For the Jews persecuted Paul especially on this account, that he preached that the legal observances ought not to be kept. Acts 21:21, James says to Paul: they have heard of you that you teach a departure from Moses, those of the Jews who are among the Gentiles, saying that they ought not to circumcise their sons, etc. It is plain, therefore, that what they impute to me is not true, otherwise I would not still be suffering persecutions. That which they impute to me is also false through that which is commonly held among others, because if I preach circumcision, the scandal of the cross is made void. For not only I, but also all the apostles, preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews indeed a scandal, etc., as is said in 1 Corinthians 1:23. And they are scandalized most of all at this, that we preach that through the cross of Christ the legal observances are made void. If, therefore, I preach circumcision, the scandal is made void, that is, there will no longer be a scandal among the Jews concerning the cross. For they would patiently endure — indeed, they would gladly wish — that we should preach that the cross and the legal observances ought to be kept together. Or, according to Augustine, the scandal of the cross is made void, that is, the cross, which is the scandal, is made void, as if he were to say: the cross has lost its effect and its power. Above, 2:21: for if justice were by the law, then Christ died in vain. The Apostle, moreover, says specifically the scandal is made void, etc., to give one to understand that it was on this account that the Jews killed Christ, because he did not keep the legal observances, and taught that they were not to be kept. John 9:16: this man is not from God, because he does not keep the sabbath. Consequently he rebukes the false apostles who had defamed him, saying would that they were cut off, etc., as if to say: they themselves trouble you in this, that they wish you to be circumcised; but would that they were not only circumcised, but wholly castrated. But against this, Romans 12:14: bless, and do not curse, etc. To this there is a twofold response. The first is, that the Apostle did not curse them, but rather blessed them, because he wished for them that they be spiritually castrated, that they might keep spiritual chastity, by cutting away the ceremonial observances, according to that saying of Matthew 19:12: there are certain eunuchs, who have castrated themselves for the kingdom of heaven. Second, that he wishes for them the sterility of offspring which eunuchs have, namely, that they not beget. Whence he says would that they were even cut off, etc., that is, that they lose the power of begetting in you, and in others. And this deservedly, because they beget sons unto error, and reduce them into the servitude of the law. Hosea 9:14: give them a womb without children, and dry breasts.”

“I would that they were even cut off which trouble you. EUNUCHS FOR CHRIST’S SAKE 313 Cut off from the Church and your fellowship, lest they corrupt the whole. Cf. 1 Cor. v. 3. This is the obvious meaning, and one befitting the dignity of an apostolic writer. However, Ambrose, Chrysostom, Theophylact, Jerome, Augustine, and others understand it of the total deprivation of the organ to which circumcision is applied, so as to bring it more closely within the scope of the whole passage, in which circumcision is the main topic. It may be asked how the Apostle can rightly imprecate a curse on the Judaisers, since this is opposed to charity, and is a mark of impatience and of a revengeful temper. “So detestable ,” says Jerome, “is the act of castration^ that whoever inflicts it on a man against his will, or on himself ought to be accounted infamous .” 1. Jerome replies that the Apostle said this as a man and in passion ; but God forbid that an Apostle, and one especially who was moved by the Holy Spirit, should so speak. Accordingly, Jerome gives another answer, according to which, like Peter to Simon Magus (Acts viii. 20), and Elisha to the children who mocked him (2 Kings ii. 24), he spoke, not in anger, but partly in zeal for righteousness, partly in love, and entreated that they might be punished through their sin, />., through circumcision, and so, when punished, be purged of their shame. 2. Chrysostom and Theophylact say that the Apostle is not imprecating a curse, but speaking jestingly, as much as to say, If they insist on it, let them be not only circumcised, but wholly cut off. 3. S. Augustine and Anselm think that there is no curse here but a blessing, as if he were to say, Would that the Jews would become spiritual eunuchs by chastity for the kingdom of heaven’s sake, and cease to preach Jewish circumcision, fixing their thoughts instead on heavenly things, and on the law of Christ, as the way to attain them. Of these three explanations the second of Jerome’s is the best. Origen castrated himself to prevent the motions of lust disturbing his chastity, but, as Chrysostom rightly says, wrongly ; for this is not taught by the Apostle, nor is it the members of the body but our vices that are to be cut off, otherwise it would be lawful to 3 14 THE EPISTLE TO THE destroy our eyes, ears, and tongue. Moreover, castration does not destroy lust, but sometimes increases it, as S. Basil says in his treatise on Virginity. Cf. Ecclus. xx. 2, and xxx. 2 1. Which trouble you . Who would rob you of your evangelical liberty”

“For brethren, ye have been called unto liberty,.... He calls them "brethren", to testify his affection to them, and to put them in mind of their relation to one another, which required mutual love, a thing he is about to press them to; he asserts that they were "called" not merely externally, but internally, by the effectual grace of God, out of bondage to sin, Satan, and the law, unto the liberty of the Gospel and of the grace of God; that liberty wherewith Christ had made them free, Gal 5:1 this he said in a judgment of charity, hoping well of them: only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh; corrupt nature, which in unregenerate men takes encouragement from, and makes an ill use of the best of things, as the mercy and patience of God; and not only takes an occasion by the law, forbidding sin to work and stir up all manner of concupiscence; but also by the Gospel, and the doctrines of it, such as eternal election, free justification, &c. which though the source and fountain, the barrier and security, of all true and real holiness, are improved and abused by wicked minds, under the influence and instigation of Satan, to vile purposes; and though regenerate persons are not in the flesh, and do not live after it, yet that is in them, and there is a proneness in them to sin; and Satan is watching all opportunities and advantages against them; so that there is need for such a caution as this, that they do not misuse their Christian liberty by indulging the flesh and the lusts of it, which is apt to take an occasion to cherish its lusts, and especially when given: Christ's free men should not do so, for that is to disgrace the doctrine of Christian liberty, to enthral themselves in, bondage instead of using their liberty aright, and to give the enemy occasion to blaspheme: the doctrine of Christian liberty may bc abused, or used as an occasion to the flesh, and to fulfil the lusts of it; when under a pretence thereof men think themselves exempt from obedience to the civil magistrate, which is using this liberty as a cloak of maliciousness; or that they are free from obedience to the law of God, as a rule of walk and conversation; or from subjection to the ordinances of the Gospel; or when they use the creatures God has given them the free use of without thankfulness, and in an immoderate manner; and when they make things indifferent which are not, or use indifferent things to the prejudice of others; and their liberty becomes a stumblingblock to weak Christians, which the apostle seems greatly to regard here; since he adds, but by love serve one another: the Vulgate Latin version reads, "by the love of the Spirit": and so some copies; Gospel liberty and the service of the saints are not at all inconsistent; as it becomes them to love one another, as the new command of Christ, their profession of religion, and their relation to each other, require, so they should show their love by their service; as by praying one with and for another, by bearing each other's burdens, sympathizing with and communicating to each other in things temporal and spiritual; in forbearing with and forgiving one another; by admonishing each other when there is occasion for it, in a meek, tender, and brotherly way; by instructing and building up one another on their most holy faith, and by stirring up one another to all the duties of religion, private and public.”

“I would they were even cut off which trouble you - This saying has puzzled many, and different interpretations of the place have been proposed by learned men. At first sight it seems as if the apostle was praying for the destruction of the false teachers who had perverted the Churches of Galatia. Mr. Wakefield thought οφελον αποκοψονται might be translated, I wish that they were made to weep; and in his translation of the New Testament the passage stands thus: "I wish that they who are unsettling you may lament it." I believe the apostle never meant any such thing. As the persons who were breeding all this confusion in the Churches of Galatia were members of that Church, the apostle appears to me to be simply expressing his desire that they might be cut off or excommunicated from the Church. Kypke has given an abundance of examples where the word is used to signify amputating; cutting off from society, office, etc.; excluding. In opposition to the notion of excommunication, it might be asked: "Why should the apostle wish these to be excommunicated when it was his own office to do it?" To this it may be answered: The apostle's authority was greatly weakened among that people by the influence of the false teachers, so that in all probability he could exercise no ecclesiastical function; he could therefore only express his wish. And the whole passage is so parallel to that, Co1 5:6, Co1 5:7, that I think there can be no reasonable doubt of the apostle's meaning: Let those who are unsettling the Church of Christ in your district be excommunicated; this is my wish, that they should no longer have any place among you."”

“they . . . which trouble you--Translate, as the Greek is different from Gal 5:10, "they who are unsettling you." were even cut off--even as they desire your foreskin to be cut off and cast away by circumcision, so would that they were even cut off from your communion, being worthless as a castaway foreskin (Gal 1:7-8; compare Phi 3:2). The fathers, JEROME, AMBROSE, AUGUSTINE, and CHRYSOSTOM, explain it, "Would that they would even cut themselves off," that is, cut off not merely the foreskin, but the whole member: if circumcision be not enough for them, then let them have excision also; an outburst hardly suitable to the gravity of an apostle. But Gal 5:9-10 plainly point to excommunication as the judgment threatened against the troublers: and danger of the bad "leaven" spreading, as the reason for it.”