Three books of commentaries on Galatians

“Three Books of Commentaries on the Epistle to the Galatians” are among the earliest New Testament commentaries of the saint. Hieronymus of Stridon. They were written around 386-387. at the request of Rev. Pavels and others Eustochium for the nuns of their monastery. In this work blzh. Jerome expressed his opinion about the “imaginary disagreement” (simulata contentio) between the apostles Peter and Paul on the issue of the need to observe the Old Testament law for all Christians. This opinion caused a long controversy between the blzh. Jerome of Stridonsky and Blessed. Augustine. *The title of the work in Latin is Commentarii in Epistolam ad Galatas. Contents Preface Book 1 Book 2 Book 3 A few more days passed after I, having interpreted the letter of Paul [the Apostle] to Philemon, moved on to the letter to the Galatians, omitting many that are between them. And suddenly a letter was delivered to me from the city [of Rome], informing me that the venerable Elder Albina presented herself before the face of the Lord, and Saint Marcella, deprived of her mother’s cohabitation, is now even more in need of your, Paul and Eustochius, consolation. And since, however, this consolation [on my part] cannot be expected due to the significant land and water distance between us, I would like to heal the sudden blow with the healing of the Scriptures; True, I know her ardent jealousy, I know her faith, I also know what kind of flame she has in her chest to overcome the weakness of her sex, forget her human side and cross the Red Sea of ​​this century to the sounds of the tympanums of the divine Scriptures. And indeed (certe), whenever I was in Rome, she never, no matter how quickly she saw me, forgot to ask for something from the Scriptures. And not following the example of the students of Pythagoras, she recognized everything as correct, no matter what I answered her, on the contrary: without preliminary discussion, the meaning of [teacher] (auctoritas) in her eyes had no force: she examined everything and discussed everything with insightful thought in such a way that it seemed to me as if I had not so much a student as a learned judge. So, I begin a task that I consider both pleasant for her, who is absent, and useful for you, who are in our presence, - [a task] that before me had not been undertaken by those writing in our language, and which was undertaken by the Greeks - despite the great significance of this - only by a few. This does not mean that I do not know Gaius Marius Victorinus, who even during my childhood taught the science of eloquence and published commentaries on the Apostle, but that he is busy studying secular works. was completely ignorant of the Holy Scriptures; but no one can reason well about what he does not know. So, why do I, stupid and reckless, undertake to do what he could not? Not at all! And, besides, it seems to me that I am even more careful and prudent in the sense that, realizing the weakness of my strength, I followed the interpretations of Origen; for this man deliberately wrote five scrolls of commentary on Paul’s epistle to the Galatians, and, in addition, Stromatus supplemented his tenth book with a brief discussion on the interpretation of this work. He also compiled various reasonings and extracts, which even in themselves (vel sola) could be sufficient. I am not talking about Didymus, my seer, or about the Laodicean (Apollinaris), who recently left the Church; and about the ancient heretic Alexander, as well as about Eusebius of Emes and Theodore of Heraclea, who, for their part, left some interpretations on this work. If I were to make even a small extract from them, I would get something that should not be treated with disdain. But, I admit frankly (ut simpliciter fatear), I re-read all this and, combining a lot of things in my mind, and then inviting a copyist, I dictated to him partly my own, and partly borrowed, sometimes without even straining my memory to reproduce both the words and the meaning. And we must thank only divine mercy for the fact that, due to our inexperience, the good things that were said by others did not disappear, and among those borrowed from others [we] did not like what we liked among our own. - Having briefly defined the course of thought of this epistle, I point out to you with this preface that you may know that the subject (materiam) of Paul's epistle to the Galatians is the same as his writings to the Romans. But what needs to be distinguished between the two is that in the last epistle we see a more sublime meaning and the use of deeper evidence, and in the first he, addressing in writing as if to those about whom he further says: O foolish Galatians and: You are so foolish, directs his speech in such a way that he rather prohibits than instructs; and he puts that speech, which even narrow-minded people could understand, as universally accessible reasoning, into generally understandable phrases, and calls on those who cannot be convinced by the power of reason to obey the commanding word (auctoritas). And indeed, there is not a single speech of the Apostle, whether contained in the epistle, or delivered by him personally during his visit (vel per Epistolam vel praesentis), in which he did not strive to teach that the burdens of the ancient Law were removed, and all that was in types and types, such as: Sabbath rest, the humiliating rite of circumcision, the repetition of the celebrations of the first days and three holidays, the exact distribution and prescription of types of food and the daily washing of dirty vessels - all this ceased with the advent of the grace of the Gospel, which is given (to man) not by the blood of slaughtered animals, but by the faith of the believing soul. Whereas in other places, in part, and as if this question is presented differently, [the Apostle] discusses it only in passing and almost briefly; these two epistles, as I said, contain mainly [the teaching] about the transformation of the ancient Law and the introduction of the Gospel; However, the epistle to the Galatians has the peculiarity that it was written not to those who from among the Jews believed in Christ and at the same time believed that it was necessary to preserve the rites of their fathers, but to those who accepted the faith of the Gospel from the pagans, but fell away again; they were frightened by the insistent assurances of some people that Peter and James, as well as all the churches in Judea, mixed the gospel of Christ with the old Law, that even Paul himself does one thing in Judea and preaches another to the pagans, and that they [the Galatians] believe in vain in the Crucified One if they believe that they can neglect what the chief Apostles observe (principes Apostolorum). For this reason, [the Apostle Paul] so carefully occupies the middle between both, so that, on the one hand, he does not destroy the grace of the Gospel under the pressure of the importance and significance [for the pagans] of the ancients, i.e., the ancestors, and on the other hand, does not strike a blow to those who preached before him, through a firm defense of the work of grace; therefore, he follows an indirect path and, as it were, along hidden underground passages, in order to teach Peter, for the sake of the people of circumcision [Jews] entrusted to him, to act in such a way that they, having quickly abandoned the previous custom, would not be tempted to the point of unbelief in the cross of Christ; and in relation to himself, show that he, as having the commandment to preach to the Gentiles, must, in the form of spreading the truth, defend what he [Peter] did for the fulfillment of his ministry. This is what the famous resident of Batanea, the blasphemous Porfiry, did not understand at all; in the first book of his work against us, he reproached that Peter was reproached by Paul for not walking with a straight foot when preaching the Gospel: he wanted to cast the stigma of error on Peter, and reproach Paul for slander, and generally accuse them both of inventing a false doctrine, as if the heads of the churches themselves disagreed among themselves. With the help of your prayers, we now touch only lightly on the meaning of this passage, and in our place we will explore it in more detail. But it is time to begin to reveal each place separately, basing it on the words of the Apostle himself. Gal.1:1. : Paul the Apostle [vol. e. sent] not from men and not through man, but from Jesus Christ and God the Father Who raised Him from the dead. (Gal.1:1) - Not out of pride, as some believe, but out of necessity, he presents himself as an Apostle [messenger] not from men, and not through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, and this precisely in order to confuse those who were chattering into the wind (ventilabant) by such greatness [that sent him] that Paul was outside the number of twelve, and added that he came from unknown place, or that he was appointed to serve (ordinatum) as [his] elders. But one might think that it is indirectly said here regarding Peter and the other [Apostles] that he, Paul, was given the preaching of the Gospel not by the Apostles, but by Jesus Christ himself, Who made them Apostles too. And all this is put at the beginning of the epistle so that no one can object to him, Paul, when he speaks against the burdens of the Law in defense of the grace of the Gospel, [in this way, for example]: “But Peter said this,” “and this the Apostles decreed,” “and this your predecessors decreed.” And indeed, in his further speech, he makes this idea, now hiddenly implied, more obvious: this is when he points out that he has not learned anything from those who apparently have something, and when he writes that he personally opposed Peter, arguing that he had no need to make concessions to the hypocrisy of the Jews. Therefore, if it seems to some to be folly that he, even in a hidden form, spoke against the Apostles, while he himself went [or: was heading] to Jerusalem in order to compare his gospel with theirs [the Gospel], so as not to somehow turn his past and present labors into nothing (ne forte in vacuum curreret aut cucurrisset), - [therefore] we turn our attention to the following. Until that day, the patriarchs of the Jews sent apostles [to the Galatians]; from them, in my opinion, then the corrupted from Galatians accepted the custom of observing the prescriptions of the Law, and perhaps another one of the Jews who believed in Christ went to Galatia and assured that Peter, the chief of the Apostles, and James, the brother of the Lord, observed the rituals according to the prescriptions of the Law. Therefore, for the necessary distinction of those who are sent from people, the Apostle from himself, sent by Christ, makes the following introduction: Paul the Apostle is not from people and not through man; and Apostle, i.e. sent, is a word characteristic of the Hebrew language: it also means Silas [or: Silai], which is given the name from the message: sent. According to the testimony of the Jews, among them there are also prophets and some holy men who are both apostles and prophets, while others are only prophets. So (denique) Moses is told: I will send you to Pharaoh (Ex. 3:10-11), and he answers: look for another whom you will send; also Isaiah is told from God: Whom will I send, and who will go to this people (Is. 6:8); [these two] are both apostles and prophets. Therefore, John the Baptist should also be called both a prophet and an apostle, although Holy Scripture says: A man was sent from God, whose name is John (John 1:6). And in the Epistle to the Hebrews (Heb. 3) [Apostle] Paul, contrary to his custom, did not mention his name, and did not preface calling himself an Apostle; this is because o meant to speak of Christ: Having therefore Jesus the High Priest [great] and the Apostle [Apostle] of our confession (Heb. 3:1); in addition, it was indecent to present Paul as an Apostle in the place where Christ was to receive the name of Apostle. But there are four kinds of apostles. One generation is those who are not from men and not through man, but from Jesus Christ and God the Father; the other kind is those who are from God, but through man; the third is those that are from man, and not from God; the fourth is those who are not from God, and not through man, and not from man, but from themselves. The number of Apostles of the first kind includes Isaiah and other prophets, and the Apostle Paul himself, who is not from people and not through man, but was sent from Jesus Christ and God the Father; the second generation [refers to] Jesus, the son of Nun, who was appointed an Apostle, it is true, from God, but through the man Moses. The third genus includes the one that is placed (ordinatus) according to the goodwill and efforts of people. So (Ut) now we see very many who are called to the priesthood not by Divine judgment, but by the bribed voice of the common people. The fourth kind includes false prophets and false apostles, about whom the Apostle says: False apostles of this kind, workers of unrighteousness, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ [are those] who say: “This says the Lord.” But the Lord did not send them (2 Cor. 11:13) 1. But the Apostle Paul is not like that, because he was sent neither from men nor through man, but from God the Father through Jesus Christ. This confirms, in refutation of the heresy of Ebion and Photinus, the idea that our Lord Jesus Christ is God; in fact (dum) the Apostle, sent to preach the Gospel by Jesus Christ, denies his message from man. This place is also used by other heresies, which, proving that the flesh of Jesus Christ was only illusory (putativam), claim that Christ was God and not man; the same must be said about the new heresy, which claims that the work of Christ was only half a work (dimidiatam). Thus, the faith of the Church is exposed to the blows of so many false teachings that if it confesses Christ as a man, then Ebion and Photinus suddenly appear; if she tries to prove that He is God, then suddenly the authors of a new teaching emerge [like bubbles in boiling water]: Manichaeus and Marcion. Therefore let them hear together at the same time that Christ is both God and man. This is not that in Him one thing is God, and the other is man, but that, having always been God, for the sake of our salvation He deigned to become man. You should know that in “Apostle” Marcion 2 it is not written: and through God the Father, since he wanted to show that Christ was raised [from the dead] not from God the Father, but by Himself, according to what He said: Destroy this church, and in three days I will raise it up (John 2:19), as in another place: No one will take away My soul from Me, but I lay it down By myself. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again (John 10:18). Verse 2: And all the brothers who are with me belong to the churches [or: Churches] in Galatia. ( Gal.1:1 ) – At the beginning of other epistles Sosthenes, Silvanus, and sometimes Timothy are supplied; and only in this, in view of the importance of the very many, does the Apostle name all the brothers. Perhaps they themselves were among the circumcision, and were not considered worthy of contempt by the Galatians. Indeed, for the correction of the people, the opinion of many and their agreement in one matter means a lot. And regarding his words: to the churches in Galatia, it should also be noted that here only in general he writes not to one Church, one city, but to the churches of the entire region, also that he calls them churches, although then he denounces them as being subject to error. From this last we must conclude that something twofold can be called a church: that church which has no filth or vice and is truly the body of Christ, and that which gathers in the name of Christ, not having the fullness of perfect virtues (Eph. 5:27). In the same way (quomodo) the wise are called in a twofold way: both those who are distinguished by complete and perfect virtue, and those who begin and can be classified as moving forward. About the perfect it is said: I will send you wise men (Luke 11:49). About those who have not received wisdom, it is said: Reprove the wise and he will love you (Proverbs 9:8). Indeed, one who has complete and perfect virtue does not need correction. According to this meaning, other virtues should also be taken into account, i.e. (quod scilicet) strong, prudent, pious, blameless, righteous and self-controlled are understood either in the full meaning of the word or in a limited sense. Verse 3: Grace to you and peace from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ. (Gal.1:3) - Not as in other epistles, he posits the grace of God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ and peace, through which, without our own merits of deeds (absque operum merito) and previous sins are forgiven us, and after forgiveness peace is given; on the contrary, he is already prudently conducting the case [of denunciation] against those who were previously disposed in favor of the Law and thought that they could be justified by the works [of the Law]; this is for the purpose that they should know that they are saved by grace and should stand firm in what they have begun to do. Verse 4: Who gave himself for our sins, that he might rescue us from this present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen. ( Gal.1:4 ) – Neither the Son gave Himself for our sins without the will of the Father, nor did the Father give up the Son without the will of the Son. But in this the will of the Son was manifested, to fulfill the will of the Father, as He Himself says in the Psalm: I have desired to fulfill Your will, O My God (Ps. 39:9). But the Son gave Himself up, so that He Himself could replace the untruth that was in us with justification. Wisdom gave herself up to defeat foolishness. Holiness and Strength sacrificed Herself to destroy filth and weakness. At the same time, He freed us not only in the future life, as we believe in accordance with the hope given to us, but even here, in this life, when we, dying with Christ, are transformed by new feelings; we cease to be of this world, which accordingly (merito) does not love you. The question is: how is the present age called evil, evil? The fact is that some heretics usually find in this a reason to assert that the Creator of light and the future age was one, and the Creator of darkness and the present age was another. And we affirm that what is called evil is not so much this age itself, composed of days and nights, years and months, as what happens in [this] age according to the name (ὁμωνύμως); How is it said that for every day his wickedness is sufficient (Matt. 6:34), and that the days of Jacob were short and disastrous (Gen. 47:9)? Not because, of course, the period of Jacob’s life was unhappy, but because what he experienced was the enduring of various trials. Of course, the time when he was in hard work to obtain wives for himself and endured many oppressions (Gen. 29-31), for Esau was a time of calm, and thus the same time was good for one, and bad for another; and in Ecclesiastes it is written: Do not say that my former days (priores) [or: worse - pejores] were good compared to these (Eccl. 7:10), only for the purpose of distinguishing [good] from evil. Therefore, John says: The whole world lies in evil (1 John 5:19). This does not mean that the world itself is evil, but that evil in the world comes from people who say: Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we will die (Is. 22:13); and the Apostle Paul himself says: Testing time, because the days are evil (Eph. 5:16). Therefore, the shady mountains are also cursed when they are filled with robbery, not because the land and forests fall into sin, but because these places are given disgrace for murder. We hate both the sword with which human blood is shed and the cup in which poison is dissolved, not because of the sin of the sword or the cup, but because those who used them for evil deserve hatred. Likewise, an age, which is a certain amount of time, is not called good or evil in itself, but according to the qualities of those who live during it. Therefore, we must treat with contempt the fabrications and fables of Valentine, who composed his thirty aeons (αἰῶνας = centuries), because the Holy Scripture speaks of centuries (αἰῶνας); he asserts that the aeons are living beings (animalia), and according to the quaternities, octals, tens and twenties, he made up the same number of centuries as the prolific impurity of the Aeneid gave birth to. One must also ask: what is the difference between a century and a century of centuries or a century of centuries, and where it is said about a small amount of time, and where it is about eternity, because in the Hebrew language olam (עולם), i.e., age, denotes eternity where it is written with the insertion of the letter ו (vav), and where it is written without the letter ו (vav) denotes the fiftieth year, which they call anniversary That is why that Jew who, for the sake of his wife and children and out of love for his master, is assigned to slavery by piercing his ear, receives a command to be in slavery for an age, in the sense: until the fiftieth year (Ex. 21:6). Also, both the Moabites and the Ammonites do not enter the Church of the Lord until the fifth and tenth generation and for an age, because with the onset of the jubilee came the end of all difficult conditions and obligations ( Deut.23:3). Some argue that the meaning of the words: forever and ever is the same as the words: in the holy of holies, in the heavens of heavens, in works of works, in songs of songs; and as there is a distinction of heaven in relation to those to whom heaven belongs, and a distinction of the sanctuary in relation to that which is more holy than the sanctuary, and a distinction of acts which are superior in excellence to other acts and songs which rise above all songs; so there is a difference between centuries, which, compared to centuries, are centuries par excellence. So, by the present age we mean that which must be counted, beginning from the time when heaven and earth were created, and which continues until the time of the end of the world, when Christ is to judge all. And sometimes they move it further, taking a step into the past, and talking about centuries past and future: whether they were good, or evil, or whether they will be so; at the same time, they entered into the consideration of such profound issues that they even compiled books and immense scrolls (infinita volumina) to resolve them. – And the end of Paul’s preface is made with the Hebrew word: Amen (אמן), which seventy translate [usually] with the word γένοιτο, that is, let it be; and Akila with the word πεποιστωμένος - true, or: true; this word is often used by the Savior in the Gospel: He confirms His speech with the word amen (Amen). Verse 6: I am amazed that you are so quickly moving away (transferimini) from Him who called you to the grace of Jesus Christ, following another gospel, which is nothing other than that of some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. (Gal.1:6–7) – We meet the word distance (transfer) for the first time in the book of Genesis (Gen.5:24), where [it is said]: God removed (transtulit) Enoch, and he was not found. After this, also in the book of Kings (1 Kings 21:26), which says how King Ahab’s wife Jezebel alienated him from true worship of God to the worship of idols, so that he began to do everything, similar to what the Amorites did, whom the Lord scattered before the children of Israel. But although both actions are removal (translatio), yet the first [Enoch] is the work of God, and [Ahab] is the work of the devil. Whoever is kidnapped (trausfertur) by God is not found by his enemies, and he cannot be kidnapped by those plotting intrigues; This, in my opinion, means: and was not found. And whoever is kidnapped by the devil is transferred to something that apparently exists, but in fact does not exist. And the wise men of this world call those who are carried away from one teaching to another; so they called the famous Dionysius Transpositus or Translatus [Μεταθέμενος - transferred, shifted from place to place], that is, he retreated from the previous belief (decreto) to the opposite; this is the Dionysius who originally preached the doctrine that sorrow is not evil; and then, under the pressure of misfortunes and tormented by grief, he began to assert that grief is the greatest of all evils. – So, [Apostle] Paul is surprised that the [Galatians] are drawn away from the freedom of the Gospel into the slavery of the works of the Law; and then he is surprised that they are carried away so quickly, because the same responsibility does not lie on the one who is difficult to be carried away by another, and on the one who is carried away quickly; the same (ut) and during martyrdom: not the same guilt lies on the one who, without struggle and torture, quickly moves to renounce the faith, and on the one who, through racks (equuleos), quartering wheels (fidiculos) and fire, is torn to pieces and forced to renounce what he believed in. The preaching of the Gospel was still relatively new; The interval was not yet long after the Apostle drew the Galatians away from idols to Christ. So, he wonders how they so quickly retreated from Him, by whose name they had recently become Christians. This passage contains a turn of phrase called a permutation of words (ὑπέρβατον), which in its own order can be read in this way: “I am amazed that you were so quickly distracted from Christ Jesus, who called you to grace,” saying: I came to call not the righteous, but sinners to repentance (Mark 2:17). Indeed, we are saved by grace, not through the Law (Eph. 2:8–9). But you are drawn towards another Gospel, which is not another, because everything that is false cannot be firmly standing (non subsistit); and that which is contrary to the truth does not exist, as can be seen from the following: Do not, O Lord, transfer Your dominion to those who do not exist (Esth. 4:17). And the Lord called upon what did not exist in order to bring into being what did not exist. If, however, those who believed in the same God and had the same Scripture are said to be attracted to another Gospel, which is not the Gospel, then what should we think about Marcion and other heretics who deny the Creator of the world and invent that Jesus Christ is the Christ [Anointed] of another God. They err and fall not only in the interpretation of the Law and the literal meaning (litterae), or in [the doctrine of] the struggle of flesh and spirit; but even they do not agree on the fundamental (toto) right of the Church. But [the Apostle] says beautifully: These are only a few who disturb you and want to pervert the Gospel of Christ. They want, he says, to replace the Gospel, to pervert and cause disturbance; but they are unable to do this, because it is such by nature that it cannot be other than true. Anyone who interprets the Gospel differently in spirit and thought than what is contained in what is written leads the believers into confusion and perverts the Gospel of Christ, so that he pushes back what is in front, and turns what is behind forward. If someone follows only the letter, then he puts what is behind in front; and if anyone clings to the interpretations of the Jews, he pushes back what by nature is placed in front. Moreover (necnon), the Galatians’ adoption of the word passion (translatio) is very suitable [to them], for the word Galatia in our language means precisely passion, transference (translatio). Verses 8 and 9: But even if we or [even] an angel from heaven came down to preach to you [something] beyond what we preached to you, let him be excommunicated. As we said before, so now I repeat again: If anyone preaches to you [something] beyond what you have received, let him be excommunicated. (Gal.1:8-9) - These words of the Apostle can be taken as some kind of exaggeration (hyperbolice), and not in the sense that the Apostle or an angel from heaven could preach differently than they previously said. But even if it were possible that both the apostles and angels would change, one must not deviate from what was once accepted. [This should be thought] especially when the Apostle himself shows the firmness of his faith, saying in another place: I know that neither death nor life, nor angels, nor rulers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor strength, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord (Rom. 8:38-39). I tell you the truth, I do not lie, for my conscience gives me testimony (Rom. 9:1). There is no doubt that this was not said to those who could ever apostatize from faith in Christ and from love for Him. But those who want to see in these words the actual truth, and not an assumption (καθ’ ὑπόθεσιν dictum), i.e., who want to see the idea that the Apostles and even the Angels can turn to evil, present as proof that the Apostle Paul himself knew that he too could fall if he lived more carelessly; this is clear from his words: But I subdue and enslave my body, so that, while preaching to others, I myself should not be condemned (1 Cor. 9:27); [this is also evident from the fact] that the Angels, who did not preserve their original state 3, but left their dwelling, were capable of change: in eternal bonds under darkness they are kept for the judgment of the great day (Jude 1:6). Only the nature of God alone is unchangeable, which is written as follows: You are the same (Ps. 102:28), and He Himself says about Himself: I am your God, and I do not change (Mal. 3:6). That the lucifer, who rises in the morning, fell, [this is as well known as that] that He who was once sent to all nations was crushed on the earth. The famous learned man Tertullian skillfully wrote regarding this place against Apelles and his sister Philumena, who was possessed by a certain angel of the devilish spirit and corrupted; [he wrote] that this is the angel against whom, long before the birth of Apelles, the Holy Spirit prophetically pronounced excommunication (anathema) through the mouth of the Apostle. Then ἀνάθεμα is a concept (verbum) actually Jewish, and is used both in the book of Joshua and in the book of Numbers (Josh. 6:17–18, Num. 21:2–3), when the Lord commanded that everything that was in Jericho and belonged to the Modianites was considered under excommunication and excommunication. Let us ask those who consider Christ and the Apostle Paul: One to be the Son, and the other to be a servant of the good and at that time unknown (?) God, Who did not want to slander (nesciat maledicere = curse) or condemn anyone: how does His Apostle use the word of the Jews, i.e. [the word] of the Creator, and expresses the wish (velit) that either the apostle or the angel perish, although He Himself He didn't want to take revenge. And his addition: As we said before, so again I repeat, shows that at the beginning the Apostle warned against the same thing, that is, he proclaimed the excommunication of those who would teach differently, and now, after such a sermon was discovered, he pronounces the excommunication that he had previously predicted. Therefore, he excommunicated himself, since he was accused of doing one thing in Judea, and preaching another among the pagans, and against the Angel, who, as [everyone] knew, was superior in dignity even to his predecessors, the Apostles. So, according to him, the significance (auctoritas) of Peter and John should not be considered so great, when he [Paul] neither for himself, who taught them [the Galatians] before, nor for the Angel, considered it permissible to preach differently in comparison with what they had been taught before. So, he identified by name only himself and the Angel, and indicated the others without a name: if anyone, he says, preaches the gospel to you, so that with a general word [anyone] does not offend his predecessors, and, however, indicate their names in a hidden form. Verse 10: In fact, will I now incline only people or God to myself, or do I strive to be pleasing to people? If I still pleased people, I would not be a servant of Christ. (Gal.1:10) - Let us not think that the Apostle teaches us, following his example, to despise the judgment of people, for in another place he says: Therefore, having the fear of the Lord, we incline people to ourselves, and we are open to God (2 Cor. 5:11), and the well-known word: Be shameless for Jews and Gentiles, and for the Church of God (1 Cor. 10:32), just as I please everyone in everyone, striving not for what is useful to me, but to many, so that they may be saved (1 Cor. 10:33) But if it is possible for us to please God and people equally, then we must please people; If we please people in no other way than by displeasing God, then we should rather please God than people. On the other hand, the Apostle himself adds the reason why he pleases people, saying: Seeking not what is useful to me, but what is useful to many, so that they may be saved. And the one who, prompted by love, which does not seek one’s own, but someone else’s, pleases everyone so that they can be saved, undoubtedly pleases God, who cares about the salvation of people. In his speech there is now a special word only (modo), deliberately added here, showing whether, depending on the circumstances (pro tempore), one should please or not please people; Thus, the one who is now not pleasing to people as a result of the preaching of the gospel truth will subsequently be pleasing to them as a result of the salvation of very many people. Paul was once pleasing to the Jews as a true zealot for the traditions of his fathers, for he had previously impeccably fulfilled the Law and had a fiery zeal for the rites and customs of his ancestors to such an extent that he even took part in the stoning of Stephen, and he strove to Damascus to deprive the freedom of those who renounced the Law (Acts 7:58, 8:1, 9:1-2). But after his transformation from a persecutor into a chosen vessel and the beginning of preaching the faith of which he had once been a persecutor, he became hated by the Jews, who had previously loved him. This is what his words mean: “Do I strive to please the Jews, because of whose hatred of me I became pleasing to God? After all, if I were pleasing to them, I would not be a servant of Christ; because I would affirm the Law, destroying the grace of the Gospel; for the same reason I do not strive to preserve the Law. I cannot please God and the Jews equally, because the one who pleases them does not pleasing to God." And the word suadere itself is taken from ordinary usage (humano usu), namely, when someone has what he has and once acquired for himself, he tries to instill in others - this word is used in very many places of Scripture, including the following: Conviction (suasio) does not come from him who called you (Gal. 5:8); the same thing is in the book of the Acts of the Apostles: So many Jews came to him in the hospices, to whom he explained, supporting with testimonies, the kingdom of God and convincing them about Jesus [with testimonies] from the Law of Moses and the Prophets until the evening (Acts 28:23). He did all this because a rumor was spread about him that he was secretly observing the provisions of the law and in Jerusalem joining the number of the Judaizers. Verses 11, 12: For I make you aware, brethren, that the gospel which I proclaimed was not of man, for I did not receive it from man or learn it, but by revelation from Jesus Christ. (Gal.1:11–12) – On the basis of this place the teaching of Ebion and Photinus is lamented, [for this place testifies] that Christ is God, and not only man. Indeed, if Paul’s gospel does not come from man, and if he received it and learned it not from man, but through the revelation of Jesus Christ, then, without a doubt, Jesus Christ, who revealed the gospel to Paul, is not a man. And if He is not a man, then it follows that He is God. But by this we do not reject the teaching that He took on the [nature] of man, but we reject only the teaching according to which He was only a man. The question is: Have the churches of the whole world received the gospel from God or from man? In fact, which of you was taught through the revelation of Christ, and did not receive knowledge through human preaching? To this question we will answer that those who can say: Are you looking for evidence of Him who, like Christ, speaks in me (2 Cor. 13:3), and; But it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me (Gal. 2:20), - [these] taught not so much themselves as God [living] in them, who says to the saints: I said: you are gods, and you are all sons of the Most High (Ps. 82:6), and then about sinners: You, like people, will die and fall, like one of the first (Ps. 81:7). So, when Paul and Peter speak, who do not die like men, and do not fall like one of the leaders, it is obvious that they are gods. And those who are gods teach the gospel not of man, but of God. Marcion and Basilides, and other heretical pestilence, do not have the gospel of God, because they do not have the Holy Spirit, without Whom the gospel they preach is human. And at the same time, let us not think that the Gospel lies in the words of Scripture, but in its meaning, not in the superficial meaning, but in the internal content, not in the outer covers (foliis) of speech, but in the root of its meaning. The prophet says about God: His words are good in relation to him (Mic. 2:7) (according to LXX). Scripture is then useful to those who hear it when it is not proclaimed without Christ, when it is not offered without the Father, and when the preacher does not inspire it to others without the [Holy] Spirit. Otherwise, according to the word of Ezekiel (Ezekiel 13:18), both the devil, who speaks from the Scriptures, and all heresies prepare for themselves from it a convenient support (consuunt cervicalia = sew together a headboard), which placed under the arm (cubitum) of people of all ages. Likewise, I myself, who say, if I have Christ in me, then I have a gospel that is not human; and if I am a sinner, then it is said to me: The Lord spoke to the sinner. Why do you proclaim My justifications and accept My Testament in your mouth? But he himself hated the instruction and threw My words behind him (Ps. 49:16-17) and so on, following that. It is very dangerous to preach in the Church, because as a result of a false interpretation, the gospel of Christ can be made into a human gospel, or, even worse, a devilish one. And the difference between receiving and learning is that the one who receives the gospel is the one to whom it is first instilled and in whom it is raised to the level of faith, so that he believes that what is written belongs to you. And he learns who knows clearly and separately what is presented in him under the images of fortune telling and parables, and he knows it not by human revelation, but by revelation from Christ, Who revealed it to Paul, or through Paul, in whom Christ speaks. And the very word ἀποκάληψις, 5 i.e. revelation, is a word peculiar exclusively to Scripture, and not borrowed from the Greeks from any of the secular sages. Therefore, it seems to me, both in other words that LXX interpreters translated into Greek from Hebrew, and in this especially, they sought to express the special properties of foreign speech, finding new words for new objects, and to give meaning when something secret and hidden, after removing the outer cover, was made clear and brought to light. To explain this, here is an example. Moses talked with God with an open face, i.e. without cover (Ex.33, 34); but, turning to the people, he put a veil over his face, because the people did not have the strength to look him straight in the face (Num. 4). In the same way the veil was stretched before the Ark of the Covenant; and when it was removed, what was previously hidden was exposed to view, and - let's use this very word - was revealed (revelabantur). So, if those who are accustomed to reading the works of eloquent secular people begin to mock the novelty and artlessness of our speech, then we will send them to the books of Cicero relating to philosophical issues; and they will see how great was the need to use there such a large number of outlandish words, which the ear of a Latin man had never heard; and this was when he translated from the Greek language, which is close to us. And what did those who tried to express the peculiarities of difficult Jewish phrases have to endure? And yet in so many scrolls of the Scriptures there are far fewer words that breathe novelty than those that Cicero collected in [his] little book. Then, as we said at the beginning, when interpreting the words: Paul, sent not from men and not through man, so now his word can be understood in secret in relation to the Apostle Peter and his other predecessors, Paul, in the sense that he, having Christ alone as a mentor in the gospel, was not moved by any law or authority (quod nullius pro Lege et auctoritate moveatur). Further: he points to that revelation in which, during the journey to Damascus, he was honored to hear the voice of Christ and, struck by the blindness of his bodily eyes, began to contemplate the light of the world. Verses 13, 14 · For you have heard about my life in Judaism in time: how I was excessively persecuting the Church of God and ruining it, and surpassed in Judaism many [of my] peers in my generation [as] more than zealous for my fatherly traditions (Gal. 1: 13-14). – Such a message is very useful for the Galatians, namely that Paul, the desolator of the Church of God and the most zealous defender of Judaism, suddenly turned to faith in Christ, and this at a time when the Crucified One had just been preached to the world, and when the new teaching was persecuted by both the pagans and the Jews of the whole [then] world. Indeed, they could say: “If one who from a small age was instructed in the rules of life (disciplinis) of the Pharisees; who in Jewish traditions surpassed all his peers - [if he] now defends the Church, which he once very strongly persecuted, and prefers to have the grace and new teaching of Christ in spite of the hatred of all, and not [preserve] the old Law for the sake of the praise of many; then what should we do, who have become Christians directly from paganism? And his words are beautiful: He persecuted the Church of God excessively, so that from this there arises surprise [to him], because not every one of those who were even insignificant persecutors of the Church of God turned to faith, but only the one who surpassed others in fasting. And he wisely conveys in his narration that he did not serve the Law of God so much as the fatherly, i.e., Pharisee traditions that teach the doctrines and commandments of men (Matthew 15:9, Mark 7:7-9). How beautiful is the selection and meaning of expressions: You heard, he says, about my life in Judaism once; “about life” not: “about grace”, “once upon a time”, and not: “now”. “in Judaism”, and not: “in the Law of God”; How I excessively persecuted the Church of God and devastated it. He was not a persecutor like others, but “excessively.” And he seemed not to be satisfied with strong persecution, but devastated the Church, as if he were a predator or a robber. He also does not say: the Church of Christ, as he then considered it [or: considered], i.e. coming from the One whom he despised and persecuted, but: the Church of God, according to his real faith; Moreover, it either indicates God in Christ, or says that it is the Church of the same God who once gave the Law. And in Judaism he surpassed many of his peers in my family, [as] more than properly zealous for his fatherly traditions. And again he calls himself superior not in the Law of God, but in Judaism, and [exceeded] not everyone, but very many, and not his elders, but his peers, so he makes an indication of his zealous pursuits, and at the same time rejects the opportunity to reproach him for boasting. And speaking about the traditions of the fathers, but not about the commandments of God, he shows himself to be a Pharisee of the Pharisees, and having the zeal of God, but not according to reason (non secundum scientiam). Even to this day, people who understand the Holy Scriptures in the Jewish way persecute the Church of Christ and devastate it; they are corrupted not by the Law of God, but by human traditions. Verse 15 [and beginning 16]: When it pleased him, who chose me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace, to reveal his Son in me, that I might preach the gospel of him among the Gentiles. (Gal.15-16) - Not only in this place, but also in the letter to the Romans, Paul writes that he was chosen for the gospel of God. And Jeremiah, before he was conceived and formed in his mother’s womb, appears as known and sanctified by God (Jer. 1:5); also on behalf of the Righteous One, or, as some think, on the person of Christ, it is said: I was left for you from the womb; From my mother's womb You are my God (Ps. 21:11). And against sinners, David exclaims: For behold, I was conceived in iniquities, and my mother conceived me in sins (Ps. 50:7); and elsewhere: From the time they are in the womb, the wicked are alienated [from God] (Ps. 57:4); finally, in both meanings [it is said]: God loved Jacob, but hated Esau (Mal.1:1-2), before the children were born [(Rom.9:11-13)]. Heretics find in this place a basis for recognizing several different natures, namely: spiritual, mental and earthly (χοϊκήν), of which one is saved, the other perishes, and the third takes the middle between those two; They present the matter in such a way that a righteous person would never be chosen before he had done some good, nor would a sinner arouse hatred before committing a crime, if the nature of those being saved and those perishing were not different. To this we can simply answer that this happens according to divine foreknowledge, so that the one in whom He foresees a future righteous person is loved before he is born from the womb, and He hates a future sinner before he sins; but this does not mean that God is unjust in His love and hatred, but only that He considers them according to their worth (debeat) no other way than knowing in advance that they will be either righteous or sinners; that He judges, not like people, only about the present, for for Him the future is already accomplished, and that He pronounces His verdict on the consequences of actions, and not on the beginning of them. This is the simplest explanation, and without other, more sublime explanations, it may to some extent be sufficient for the reader. However, those who seek to assert that God is unjust, on the basis of what we said a little higher: From the womb [of the mother], sinners are alienated [from God], also add further the following words: They are mistaken from the womb [of the mother], they speak lies. These people point out the following: How is it that sinners are mistaken right from their mother’s womb and speak lies when they can still have neither words nor meaning? Or: what is the truth of God’s foreknowledge if He loves and preserves one before His birth, and hates another? Or such [heretics] attribute the reason for such an action of God to the previous life, as if each, according to his own merit, from birth is ranked among the good or evil angels. They chatter that this whole passage about Jacob and Esau, which we have just mentioned, is written to the Romans in such a way that it is impossible to give a satisfactory answer to it without intense labor and taking the hellebore of Chrysippus [i.e. e. sedative]. It is not the same thing to say: To reveal His Son in me, compared to saying: To reveal His Son to me. Indeed, if something is revealed to someone, only that which was not there before can be revealed to him; and if it is revealed in someone, then what was already in him is revealed before, and after it has been revealed to him. We find something similar to this in the Gospel: There is someone standing among you whom you do not know (John 1:26). And in another place: There was the true light, which enlightens every person who comes into the world (John 1:9). From this it is clear that in nature all people have the knowledge of God, and that no one is born [spiritually] without Christ and does not have wisdom, justice and other virtues. Therefore, although many without the faith of Christ and the Gospel act in some respects wisely and even holyly, for example. [ut], obey their parents, extend a hand to the needy, do not oppress their neighbors, do not steal someone else’s property; nevertheless, they are more guilty before the judgment of God, for, having within themselves the germs (principia) of virtues and Divine seeds, they do not believe in Him, without Whom they cannot be. But the Son of God revealed in Paul can also be understood in another sense (aliter), namely in the fact that through his preaching He became known to the pagans, whom they did not know before. Verse 16 [end]: Immediately I did not trust in flesh and blood (Gal. 1:16), - or, as it is even better in Greek: I did not consult (contuli, Greek προσανεθέμην) with flesh and blood [or: I did not trust in flesh and blood]. I know that many people think that this [flesh and blood] is said about the Apostles; Indeed, Porfiry objects that after the revelation of Christ, it would not have been appropriate for Paul to go to the Apostles and discuss the matter of preaching with them, i.e., after being taught by the Lord, to receive instruction from flesh and blood. But God forbid me from considering Peter, James and John to be flesh and blood, who cannot inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 1:26-28); (1 Cor. 15:50) . Indeed, if the spiritual Apostles were flesh and blood, then what should we think then about the bodily ones (χοϊκοῖς)? So, there is no doubt that the Apostle Paul after the revelation did not rely on flesh and blood in the sense that he did not want to cast pearls before swine and give what is holy to dogs (Matthew 7:6). Look at what is written about sinners: My Spirit will not remain in these people, because they are flesh and blood (Gen. 6:3). And if with those who are flesh and blood, who did not reveal the Son of God to Peter (Matt. 16:16), the Apostle did not consult about the gospel that was revealed to him, but little by little he turned from flesh and blood to the spirit; it was he who entrusted to them the hidden shrines (occulta sacramenta) of the gospel. But someone may say: “If he did not immediately consult flesh and blood about the Gospel, then it is implied that he will subsequently consult flesh and blood, and the meaning of the passage by which the apostles are denied to be flesh and blood cannot be maintained, because, as I said, he who did not consult flesh and blood in the beginning will at least consult them later.” This assumption forces us to point out this difference: we should not connect the word “immediately” (stati m or: continuo) with the words “flesh and blood”, but connect them with the higher ones: When it was pleasing to Him who chose Me from my mother’s womb and then: To reveal His Son in me and finally: That I might preach Him immediately to the Gentiles, so that the words: He did not trust the flesh and blood are, in fact, the beginning; and this is precisely the way to think, because the one who immediately after the revelation from Christ, in order to proclaim the Gospel to the pagans, did not waste time in any delay, going to the Apostles and conferring with people about the revelation of the Lord; but he retired to Arabia, and then, after three years of preaching, he returned again to Damascus, and then (tunc demum), going to Jerusalem, he saw Peter, James and John. Verse 17: And he did not go up to Jerusalem to the apostles who were before him. (Gal.1:17) – If the Apostle says: He did not trust in flesh and blood, then what was the need to repeat the same thing in words: And he did not go up to Jerusalem to the Apostles, his predecessors? So, we must adhere to the meaning that we outlined above. But he went to Arabia, and again returned to Damascus. – Apparently the order of events does not coincide in the sense that Luke in the Acts of St. The Apostles reports (Acts 9:19-27) this way: when Paul, having believed in Christ, boldly preached the Gospel for many days in Damascus, intrigues were arranged against him, and he was lowered from the wall at night in a basket, and then arrived in Jerusalem, trying to join the disciples. When they avoided him, afraid to approach him, he was brought to the Apostles by Barnabas, and told them how he saw the Lord on the way, and how in Damascus he acted with firm faith in the name of the Lord [or with the addition: Jesus]. He was with them, he says, entering and leaving Jerusalem and acting with firm faith in the name of the Lord. He also talked and competed with the Greeks, and they tried to kill him; when the brethren found out [about this], they took him to Caesarea and then released him to Tarsus (Acts 9:28-30). And in the letter the Apostle says that he first went to Arabia and, returning again to Damascus, came, three years later, to Jerusalem, saw Peter and spent fifteen days with him, and did not meet with any other of the Apostles except James, the brother of the Lord. And that it was really so that they would believe him (because it might seem doubtful to those who were not with him), he confirms his words with an oath: But what I tell you, before God, I do not invent. We, in accordance with Luke's narrative, can think that Paul really was in Jerusalem, but not like the Apostles, his predecessors, in order to learn anything from them, but in order to ward off the danger of persecution, which he incurred in Damascus for the sake of preaching the Gospel; and thus he came to Jerusalem as he would have gone to any other city. And from there he hastily withdrew to Arabia as a result of intrigues, or [again] to Damascus, from where three years later he returned to Jerusalem to see Peter. Of course, it could have been like this: immediately after baptism and strengthening himself with food, he spent several days with his disciples in Damascus and, to the amazement of everyone, in Jewish assemblies (synagogues) he immediately began to preach that Jesus is the Son of God, and then he went to Arabia and from Arabia he returned to Damascus, where he stayed for three years, about which, as many days, Scripture testifies like this: When many days were fulfilled, The Jews held a meeting to kill Him (Acts 9:23). But Saul became aware of their plans, so they guarded the doors day and night to kill Him. That is why the disciples took him at night and released him through the wall, lowering him in a basket. And when he came to Jerusalem, he made an attempt to join the disciples. The Apostle Luke, perhaps, omitted information about Arabia because [Paul] did not achieve anything worthy of the Apostolic preaching there and preferred to report in brief words what, in his opinion, was worthy of the Gospel of Christ. Even if he spent time in Arabia without any special consequences (frustra), then this should not be attributed to the slowness of the Apostle, but to the fact that there may have been some command and even a commandment from God regarding silence. For even after this we read that Paul, who came out with Power, was forbidden by the Holy Spirit to preach in Asia (Acts 16:6). Otherwise: But he went to Arabia and again returned to Damascus. What benefit does this message bring me if I read that Paul immediately after the revelation of Christ went to Arabia, and from Arabia immediately returned to Damascus, for I do not know why he went there, or: what benefit did his walk and return bring? The Apostle himself gives me reason for a higher understanding [of this passage] in the same epistle, when he talks about Abraham, Hagar and Sarah: Indeed, this is expressed allegorically, for here are two Testaments - namely: one from Mount Sinai giving birth to slavery, this is Hagar, because Sinai is a mountain in Arabia; she is united [spiritually] with her who is now in Jerusalem (Gal. 4:24–25). And he teaches that the Old Testament, i.e. the son of a slave is set in Arabia, which means: humiliated and close to falling. Thus, Paul, as soon as he believed, turning to the Law, to the Prophets, to the sacraments of the Old Testament, which was already declining, looked for Christ in them, Whom he was commanded to preach to the pagans. But, having discovered the Law, he did not remain in it for long, but returned to Damascus, that is, to the blood and suffering of Christ, and from there, strengthened by the reading of the prophecies, he headed to Jerusalem, that is, to the place of vision and peace, not so much in order to learn something from the Apostles, but in order to compare his teaching of the Gospel with the teaching of them [the Apostles]. Verse 18: Then, three years later, he went to Jerusalem to see Peter (Gal. 1:18) - not [of course] to look at his eyes, cheeks, or facial expression, or to see whether he was thin, fat, with an aquiline or straight nose, whether his forehead was covered with hair, or whether he was bald, as Clement reports in his “Periods.” I do not admit that for Apostolic severity it was an important matter after such a long - three-year - preparation to desire to get acquainted with some human side of Peter. But he [Paul] beheld him with the same eyes with which we now see him in his epistles. With the same eyes he contemplated Cephas, with which Paul himself is now contemplated by some prudent people. And if this does not seem so to anyone, let him connect it all with the above meaning: with the fact that the apostles did not tell him anything; because, if he received the command to go to Jerusalem, then to go in order to see the Apostle, not for the sake of learning from him, since he himself had the same source (auctorem) of preaching, but for the sake of honoring the first Apostle. And he stayed with him for fifteen days. “He did not need lengthy instructions, since he had been preparing for his meeting with Peter for such a long time. And although it seems to some that it is unnecessary to pay attention to the counting of numbers in Scripture, I believe that it will not be without benefit [to note that] the fifteen days during which Paul was with Peter signify complete knowledge, complete teaching. Indeed, in the Psalter there are fifteen verses and fifteen degrees, through which they approach God to sing, and the righteous ascend to dwell in the dwellings of God. Likewise, Hezekiah was worthy to receive a sign with the help of steps, when he was given fifteen years to live (Is. 38); and the festivals of God began on the fifteenth day. And besides (since we follow a twofold understanding), when he indicates fifteen days, he does this in order to show that the time during which he could learn something from Peter was not long; so it all comes down to the same understanding with which he began: that is, he was taught not from man, but from God. Verse 19. And I saw no other of the apostles except James the brother of the Lord. ( Gal.1:19 ) – I remembered that when I was in Rome, at the urging of the brothers I wrote a book about the perpetual virginity of St. Mary. In it I needed to conduct a lengthy discussion about those who are called the brothers of the Lord. Therefore, whatever we write, we must be content with it. Now it is enough for us only that he [James] was called the brother of the Lord by his excellent right, by his incomparable faith and by his extraordinary (non mediam) wisdom, and also because he was the first to preside over that Church, which, before others, was formed by the Jews who believed in Christ. However, the rest of the Apostles are also called brothers of the Lord, for example, (sicut) in the Gospel: Go, [and] say to My brothers: I am going to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God (John 20:17). And in the Psalm: I will proclaim Your name to My brothers: in the midst of the Church I will sing praises to You (Ps. 21:23). But this one is primarily called a brother, since the Lord, going to the Father, entrusted the sons of His Mother to him. And just as Job and the other patriarchs are called servants of God, but Moses is called as if he had something more excellent, so that regarding him it is written: But not like Moses my servant (Heb. 3:5); so blessed Jacob in a special sense is called the brother of the Lord (as we said before). And when, in addition to the Apostles, some others are also called Apostles, the reason for this is as follows: All who saw the Lord and then preached him were called Apostles, as it is written in the Epistle to the Corinthians: That He appeared to Cephas, after that known (illis) to the eleven 6 , then appeared to more than five hundred brethren at the same time (simul), of whom many remain alive even to this day, and some have already fallen asleep [died]: then he appeared to James, then to all the Apostles (1 Cor. 15:5–7). Indeed, over time, little by little and in other places, from among those whom the Lord chose, Apostles (ordinati sunt apostoli) were installed, as the famous word to the Philippians says: But I considered it necessary to send to you brother Epaphroditus, my fellow worker and companion, and your apostle and minister in my need (Phil. 2:25). About the same case it is written to the Corinthians: Or the Apostles of the Churches, the glory [or: in the glory] of God (2 Cor. 8:23) 7. Silas and Judas are also called Apostles from the Apostles. Therefore, he was very much mistaken who thought that this James was the Apostle, the brother of John, who, as is known, shed blood for Christ after Stephen, according to the testimony (juxta fidem) of the book of the Acts of the Apostles (Acts 12:2). And this Jacob was the first bishop of Jerusalem and had the nickname Righteous, a man known for such holiness and enjoyed such fame among the people that they zealously tried to touch the hem of his robe. This is the one who was subsequently thrown down by the Jews from the top of the church - and had as his successor Simon, who was also betrayed for the sake of the crucified Lord. So, he [Paul] says that besides these he did not meet with any of the Apostles, so that there would be no contradiction, namely: although he was not instructed by Peter, he had other Apostles as mentors. But he did not see them, and not because he was motivated by contempt (contemptui), but because they were scattered throughout the world to preach the Gospel. Verse 20: But what I write to you is before God; I do not lie. (Gal.1:20) - This must be understood or simply: “What I say to you is true, and, God is my witness, I have not counterfeited it either with words skillfully composed or with any lie”; or it should be understood in a more sublime meaning: “What I write to you is before the face of God, that is, worthy of the contemplation of God.” Why is it worthy of contemplation of God? Precisely because I don't lie. And since the eyes of the Lord are directed towards the righteous (Ps. 33:16), and He turns away His face from the face of the wicked; what is written now before the face of God is because I write without using lies. If I lied, it would not be before the face of God. And this, what he now writes to the Galatians, can be understood not only in relation to what he writes to them, but also about all the epistles in general, because what he writes is not false, and his words and heart are not in disagreement with each other. Verse 21: Then I came to the region of Syria and Cilicia. (Gal.1:21) - After visiting Jerusalem, he went to Syria, which means for us: exalted, excellent, and from there he moved to Cilicia, which he wished to accept into faith in Christ, proclaiming to her a call to repentance, for the name of Cilicia means acceptance, or sorrowful crying. Verse 22-24: But I was not known by face to the churches of Judea which were in Christ Jesus; but only they heard that the one who once persecuted us was now preaching the gospel that he had once tried to eradicate, and they glorified God for me. (Gal.1:22-24) – The churches that were in Judea knew Paul only by ear, and many of them saw him more as a persecutor than as an Apostle. But Syria, parts of Cilicia, Arabia and Damascus also happened to know him personally, because the teacher of the pagans preached the gospel of Christ not to the Jews, but to the pagans. And all that he did was the following: he had the goal of showing that he could never have become glorious from a persecutor in the eyes of those whom he had previously persecuted, if his preaching had not been approved by the verdict of those who had previously known his malice (eum malum noverant). And he secretly returns to this goal, claiming that he worked in Judea for such a short time that he was unknown to believers even by sight. By this he shows that for him the teacher was neither Peter, nor James, nor John, but Christ, who revealed the Gospel to him. But at the same time, it should be noted that before he appears to be a persecutor of the Church, and here of faith, there of people, and here of deeds, so now [or: then, i.e. tunc instead of nunc] with great convenience it is said: He preaches the faith that he once tried to eradicate. In fact, the Church could not be spoken of in this way. Gal.2:1–2. : Then, fourteen years later, he again went to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus with him. But I walked by revelation and consulted with them about the gospel that I preach to the Gentiles and separately with those who seemed [outstanding], so that I would not accidentally struggle or I would not struggle in vain (Gal. 2:1-2). - What the Latin translator above translated with the word calmed down (acquievi) - in the place where it is written: Immediately I did not calm down [did not rely] on flesh and blood, in the present place he translated it much better [than that word] with the word: conferred [conferred]. But, to tell the truth, the Greek word ἀνεθέμην means something different from how it is understood by us - namely: it means that we consult with a friend about what we know, and, as it were, put into his heart (sinum) and conscience what we know, in order to approve or disapprove by joint discussion. So, fourteen years later, he went to Jerusalem, and the one who had previously gone only to see Peter says that now he went because he had in mind to consult with the Apostles about the gospel, taking with him Barnabas the circumcised and from the Gentiles Titus, who had his foreskin uncircumcised, so that in this way every word would be established (staret) by the mouth of two or three witnesses ( Deut.19:15). But it’s another thing to consult with someone, and another thing to learn [from someone]. There is equality between those who deliberate; and the difference between a teacher and a student is that the student is less than the one who teaches. At the beginning, after turning to faith, he saw the Apostles only [so to speak] in passing. And after, as he himself says, seventeen years, he talks with them in detail (plane) and humbly tries to find out whether he worked in vain, perhaps, or is working. He resorted to the Apostles - predecessors for a twofold reason: on the one hand, to show the humility of Paul, although he was already a teacher of the pagans throughout the world, and on the other hand, so that the Galatians would know that those who presided over the Churches of Judea did not reject his gospel. And at the same time, he shows that for the sake of faith in Christ and the freedom of the Gospel, he dared to bring a man, the uncircumcised Titus, to those who knew a lot about him: that he violated the Law, rebelled against Moses and almost completely rejected circumcision. And neither he himself, among such a large number of Jews and his enemies, who, in the heat of visible zeal for the law, wanted to shed his blood, nor Titus, was forced by any fear to yield to necessity, which could be justified either due to local conditions, or due to the importance of the elders, or due to the large number of Churches that from among the Jews believed in Christ, or due to temporary circumstances - namely, so as not to be subjected to such hatred. Some argue that fourteen years later he went to Jerusalem, that is, precisely when, according to the book of the Acts of the Apostles, a discussion arose among the believers of Antioch on the issue of keeping or not keeping the Law, and it was good to go to Jerusalem and await the decision of the elders, for which purpose (quando) Paul and Barnabas himself were sent, and that this is exactly what is said in the Latin collections (codicibus) of the books of Holy Scripture: And for a time we even agreed to submit to them 8 so that the truth of the Gospel might remain strong among you (Gal. 2:5), that is, precisely in the sense that Paul and Barnabas agreed to a letter on a matter that, although quite obvious, was still doubtful, with the goal that the grace of the Gospel would be confirmed for believers also by the court of the elders [Apostles] and so that no one else who no longer had any doubt about the abolition of circumcision, since the Apostles were commanded to remove the yoke of the Law from the pagans who believed in Christ. And his words: I conferred with them about the Gospel, which I preach among the pagans, and separately [consulted] with those who seemed [outstanding], so that I would not accidentally strive or I would not strive in vain - these words can also be understood in such a way that he secretly discussed with the Apostles the grace of Gospel freedom and the outdated antiquity of the destroyed Law in view of the multitude of Jews who believed, but could not yet hear that Christ is the fulfillment and end of the Law; These are those who, in the absence of the Apostle Paul, spread rumors that he was working in vain or that he was laboring who believed that he should not. follow the Old Testament Law. And Paul [did] this not because he was afraid that he had been preaching a false gospel for seventeen years, but because he wanted to show his predecessors that he, as those who did not know, believed, had not labored or labored in vain. Verses 3–5: However, Titus, who was with me, was not even forced to be circumcised. But even for the sake of the false brothers who crept in, who crept in to cry out for help against our freedom, which we have in Christ Jesus, and to return us to slavery, we did not submit to them for an hour, so that the truth of the Gospel might remain firmly with you (Gal. 2:3-5) - If Titus, who was from the Gentiles, was not forced by any fear to undergo circumcision in Jerusalem, that is, in the main city of the Jews, in which Paul was subjected to such hatred for reproaching Moses that he was almost killed by the Jews - this is when he was released by the tribune, and was sent in chains to Rome, to Caesar - then how some think that we should read: And to them (quibus) we submitted for a while, so that the truth of the Gospel might remain firmly with you, and that Titus, who before could not be forced to be circumcised, was finally forced to be circumcised? Or what kind of truth of the Gospel is it to make a concession to the hypocrisy of the Jews, and to observe what you previously considered as garbage (σκύβαλον) and despised as something worthy of condemnation, and to see something in what is in reality nothing. Finally (sed) and the very meaning of this letter is very clearly contradicted by the fact that the Apostle seems to be calling the Galatians to circumcision. With the entire structure of his speech, he wants to show that he, a Jew of Jews, who once kept the works of the Law, was circumcised on the eighth day according to the law of the Pharisees, but by the grace of Christ despises everything. Indeed, when he went to Jerusalem and when the false brothers - believers [in Christ] from among the circumcision - wanted him to circumcise Titus, neither he nor Titus yielded to violence in order to preserve the truth of the Gospel. Therefore, if he says that he was forced by necessity to circumcise Titus, then how does he reject the Galatians from that circumcision, from which in Jerusalem he could not deliver Titus, although this latter was from the pagans. So, - or you need to follow the reading of the Greek collections of St. Books: We did not submit to them even for a while, and (ut) the saying can be consistently understood: So that the truth of the Gospel remains unchanged among you; or, if we wish to trust some Latin list (exemplaris), we must follow the above meaning, namely, that the concession for the time consisted not in circumcising Titus, but in going to Jerusalem. Thus Paul and Barnabas submitted to the desire to go to Jerusalem, when a division arose in Antioch on the issue of the Law, so that through the letter from the Apostles their [Paul and Barnabas] judgment would be confirmed, and the truth of the gospel would remain firm among the Galatians, which is not in the letter, but in the spirit, not in the carnal sense, but in the spiritual understanding, and not in the obvious Judaism, but in the hidden (occulto). But you should know that the conjunction but (autem) used in this place in the words is unnecessary: ​​But also for the sake of the false brothers who have crept in, and even if it is read, it does not have a corresponding word that complements it. The order of arrangement and meaning of the place is as follows: “But even Titus, although he was [by origin] from the pagans, was not forced to be circumcised.” And immediately then he adds the reason why (ut) he could be forced to be circumcised against his will: For the sake of those who have crept in, he says, false brothers, who have crept in to cry for help against our freedom, which we have in Christ Jesus, to subject us to slavery. Since they were frightening with their intrigues and wanted to bring [their] numbers from the freedom of Christ into slavery of the Law, we did not even yield to them for a while in order to circumcise Titus, especially when some need for the sake of church peace could excuse us; and we did all this so that you would have no reason to depart from the grace of the Gospel. So, if we in Jerusalem - when there were so many threatening false brethren among the Jews, and when those who were elders opposed them only in part - [we] could not yield to any force or persuasion in order to observe circumcision, which, as we knew, had ended: then why are you of the Gentiles, you [living] in Galatia, you, against whom no force can be used, voluntarily departing from grace, go over to the already destroyed antiquity of the Law. Verse 6: But I have no distinction with those who show themselves to be anything, whatever they may have been: God does not regard the face of man. (Gal.2:6) - He says: Although the Lord had Peter and John with Him, and although they saw Him transfigured on the mountain (Matthew 17, Mark 9), and although the foundation of the Church was laid on them; however, for me there is nothing [important] in this, because I am not speaking against those who followed the Lord at that time, but against those who now prefer the Law of grace. I do not slander the predecessors and do not blame the elders in any way, but I only say that the Lord does not look at the face of a person. Indeed, He did not look at Moses, did not look at David, and did not look at others; So He will also look at those who, apparently, would temporarily yield to someone, although they themselves agree with me, for Peter also says: By the truth I perceive that God is not one who regards personalities, but whoever fears Him and practices righteousness is acceptable to Him in every place (Acts 10:34-35). So, with the same proof that the holy Apostle Peter, after the baptism of Cornelius from the pagans, uncircumcised, uses against those who were tempted, and reassures them with the fact that he could not refuse the water [of baptism] to those who received the Holy Spirit; [with this same proof] now the holy Apostle Paul objects to Peter himself, namely, that God is no respecter of persons, but judges everyone according to the truth. Thus, he carefully and little by little takes the middle between praising Peter and reproaching [him], so that he rewards the merits of his predecessor, the Apostle, and nevertheless boldly confronts him to his face, prompted by the truth. For those who seemed [outstanding] did not advise me anything. – Above [he said] he himself consulted with them and told them a lot about what he had achieved among the pagans; but they didn’t add anything to him; only, approving what was said to them, they gave him their [right] hand as a sign of communication and affirmed that their gospel and Paul's gospel were the same. Again it is necessary to note that the word advised (contulerunt) is the same one that we spoke about before in Greek (προσανέθεντο). Verses 7, 8: But, on the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised (praeputii), as Peter was to the circumcision, for He who assisted Peter in being an ambassador (apostolatum) to the circumcision also aided me among the Gentiles. - and when they learned about the grace given to me, Peter and James and John, who were considered pillars, gave me and Barnabas the hand of fellowship, so that we [would go] to the pagans, and they to the circumcision. (Gal.2:7-9) - Here the arrangement of words is reversed (ὑπέρβατον est), and with the omission of much that was said in the middle, this passage can be briefly read as follows: “The eminent ones (qui videbantur) did not tell me anything, but, on the contrary, gave me and Barnabas the hand of communication.” However, perhaps he, Paul, without praising himself, secretly gives the following meaning: “Those who seemed to me to be outstanding did not add anything; but, on the contrary, it was communicated to them by me, although they were more steadfast in the grace of the Gospel.” And all together, what he said means the following: “One and the same entrusted me with the gospel for the uncircumcised, and Peter for the circumcised. He sent me to the Gentiles, and appointed Peter in Judea. And neither the pagans in adulthood should have experienced suffering from useless circumcision, and abstained from the dishes to which they had always been accustomed, and which God created for use; neither those who believed from the Jews and were circumcised, and out of habit, as if of a second nature, should not have considered themselves to have something greater in comparison with other nations, but they did not begin to frivolously despise what they were once famous for. So, the Providence of God gave to the circumcised one Apostle, who, apparently, relied on the Law, and for those who were in the uncircumcised state - another Apostle, who considered the grace of the Gospel not slavery, but free faith. This is so that there will be no obstacle to faith for any reason, and neither the circumcised nor the uncircumcised will be deterred from believing in Christ. We are not saying that Peter seemed to have forgotten about the first [instructions] and considered it necessary to observe, in addition to the grace of the Gospel, the precepts of the Law, for Peter himself testified in the Acts of the Apostles that no person is unclean, and taught that in that vessel which he saw coming down from heaven, and which was supported by the four corners, there was no difference between people, whether they were Jews or Gentiles ( Acts 10:11–15, 11:5–9); and [we want to say] that even he, showing himself to be an observant of the Law, only little by little deviated the Jews from their previous way of life, because they could not quite suddenly look with contempt, as useless waste, on their so many efforts in keeping the Law and careful behavior [according to the prescriptions] in the past life. From this we understand exactly why the hand of fellowship was given to Paul and Barnabas by Peter, James and John, namely, so that the gospel of Christ would not be considered different due to different observances [of the Law], and so that the community of the circumcised and those having the foreskin would be considered one and the same. He skillfully (pulchre) constructs his speech, saying: He who assisted Peter in his mission to the circumcision; this is for the purpose of preventing anyone from thinking that he is slandering Peter; but, having prefaced the praises of Peter, he wants to make it clear that Peter partly allowed circumcision for this purpose in order to win those of the Jews who [especially] trusted him, and to keep them in the faith in Christ and the Gospel. But at the same time he implies that if he [Peter] is innocent of observing for a time what may not be observed, and does this in order not to lose those who trust him; then he [Paul] must do even more for the sake of the truth of the Gospel, because what was entrusted to him consists of the uncircumcised: it is necessary that the pagans, frightened by the weight and difficulties of the Law, should not depart from the faith in Christ, which they so easily accepted (and Christi fide et credulitate). The hidden question here is: So what? If Peter had found [any] of the Gentiles, would he not have led them to faith? Or: if Paul had revealed some of the circumcised, would he not have called them to the baptism of Christ? These questions are resolved in such a way that we must recognize one main commandment given regarding Jews and Gentiles, so that those who defend the Law have one they can follow, and that those who prefer grace to the Law will not lack a teacher and leader. In general, they had a purpose - to gather the Church for Christ from all nations. And indeed, we read that the pagan Cornelius was baptized by Saint Peter, and Paul preached in the assemblies (synagogis) of the Jews very often about Christ. Peter and James and John, who were considered pillars (Acts 10, 13, 17). Above we read three times what was said by the Apostle: And separately from those who seemed [outstanding], and: And from those who seemed to be something, and: Those who seemed to be something did not report anything about me. Therefore, I carefully examined what his words meant: seemed (videbantur) but now he freed me from any difficulty by adding the words: which seemed (considered) pillars. So, the Apostles are the pillars of the Church, and especially Peter, James and John, two of whom were worthy to ascend the mountain with the Lord; and of these latter, one in the Apocalypse speaks on behalf of the Savior: He who overcomes I will make a pillar in the church of My God (Rev. 3:12), teaching in this way that he who defeats the enemy can become a pillar of the Church. And in his letter to Timothy, Paul writes: So that you may know how you ought to live in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God, and moreover (autem) the pillar and ground of the truth (1 Tim. 3:15). By these and other words we learn that both the apostles and all believers, as well as the Church itself, are called a pillar in the Scriptures, and that there is no difference in words about the body or about the members, since the body is divided into members, and the members belong to the body. So, Peter and James and John, who were considered pillars, gave Paul and Barnabas the hand of fellowship; but Titus, who was with them, was not given, because he had not yet reached such a degree that he could be entrusted with the important work (mercimonia) of Christ on an equal basis with the elders, and so that he too would occupy the same place of activity that Barnabas and Paul occupied. Verse 10: Only so that we remember the poor, which is exactly what I took care to do. (Gal.2:10) - The poor saints, whose care is required of Paul and Barnabas, are those of the believing Jews, who laid the price of the proceeds from the sale of their property at the feet of the Apostles for distribution to the poor, or those whom their fellow tribesmen, relatives and parents considered outcasts, who supposedly needed to be purified, as apostates from the Law and believers in the Crucified One. How much labor the Holy Apostle Paul endured in serving them, his epistles are witnesses to this, for he writes to the Corinthians, and the Thessalonians, and to all the Gentile Churches, so that they prepare this gift to be sent to Jerusalem, either through himself, or through those who are pleasing to them. So now he boldly (confidenter) says that I have already done exactly this. However, by the poor we can also mean another kind of people - precisely those who are spoken of in the Gospel: Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 5:3), because such also deserve to be in the memory of the Apostles. Likewise those poor people about whom Solomon writes: Redemption for a man’s soul is his own wealth. The poor man does not even hear the threat (Prov. 13:8) In fact, he cannot hear about the future horror of punishments, he is poor in faith, poor in grace, having neither spiritual wealth, nor knowledge of the Holy Scriptures, which is compared with gold, silver and precious stones. Consequently, if it is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick, then it was fitting for the Apostles, who extended the hand of fellowship, not to despise the poor, not to neglect sinners, but to always remember them, just as Paul remembered that Corinthian, whom, although he punished for a time, - in the first epistle - so that through the body, which labored in the work of repentance, he would be saved in spirit (1 Cor. 5:5), and in the second epistle he again calls to the Church so that he is not struck by more sorrow than he should; and he asks everyone to affirm their love for him and show mercy to their brother, as he himself [Paul] showed to each of them before the face of Christ, in fulfillment of the condition imposed on him in Jerusalem, that he should always remember the poor. Verses 11-13: And when Peter arrived at Antioch, I confronted him to his face, for he was being reproached. Indeed, before some of Jacob appeared, he ate food with the pagans, and when they appeared, he began to shy away and separated himself out of fear of those who were from among the circumcision, and the rest of the Jews sympathized with his pretense, so that even Barnabas was carried away by them in their pretense. (Gal.2:11-13) - From the fact that Peter, before the arrival of some from Jerusalem, ate food with the pagans, it is revealed that he did not forget the first instruction: that no one should call any person common (communem), or unclean; but since for the sake of those who thought that the Law still had to be kept, he gradually deviated from cohabitation with the pagans (so that even the rest of the Jews, like Barnabas, who preached the Gospel with Paul among the pagans, were forced to do the same); but those who in Antioch believed in Christ from the Gentiles and were not circumcised were prompted to go over to the heavy yoke of the Law: they did not understand the condescension of Peter, through which he wanted to save the Jews, but thought that this was the case on the basis of the Gospel. So, when the Apostle Paul saw that the grace of Christ was in danger, and that the ancient enemy (bellator) was using a new way to fight; then, in order to correct Peter's condescension [to the Jews] with a new condescension of the opposite quality, he opposed him openly, but not in order to expose his intention, but so that through his open (in publico) rebuke those who believed in Christ from the Gentiles would be saved, since Paul arose as his [Peter's] accuser. Therefore, if anyone thinks that Peter really met with opposition from Paul, who, for the sake of the truth of the Gospel, intrepidly insulted his predecessor [the Apostle]; then such a one will not understand (non ei stabit) that Paul himself was a Jew for the Jews in order to win the Jews, and that he himself is responsible in the same pretense when he shaved his head completely (facto calvitio) in Cenchrea, carried an offering to Jerusalem, circumcised Timothy and walked barefoot - which undoubtedly was among the ritual actions (caeremoniis) of the Jews ( Acts 18:18, 16:3). So, if the same one who was sent to preach to the pagans did not consider it useless to say: Do not be a stumbling block to the Jews and to the church of God, just as I myself please everyone in everything, not seeking what is good only for me, but for many, so that they may be saved (1 Cor. 10:32-33), and yet did something that was contrary (contraria) to the Gospel, so as not to lead the Jews into temptation: then on what On what basis does he dare to reproach Peter, who was the Apostle of the circumcision, because he himself was the Apostle of the Gentiles, and deserves to be reproached for what he himself allowed? But, as we said before, he publicly (secundum faciem publicam) with a feigned objection opposes Peter and the others [brothers or false brethren] in order to expose their pretense in keeping the Law, which harmed the Gentile believers, and so that both of them (uterque populus) would be saved, some by praising circumcision and following Peter, and others who did not want to be circumcised - through open approval of Paul's freedom of action. And the words: subjected to reproaches, with the addition: because he abstained from eating food together, are said so that we understand that Peter deserved reproach not so much from Paul as from those brothers with whom he had previously eaten food, and from whom he then separated. And that pretense for a time can be useful and acceptable, this is shown to us by the example of the king of Israel Jehu (Jehu); who could kill the priests of Baal only by pretending that he wanted to honor the worship of an idol; he says: Gather for me all the priests of Baal; for if Ahab served Baal in a little, then I will serve in much (2 Kings 10:19). So did David, when he changed his face before Abimelech, and let him go, and left (1 Sam. 21:12-13) 9. It is not surprising if righteous people pretend somewhat for a while for the sake of saving themselves and others, when our Lord Himself, having no sin and sinful flesh, took on the likeness of sinful flesh, so that, having condemned sin in the flesh, He would make us in Himself the righteousness of God. There is no doubt that Paul read in the Gospel of the Lord, who commands: If your brother sins against you, then go and correct him [privately] between yourself and that one. If he listens to you, then you have gained your brother (Luke 17:3) 10. How then, if it is commanded to do this in relation to the least brothers, would he have dared to publicly reprove the greatest Apostle so uncontrollably and persistently, if Peter himself was not pleased with this method of reproof, and Paul did not want to offend the one about whom he had previously said: I came to Jerusalem to see Peter, and stayed with him fifteen days; and I saw no other of the apostles; and then: He who assisted Peter in his mission to the circumcision; and finally (infra); Peter, and James, and John, who were considered pillars, and other things that he says in his praise. Several times, while still a youth, I took part in disputes in Rome and practiced drawing up objections before imaginary opponents, for which I went to the tribunal, where I saw the most outstanding speakers arguing with each other with such heat that often, leaving their affairs, they turned to personal reproaches and mutually tormented themselves with poisonous ridicule. If they do this so that those who are defended do not arouse suspicion of treason against the cause, and deceive the surrounding people, then what do we think about such pillars of the Church - Peter and Paul - what should such vessels of wisdom do between Jews and pagans who disagreed with each other, but not enter into a visible dispute, so that peace would come between believers, and sacred disagreement between them would lead to the unity of faith in the Church. There are those who under Cephas 11, to whom Paul opposed, as he writes: in the person, they see not the Apostle Peter, but another, out of seventy disciples, called by this name. They say that Peter could in no way deviate from the way of life with the pagans, since he also baptized the centurion Cornelius; and when he came to Jerusalem, then, while the circumcision came out against him, they said: Why did you go in to people who have foreskin and eat food with them? - He, having told about the former vision, concluded his answer as follows: Therefore, if God gave them the same grace as he gave to us who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ; then who was I that I could hinder God. When they heard this, they were silent and glorified God, saying: So, God also gave to the Gentiles repentance leading to life. [Such objectors insist on this opinion] especially because Luke, the writer of the past life (scriptor historiae), does not mention this misunderstanding in a single word and does not even say that Paul was ever in Antioch with Peter; and on the other hand, this opens up the possibility of slander from Porphyry if we began to believe that Peter fell into error, or Paul boldly denounced the chief Apostle (principem apostolorum). Such interpreters must first of all answer that I do not know that we know the name of any other Cephas, except the one who in the Gospels and in other letters of Paul, as well as in this very one, is called (scribitur) either Cephas or Peter. And this is not because the name Cephas means one thing, and Peter means another, but because what is called by the Greeks and Latins the word petra, the Jews and Syrians, due to the similarity of their language, call Cephas. Finally, the entire flow of evidence, hiddenly directed in relation to Peter, James and John, refutes the above understanding of this passage. And the fact that Luke is silent about this circumstance is not at all surprising, because he, using the freedom of a describer of past events, kept silent about many other things that Paul conveys as about what he experienced; and if one considered it worthy to report something for a known reason, and the other accidentally missed it, then this is not immediately a sign of a contradiction between them. Finally, we accept [the tradition] that Peter was the first bishop in Antioch and from there crossed over to Rome, which Luke is absolutely clear about. kept silent. In the extreme case, if, in view of Porphyry’s slander, we need to invent another Cephas, so as not to think that Peter fell into error, then in Holy Scripture much more should be excluded, because he attacks because he does not understand this. But if Christ commands us, then we will act against Porfiry in another work; and now let's move on. Verse 14: But when I saw that they were not walking straight to the truth of the gospel, I spoke to Peter in the presence of everyone (Gal. 2:14). - Like those who, having the correct gait, although they pretend to be lame, do not lack legs, but there is some reason why they lame; so Peter, knowing that neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but only the fulfillment of the commandments of God is [important], initially ate food with the pagans, but for a while he began to shy away from them, so as not to lose the Jews to the faith of Christ. Therefore, Paul, in the same way as he, outwardly shows his appearance, confronts him to his face and speaks in the presence of everyone - not so much in order to convict Peter, but in order for those for whose sake Peter expressed pretense to be corrected, or in order to eliminate the exaltation of the Jews and the hopeless position of the Gentiles. Therefore, if someone does not like the interpretation that neither Peter sinned nor Paul made a bold reproof against the elder only for show (ostenditur), he must explain: on what basis does Paul attack in the actions of another what he allowed in himself? If you, even though you are a Jew, live like a pagan and not like a Jew, then how do you force the pagans to Judaize? – He attacks Peter with irrefutable evidence, and in fact, through Peter, those who forced him to do something that mutually contradicts themselves. He says: “If you, Peter, are by nature a Jew, circumcised from a young age, and keeping absolutely all (universi) of the precepts of the Law, now by the grace of Christ you know that they in themselves have no benefit - but serve only as examples and images of the future - and if you eat food with those who are from the pagans, living not as before in superstitions, but freely and without constraint (indifferenter); then how are you now forcing to Judaize those who accepted the faith from among the pagans, now moving away from them and separating and separating from them, as if they were defiled. For if those from whom you distance yourself are unclean, and if you distance yourself from them because they do not have circumcision, then you forcefully force them to receive circumcision and become Jews; although you yourself, being a Jew, live like a pagan. And in a hidden form he indicated the reason why he rebelled against him - precisely because by his feigned behavior he forced them to Judaize in the way they want to imitate him, Verse 15: We are by nature Jews, and not sinners from the Gentiles (Gal. 2:15) - Heretics find fault with this place, who, inventing something ridiculous and unsuitable, say that neither the spiritual nature can sin, nor the earthly nature can do anything righteous. To such we ask: why were branches broken off from a good olive tree, and why were they grafted into the root of a good olive tree from a wild olive tree, if nothing can fall from a good one, nor can anything rise from a bad one? Or: how did he himself (vel) previously persecute the Church, if he was spiritual by nature; or why later did he become an Apostle, if [we assume that] he was born of earthly nature? Therefore, if they insist that he was by nature earthly, we will present [to them] his own words: We are by nature children of wrath, like others (Eph. 2:3). He is a Jew by nature, who comes from the line of Abraham, and was circumcised by his parents on the eighth day. But I will present the entire proof in brief words - [precisely] the meaning here is: “We, i.e. I and you, Peter, (he adds his personality so as not to seem to cause offense), although by nature we are Jews, since we do what is prescribed by the Law, and not sinners from the pagans - who are sinners either generally because they serve idols, or because we now consider them unclean - since we know that we cannot be saved by fulfilling the Law, but only by faith in Christ, then we will believe in Christ, so that the faith in Christ that we had [or: we have] gave us what the Law did not give us. Therefore, if, having departed from the Law, by which we cannot be saved, we pass to faith, which requires not circumcision of the flesh, but a reverent, pure heart, and [if] even now, retreating from the pagans, we instill [agimus] that he who has not received circumcision is unclean: then, consequently, faith in Christ, by which we consider it possible to be saved, is rather a servant of sin than of justification - [faith] which eliminates circumcision and without which everyone becomes unclean. But God forbid [me] that, having once eliminated something and recognized its uselessness for myself, I again begin to defend it. Having once departed from the Law, I died to the Law in order to live in Christ, and being nailed to His cross, and being reborn into a new man, to live more by faith than by the flesh, and with Christ to come out of the world. I hold on to what I once became attached to. Christ did not die for me in vain; My faith in Him would have been in vain if I could have been saved by the ancient Law without His faith. Verse 16: But knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law, but only through faith in Jesus Christ, so that he may be justified by faith, and not by the works of the Law. ( Gal. 2:16 ) - Some say: “If what Paul affirms is true, that is, that no one is justified by the works of the Law, but only through faith in Jesus Christ, then [one must think that] the patriarchs and prophets and saints who were before the coming of Christ were imperfect.” We can convince such by what is here said: "They were not justified who believed that justification could be obtained only through the works of the Law. But the saints who were from ancient times were justified by faith in Christ. Indeed, Abraham saw the day of Christ and rejoiced (John 8:56); and Moses counted the reproach of Christ as greater riches than the treasures of Egypt, for he looked to the reward ( Heb.11:26); and Isaiah saw the glory of Christ (Is.6), as the Evangelist John says, and as the Apostle Jude says about everyone: I want to remind you, who already know everything: that Jesus 12, who saved the people from Egypt, then destroyed those who did not believe (Jude 1:5). Consequently, it is not so much the works of the Law that are condemned as those who are confident that they can be justified only through these works, because the Savior says the same thing to the disciples: If your righteousness does not exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, then you will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 5:20). In this place it is necessary to collect into one [or: consider] how many commandments there are in the Law that no one can fulfill. On the contrary, we must also say about those commandments of the Law that can be fulfilled by those who do not know it. But the workers [doers] of the Law are not justified because they do not have faith in Christ - for example: not to engage in unnatural vice with a husband (ne dormire cum viro dormitatione mulieri), not to commit adultery, not to rob, but to honor father and mother more and do other things that are commanded [in the Law]. Therefore, if about holy men we are presented with examples that, while walking in the Law, they fulfilled everything that was according to the Law, then we will say: That the Law was not made for the righteous, but for the unrighteous, the disobedient, the ungodly, and sinners defiled and unclean (1 Tim. 1:9). But he who has been taught by God has no need to receive instruction even in love, as Paul says: But I do not consider it necessary to write to you about love, for you yourselves have been taught by God to love one another (1 Thessalonians 4:9). Verses 17, 18 [end of 16, 17 and 18]: For by the works of the Law no (omnis) flesh is justified. Therefore, if, seeking justification in Christ, we ourselves turned out to be sinners, is Christ really the servant of sin? God forbid (Absit!) For if I restore again what I have destroyed, then I make myself a traitor. (Gal.2:16–18) – By the works of the Law that flesh will not be justified [or: not justified] about which it is written: All flesh is hay; and all its glory is like the flower of the field (Isa. 40:6), And by faith in Christ that flesh is justified, about which in the sacrament of the resurrection it is said: All flesh will see the salvation of God (Luke 3:6). But according to the lower (humiliorem) understanding, through the fulfillment of the Law, not all flesh was once justified, but only those people who were in Palestine. And now through faith in Jesus Christ all flesh is justified, because His Church is founded throughout the whole world. Verse 19: But through the Law I died to the Law, that I might live to God. (Gal.2:19) – It is another thing to die through the Law [or with the addition: for the Law], but another thing to die for the Law. He who dies for the Law lived for it before death, observing Saturdays and new moons, holidays, having a figurative idea of ​​​​sacrifices, Jewish fables and traditions about the origin of childbirth (genealogias). But after the coming of Christ, when the Law, about which it is written: We know that the Law is spiritual (Rom. 7:14), departed (mortuus est) through the Gospel Law for the former Law, the soul - about which, according to the words of the Epistle to the Romans, it is written: If she enters into marriage while her husband is alive, commits adultery - after the death of her husband, that is, the Old Law, entered into a marriage union with the spiritual Law, to bear fruit to God. That is why the prophet Hosea says to her: Your fruit has been found from Me (Hosea 14:9). The well-known mysterious saying also applies to it: He who is wise and understands it, and understanding and knows it. So, the one who dies to the literal Law through the spiritual Law lives for God, since he cannot exist without the Law of God, but he lives in the Law of Christ. And the one who dies to the Law because of sins is already dead in reality; but it can no longer be said about him: To live for God. And that in addition to the Law of the letter there is also a spiritual Law, the Apostle teaches about this in another place, saying: So, indeed, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good (Rom. 7:12); and Ezekiel speaks on behalf of God: I brought them, that is, the people of Judah, out of the land of Egypt and brought them into the wilderness, and gave them My commandments, and showed them My justifications; Let a man do them, and he will live (Ezek. 20:10–11). But about that Law that produces wrath, for which the Apostle also died, he subsequently says: And I gave (dedi) them commandments that were not good and excuses in which they would not live in them (Ezek. 20:25). The same thing is indicated in the Psalter: Since I have not comprehended knowledge, I will enter into the power of God (Ps. 70:15). I am nailed to the cross with Christ. - Since he said that through the Law he died to the Law, he shows how he died: I was nailed to the cross together with Christ, that is, taking up the cross and following Christ, and sacrificing myself in the suffering itself: Remember me when you come into Your kingdom (Luke 23:42-43), and immediately then hearing the words: Today you will be with Me in heaven If anyone, having mortified his limbs on earth and died to the world, is conformed to the death of Christ, he is nailed together with Jesus and nails the sign (tropaeum) of his death on the tree of the Lord’s suffering. Verse 20: But it is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. (Gal.2:20) - He who once lived in the Law does not live, because he persecuted the Church; but Christ lives in him: wisdom, power, word, peace, joy and other virtues, which if someone does not have, he cannot say: But Christ lives in me. And all this [the Apostle Paul] says in his own person against Peter about Peter. And the fact that I now live in the flesh. – It is another thing to be in the flesh, and [another] to live in the flesh. Indeed, those who exist in the flesh cannot please God (Rom. 8:8-9). Therefore, to those who live well it is said: But you do not exist in the flesh. I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me. – Romans says about God that He did not spare His Son, but gave Him up for us. And now it is said about Christ that He gave Himself: Who loved me, He says, and gave Himself for me. And in the Gospel, where the Apostles are listed, it is added: And Judas Iscariot [or: Scariot] who betrayed Him (Luke 6:16), and again about him: Behold, the one who will betray Me has come near (Matthew 26:46). Regarding the chief priests and elders of the people, Scripture mentions that they condemned Jesus to death and, having bound Him, led him and handed him over to Pilate the governor (praesidi) (Matthew 27, Mark 15). and about Pilate it is again said: He released Barabbas to them, and delivered Jesus, having been scourged, to them so that they would crucify Him (John 19). So: both the Father betrayed the Son, and the Son betrayed Himself, and Judas and the priests betrayed Him to the chief [priests], and finally Pilate himself betrayed Him, delivered into his hands. But: the Father betrayed Him to save the lost world; Jesus gave Himself up to fulfill the will of the Father and His own, and Judas, the priests and elders of the people, and Pilate ignorantly gave up Life to death. But although She gave herself up for the sake of our salvation, blessed and very happy is he who, when Christ lives in him, can say in every thought and action: I live in faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. Verse 21: I do not reject the grace of God. In fact, if justification is through the Law, then Christ died in vain (Gal. 2:21) - Rejects grace, both the one who lives in the Law after the Gospel, and the one who is defiled by sins after baptism. But the one who, according to the Apostle, can say: His grace in me was not in vain (1 Cor. 15:10), [he] can say with confidence: I do not reject the grace of God. And then the following is very necessary to say against those who, after believing in Christ, consider it necessary to keep the commandments of the Law, for it is to them that it should be said: If justification is through the Law, then therefore Christ died [or: would have died] in vain. Or maybe they will show us how Christ did not die in vain if works justify. But even if there are such stupid people, they will not dare to say that Christ died without a reason. So, to the part of the inference that is proposed here, i.e. to the words: For if justification is through the Law, then it follows that Christ died in vain, we must add what can be consistently added and cannot be rejected as follows: “But Christ did not die in vain,” and then we can draw the following conclusion: “Consequently, justification was not through the Law.” – Up to this point [the speech was] against Peter; and now he turns to the Galatians. Gal.3:1. : O senseless Galatians, who has deceived you (fascinavit, enchanted) (Gal.3:1). – This place can be understood in two ways. The Galatians are called unintelligible either because, moving from the highest to the lowest, they began in the spirit and ended in the flesh, or because each country had its own characteristics. The Apostle confirms that the Cretans are always deceitful, evil beasts, lazy gluttons (pigros ventres), as the poet Epimenides said. According to the Latin historian, the Moors are vain, the Dalmatians are cruel. All poets say that the Phrygians are timid. Philosophers boast that Athens produces more naturally capable people. And that the Greeks are frivolous, the idea of ​​this is suggested by Tullius and Q. Caesar in the following words: “Either frivolous Greeks, or ferocious barbarians”; and in [his reasoning] before Flaccus he says: “Innate frivolity and learned emptiness.” Even the people of Israel accuse the entire Holy Scripture of coarseness of heart and stupidity (dura cervica). In my opinion, the Apostle, with the above words, reproaches the Galatians for their local [natural] peculiarities. Although some, entering into the discussion of deep questions, as if in order to avoid the heretical doctrine that speaks of the difference of nature, assert that the Tyrians and Sidonians, the Moabites and Ammonites, the Edomites, the Babylonians and the Egyptians and all the nations named in the Scriptures, had [indeed] some characteristics, but this is due to previous causes and according to the qualities of previous deeds, so that the justice of God is not subject to doubt, since every nation is recognized as either good or evil, that is, with qualities that other people do not have. And we, rejecting these thoughtful arguments, will follow what was said above, and we will argue that the Apostle either reproaches the Galatians for their foolishness, as a result of which they could not distinguish between the spirit of the Law and the letter, or rebels against their natural (gentis - national) vice, since they are disobedient and stupid, and do not easily learn wise instructions. And the further words: Who deceived you (1 Cor. 11) (?) we must explain in a manner worthy of Paul (although Paul was not skilled in speech, but not in wisdom), i.e. not in the sense that he recognized divination, which, according to the common people, brings evil; but in the sense that he used a common expression and, both here and in other places, used everyday speech. We read in Proverbs: A gift torments the eyes of the envious. The fact that you read envious (invidus) is expressed more significantly in Greek by the word seducer (fascinator - sorcerer, sorcerer who can cast the evil eye). And in the book of Wisdom, attributed to Solomon, it is written: The deceitfulness of evil darkens good (Wisdom 4:12). From these examples we learn that either an envious person is tormented at the sight of another's well-being (filicitate 13), or one who has some benefit is subject to some harm when another charms (fescinante 14) him or envies (invidente) him. They say that witchcraft primarily harms children and children and those who are not yet walking on the path with a firm foot. Therefore, one of the pagans says: “I do not know which eye enchanted my tender lambs” (Virgil. Eclogue. 3). God sees whether this is right or not, because it may be that demons serve this sin and turn away from good deeds those people whom they see either beginning in the work of God or improving. Our question now is that, in our opinion, the Apostle took an example from popular opinion. Thus, just as the age of childhood (tenera) is represented as susceptible to harm from divination, the Galatians, newborn (nuper nati) in faith in Christ, and still fed on milk, and not on solid food (1 Cor. 3), were damaged, as if someone had bewitched them, and they were weakened by the womb of faith (stomacho fidei nauseante). They cast out the food of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, if anyone wants to object to us, then let him explain how the valley of the giants 15 in the book of Kings (2 Kings 23:10) (?), the sirens 16 and onocentaurs 17 in Isaiah (Isaiah 34:13–14), Arcturus, Orion and the Pleiades 18 in the book of Job (Job 9:9) and etc. similar expressions that have their source and beginning in the fabulous legends of the pagans. Let us therefore ask Marcion regarding this passage, since he denies the prophets: how will what follows be interpreted? Before whose eyes Jesus Christ was written, crucified in you. - Indeed, in truth, the One was written for us, about the tree of the cross, suffering, strangulation and scourging, Whom the whole face of the prophets predicts; so we learned about His suffering on the cross not only from the Gospel, in which He is depicted crucified, but long before He deigned to descend to earth. And considerable praise for the Galatians is that they believed in the Crucified One exactly as He was ordained to them, that is, diligently reading the prophets and learning all the sacraments of the Old Testament, they came to faith through life and obedience to the commandments of God. In some collections of the Holy Books (codicibus) it reads: Who deceived you not to believe the truth? But since this is not in the lists of Origen (Adamantii), we have omitted it. Verse 2: This is the only thing I want to know from you: whether we received the Spirit by the works of the Law, or by the hearing of faith. (Gal.3:2) - There are indeed, he says, many things that can convince you of the need to give preference to the Gospel over the Law; but since you are foolish and absolutely cannot listen to this, I turn to you with a simple speech and want to find out what is imposed on the question by itself: did the works of the Law, the observance of the Sabbath, circumcision and the new moon, given to you, give you the Holy Spirit you received, or, on the contrary, instruction in faith, through which you became believers from pagans? But if it cannot be denied that the Holy Spirit and the powers that at the beginning of faith follow the reception of the Spirit are given to us not through the works of the Law, but through faith in Christ; it is obvious that, having started as the best, you plunge into the worst. But let us carefully consider what he did not say: I want to know from you whether you have taught the Spirit through works, and with the addition: through the works of the Law, for he knew that Cornelius the centurion also received the Spirit through works (Acts 10), but not through the works of the Law, which he did not call. If, on the contrary, they say: “So, the Spirit can be received without listening to instructions in faith”; then we will say that Cornelius actually received the Spirit, but from the ear of faith and according to the natural Law, which says in our hearts what good we should do and what evil we should avoid; through him, as we know, Abraham, Moses and other saints were once justified; it can be strengthened by both the performance of works and justification through the law, but not through the Law of the flesh, which has passed through. But by giving preference to faith, we do not destroy the works of the Law (Rom. 3:31) and do not say with some: Let us do evil until good comes (the condemnation of such is just), but we prefer grace to slavery; We say: “What the Jews do out of fear, we do out of love.” They are slaves, and we are sons; they are forced to do good, and we undertake to do it voluntarily. So, faith in Christ does not serve as a basis for permissibility of crimes against the Law; but out of love from faith, the desire to do good deeds increases, not because we fear the Judge, but because we know how pleasing they are to Him in whom we believe. Perhaps someone will ask: “If faith comes only from hearing instructions in faith, then how can those who are deaf from birth become Christians?” Indeed, everyone can understand God the Father by the greatness and beauty of creatures, and the Creator, therefore, is known through the study of created things. But the birth of Christ, his suffering on the cross, death, can be known only through oral preaching (ex auditu) So: either the deaf are not Christians, or, if they are Christians, then the word of the Apostle in another place is false: So, faith comes from hearing, and hearing from the word of God “He who is content with a simple answer says the following to this: “The Apostle did not say at all that the faith of all comes from hearing, but only: faith comes from hearing, which can be understood both in general and in particular in the sense that faith comes from hearing, the faith of those who hear, who believe.” And whoever will try to satisfactorily resolve this petty question, let him first of all try to point out that the deaf can learn the Gospel through the movements of the hands, through observation of daily life, and, so to speak, through bodily movements similar to the word. Therefore, the word of God, to which nothing is deaf at all, speaks primarily to those ears about which it itself speaks in the Gospel: He who has ears to hear, let him hear (Luke 8:8), and in the Apocalypse: He who has ears, let him hear what the Spirit says to the Churches (Rev. 2:11). And the prophet Isaiah says: The Lord has given me an ear (Is. 50:4-5)) This is that other person to whom God speaks in secret, Who cries in the heart of the believer: Abba, Father (Rom. 8:15); on the other hand (we have spoken about this more than once) just as the body has all the members and feelings, so the soul also has absolutely all the feelings and members, and between them are ears, and if anyone has them, then he does not really need these bodily feelings to know the Gospel. At the same time, pay attention to the fact that here the named Spirit is understood without any addition: the Holy Spirit is the Spirit whom we receive as a gift - from God, and not from people, and about which in another place it is written: The uncorrupted Spirit is in everyone (Wis. 12:1), and: The Spirit Himself gives testimony [or: will give] to our spirit (Rom. 8:16), and in another place: No one knows what is in a person except the spirit human living in him (1 Cor. 2:11), and from the prophet Daniel: Bless the Lord, O spirits and souls of the righteous (Dan. 3:86). Verse 3: You are so foolish that although you began by the Spirit, you are now being finished in the flesh (Gal.3:3). – If they received the Holy Spirit, then in what way are they unreasonable? This is immediately resolved in the sense that although they actually received the Holy Spirit, the Spirit was taken away from them when they became flesh. Therefore, they suffered what they suffered without reason. And so that after the crime (peccatum) the Spirit does not leave David, he prays in the words: Do not take Your Holy Spirit from me (Ps. 50:13). Notice that a person who follows the letter of the Scriptures is called one who is finished in the flesh. Therefore, the word addressed to the Corinthians: While we live in the flesh, let us not make war according to the flesh (2 Cor. 10:3) is better understood to mean that those who reverently treat the Old Testament are called warring in the flesh. And those who follow the spiritual understanding, although they are in the flesh, because they have the same letter as the Jews, do not fight according to the flesh, since they are elevated from the flesh to the spirit. Therefore, when you see that he who first believed [in the Gospel] from among the pagans, and laid his hand on the side of Christ [plough, plow] under the guidance of some reasonable teacher, continues to walk towards the Gospel along the path of the Law, so that he understands everything written there about the Sabbath, unleavened bread, circumcision, slaughtering sacrifices in a manner worthy of God; and then, after reading the Gospel, under the influence of the convictions of some Jew or like-minded Jew, leaving behind shadows and vague allegories, he begins to understand the Scriptures as they are written; Then about this person you can say: “You are so foolish that although you once began in the spirit, you are now ending in the flesh.” Verse 4: You have suffered so many things without cause, if only without cause 19 (Gal.3:4). – If we look at the unfortunate Jews, in what superstition and with what difficult to observe caution they live among other nations, saying: “Do not touch, do not taste, do not touch”; then we recognize the truth of what has been said: You have suffered so much without a reason. But at the same time, the Apostle does not soften his sentence directly, but only gives it the appearance of doubt: if only for no reason, because here we are talking about those who, after the Law, can turn to the Gospel. It is better to understand this passage in such a way that the Galatians, who first believed in the Crucified One, suffered many reproaches from both the Jews and the pagans, and suffered very great persecution (non minimas persecutiones). Now they hear the reproof that they have suffered in vain, if they only turn away from the grace of Christ. At the same time, the hope remains that the one who suffered for faith in Christ, and then fell into sin, while he sins, it is as if he suffered for no reason; this hope does not make previous suffering fruitless; if he again turns to his former faith, he returns to his former behavior. Another meaning (aliter): If, he says, you think that circumcision should come after grace, then by living until now without circumcision, you have made all that you have endured unfruitful. However, it seems to me that you did not endure this in vain, since I know that the Law has no force after the Gospel. Or it may be like this: There was considerable harm from the fact that, following the Law of Circumcision, you ruined such a great previous work of faith, and now this damage is also accompanied by responsibility for impermanence, so that in the past you suffered without reason, and in the future you will endure torment. Some, to explain this passage, allow the following stretch: "Think about the former freedom of grace and the burden of the present observance of the Law, and you will see how much you have done in vain, although undoubtedly the fruit of this error should not be considered lost, for you were led to it by zeal for God. Indeed, mercy can be shown to those who do not know, if you, turning to the best, show that in you It was your knowledge that wavered, not your determination to achieve achievements. Verse 5: So he who gives you the Spirit and works within you [works] by the hearing of faith, or by the works of the Law. (Gal.3:5) – The giver (qui tribuit), i.e. the doer (administrat) must be understood in the sense of the present [and not: the giver] to show that in every single hour or moment the Holy Spirit is always given to the worthy; and the more someone improves in the work of God and love, the more he has in himself the power of the Holy Spirit, which does not do the works of the Law, but the hearing of faith. This does not mean that the works of the Law should be despised, and that without them one should strive for simple faith, but that the works themselves should be adorned with faith in Christ. After all, the famous (illa) saying of a wise man is known: “He who does not believe lives by righteousness, but the righteous man lives by faith.” At the same time, it is shown that the Galatians, having received the Holy Spirit after faith, had the gifts of strength, i.e. prophecy, kinds of tongues, healing from diseases, and so on, which are counted in the letter to the Corinthians among spiritual gifts (1 Cor. 7:7-11); and yet, after receiving so many gifts (perhaps because they did not have the gracious gift of discerning spirits), they were entangled in the snares of false teachers. It is also necessary to pay attention to what is said about the action of powers in those who do not hold the truth of the Gospel, just as in those who, not following the Lord, performed miracles in His name, as John especially asks the Lord about this: Teacher, we saw someone who casts out demons in Your name, and we rebuked him, because he does not follow us (Mark 9:38). This is said against heretics who see the justification of their faith in the fact that they can perform some sign. Although they will eat and drink in the name of the Lord - because they also have a sacrilegious altar - and will boast that, calling on the Savior, they will perform many signs, yet on the day of judgment they will hear according to their merits: I do not know you; depart from Me, you who do injustice (Matt. 7:23). Verse 6: So Abraham believed God, and [it] was counted to him as righteousness (Gal.3:6). – From this place to the words: Those who are of faith will be blessed with faithful Abraham (Gal.3:6-9), Marcion excludes from his “Apostle”. But why did he exclude this, when the rest he retained contradicts his nonsense? And Abraham believed God, leaving his fatherland for a land he did not know (Gen. 12) (ff.), firmly believing that the barren ninety-year-old Capa would give birth to a child; and sacrificing that same Isaac, although he heard the promise of God that in Isaac the offspring (semen) were assigned to him, but did not at all doubt its fulfillment. In justice, faith is credited as righteousness to one who has surpassed the works prescribed by the Law and has acquired God for himself [or: will acquire God for himself] not through fear of Him, but through love for Him. Verse 7: Know therefore that those who are of faith are the children of Abraham. (Gal.3:7) - He discusses this more fully in the letter to the Romans, namely, that faith was imputed to Abraham as righteousness, not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision (Rom.4:10). And carefully preserving this thought, he teaches that those are the children of Abraham who believe with the same thoughts as the uncircumcised Abraham; for he was glad to see and rejoiced when he saw the day of the Lord (John 8:56). Therefore, it is said to the unbelieving Jews: If you were children of Abraham, you would do the works of Abraham (John 8:39). But what other works (at the time when this was said) did God require of them, except faith in the Son of God, whom the Father sent with the word: Whoever believes in Me does not believe in Me, but in Him who sent Me (John 12:44). Therefore, in another place, people who were proud of the antiquity and nobility of the family were given the following answer: And do not say that we have a father Abraham. For the Lord is able to create children (suscitere filios) for Abraham also from these stones (Matthew 3:9). No one doubts that the stones there refer to the rough hearts of the pagans, who after that softened and accepted the banner of faith. The good deeds of Abraham, by which he was pleasing to God even before circumcision, you, diligent reader, count, and if you find anyone with similar deeds, then tell them that they are the children of Abraham, justified in uncircumcision, because he received the sign of circumcision not because of the merits of his deeds, but as a sign of his previous faith. But since from his seed Christ was to be born, in whom the blessing of all the pagans was promised, and since many centuries had to pass from the time of Abraham to Christ; then God, preventing the descendants of beloved Abraham from mixing with other nations, and his family little by little turning into an unknown, once marked the flock of Israel with the seal of circumcision, so that, living among the Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians and Chaldeans, they would be distinguished from them by this sign. Then, during the forty years of life in the wilderness, no one was circumcised, because they alone lived in the wilderness without any other mixture; but immediately after the people crossed the Jordan and after the invasion of the Jewish crowd into the land of Palestine, circumcision became necessary to prevent a future merger with the pagans. And the fact that the leader Joshua [Joshua] again writes the people as circumcised (Josh. 5:2-4) has the meaning that circumcision, which was wisely used in Egypt, ceased in the desert, in which those who believe from the Lord Jesus Christ should be circumcised with spiritual circumcision. Verses 8, 9: And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, foretold to Abraham that “in you all nations will be blessed.” So those who are of faith will be blessed with faithful Abraham (Gal. 3:8-9) - This does not mean that the Scripture itself, that is, ink and sheets of skin, which in themselves have no meaning, can foreknow the future, but that the Holy Spirit and the meaning that is hidden under the letter proclaimed what was to happen after many centuries. Then: an example borrowed from the book of Genesis, as read in the scroll containing this book (proprio volumine): And through your seed all the nations of the earth will be blessed (Gen. 26:4). What the Apostle explained about Christ, saying: It is not written: “about seeds, as if they were many, but as if they were one, and your seed, which is Christ,” we must notice the same about almost all the testimonies that are taken from the Old Testament books in the New Testament, namely, that the apostles and evangelists committed them to memory, explaining only the meaning, and often, changing the order of the words, sometimes omitting [part of] them, and sometimes adding [others]. There is no doubt for anyone that all nations were not blessed, neither in Isaac, nor in Jacob, nor in the twelve patriarchs and others who came from the root of Abraham, but in Jesus Christ, through whom all nations praise God, and a new name is blessed on earth. However, one can also understand that the Apostle borrowed the example of a seed from another place in the book of Genesis, where it is written: God brought out (no doubt Abraham) and said to him: Look at the sky and count the stars, if you can count them. And he said to him: So shall your seed be, and Abraham believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness (Gen. 15:5-6). So those who believe will be blessed with faithful Abraham, of whom it is said, because of his excellent faith in God, that he believed in God as the first. Likewise, Enos, for his superior hope in God and exalted in comparison with others, is depicted as hoping to call on the Lord God (Gen. 4:26). This is not because Abel, about whom the Lord says: The voice of your brother’s blood cries out to me (Gen. 4:10), and then the rest did not hope to call on God, but because each is called by that side of himself, which is predominantly revealed in him. At present, in the second book of commentaries on the Epistle to the Galatians, it seems to me necessary to return to what I left untouched in the first book, when I spoke about the characteristics of the pagans, namely: who are the Galatians, or from whom and where did they come from; whether they were born on the land they now inhabit, or whether it accepted them as strangers; whether they lost their language due to alliances [with other people], or whether they did not lose theirs, and learned something new. Marcus Varro, the most diligent researcher of all antiquities, and others who imitated him, reported much worthy of memory regarding this people. But since we have decided not to bring the uncircumcised into the church of God, and, frankly confessing, we have stopped reading this for many years, we will present the words of our Lactantius, which he gives about this people in the third scroll of the work to Probus. He says: "The Gauls in ancient times were called Galatians because of the whiteness of their bodies, and Sibylla calls them that. The poet also wanted to show this when he says: Then they tied gold around their necks, white as milk (Virgil. Aeneid. book. VIII) when he could say: white. Hence, of course, the name of the region Galatia, for the Gauls, once coming to it, mixed with the Greeks; therefore the country was originally called Gallogrecia, and then Galatia." It is not surprising if he spoke about the Galatians, and mentioned that they, the Western people, having missed such a large space in the middle of the lands, sat down on the plains of the East; since the opposite is also known, that is, that those who moved from Greece and the East reached the extreme limits of the West. Massilia [Marseilles] was founded by the Phocians, about whom Varro says that they know three languages, that they speak Greek, Latin and Galician. The city of Roda was inhabited by immigrants from the Rhodians, from which the river Rodanus [Rhone] got its name. I pass over the Tyrians, the founders of Carthage, and the city of Agenora, which he founded in Africa, this is the city now called Thebestia; cities. I turn to Spain: weren’t settlers from the island of Zakynthos founded Saguntum, and don’t they say that the city of Tartesson was inhabited by the Ionian Greeks, now it is called Cartea? And the Spanish mountains: Calpe, Idruntos, the Pyrenees, as well as the islands: Aphrodisias and Gymnesia, called Balearic, do not they show traces of the Greek language? Italy itself, once filled with Greek people, was called Magna Graecia. Of course, no one can deny that the Romans descended from the descendants of Aeneas the Agian. From this it is clear why the natural qualities of the living Greek spirit are often found in the West, and barbaric rudeness appears in the East. We do not want to say that in a [known] country and in this or that place people of different [qualities] are not born, but that according to the qualities of the majority, even that which does not resemble it receives a name. So, it is not surprising that the Galatians are called both unintelligible and [compared to others] slower in understanding, although Hilary, the Rhone [river] of Latin eloquence, by origin a Gallic and Pictavian, in a poem from the Hymns (in Carmine Hymnorum) calls the Gauls ignorant. And the fact that some of them are prolific in eloquence relates rather to the fruits of their teachers of eloquence than to the qualities of their country, especially since Aquitaine boasts of its Greek origin, and the Galatians do not come from this part of the country, but from among the more bestial Gauls. Paul and Eustochius, do you want to know how the Apostle Paul designated each area according to its characteristics? And to this day traces of the same virtues or errors [of the inhabitants of these countries] remain. The Roman people boast of faith (Rom. 1:8). In what other place do people gather with such diligence and constancy to churches and tombs of martyrs? where is “Amen” proclaimed like thunder from heaven, and where are the empty churches of idols falling apart? But this does not mean that the Romans have a different faith than the rest of the Churches of Christ; but it only proves that they have greater piety and simplicity in faith. On the other hand, they are convicted of frivolity and pride. In frivolity where it says: I ask you, brothers, that... You should beware of those who cause strife and temptations contrary to the teaching that you have learned, and that you should turn away from them, for people of this kind serve not Christ our Lord [or with the addition: ours], but their own belly, and with flattering speeches and eloquence (benedictionibus) they captivate the hearts of the innocent. Your obedience is known to everyone in every place. Therefore, I rejoice over you, and desire that you be wise for good and simple for evil (Rom. 16:17-19); but he accuses him of pride where it says: Do not be proud, but be afraid... I do not want you, brothers, to not know this mystery, lest you be wise in your own eyes (ipsi vobis), (Rom. 11:20, 25); and in the following words: For I say, according to the grace given to me, to all who are among you, not to philosophize more than you ought to philosophize, but to philosophize soberly (Rom. 12:3). Finally, even more clearly: Rejoicing with those who rejoice and weeping with those who weep, showing mutual agreement (idipsum invicem sentientes), not being arrogant, but agreeing with the humble, do not be wise in your own eyes [apud vosmetipsos, (Rom. 12:15-16)]. The Apostle also denotes the peculiarities of the Corinthians by the fact that their women do not cover their heads, and the men anoint their hair (1 Cor. 11:4-15), that they indifferently eat [all food] in the churches [or: at a certain time] (2 Cor. 11:20), and, puffed up with secular wisdom, they deny the resurrection of the flesh. In part, these qualities remain with them to this day, as anyone who sees Achaia can undoubtedly see (1 Cor. 4). The Macedonians boast of their love and thoughtfulness towards their brethren. Therefore he writes to them: We have no need to write to you about your love for the brethren, for you yourself have learned from God to love yourself mutually; and indeed you do this concerning all the brethren throughout all Macedonia (1 Thess. 4:9). But at the same time they receive reproaches for walking idly from house to house, and while waiting for other people’s dishes until everyone likes them, they go here and there and report what is happening in everyone’s house. Indeed, he then says: We ask you, brothers, that you may have more abundance and be diligent to be calm, to do your own work and work with your own hands, as we commanded you, and to walk honestly before those outside, and not desire anything else (1 Thessalonians 4:10-12). And lest anyone think that this admonition is only a consequence of his duty as a teacher, and not caused by the real lack of the people, in the second [epistle] to them he repeats again persistently: For even when we were with you, we told you about this; if anyone does not want to work, let him not eat. Indeed, we have heard that some among you live restlessly, doing nothing, but acting like curious people. To those who are such, we proclaim and adjure them in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, that while they labor in silence they may eat their own bread (2 Thess. 3:10-12). It would be a very long time if I wanted to review, according to the words of the Apostle and all the Scriptures, both the virtues of individual nations and their vices; for from what we have said we have come to understand why the Galatians are called foolish and insensitive. Anyone who knows Ancyra, the main city of Galatia, knows, like me (mecum), how many schisms have torn it apart to this day and how great differences in doctrine have dishonored it. I will not talk about the Catathrygians, Ophites, Barbarites and Manichaeans; for these names of human misfortune are already known. But who ever in any part of the Roman world heard the names Passalorinctae, Ascodrobi [Ascodrogi] and Artothirites and other even more amazing [divisions] than even their names. And to this day traces of their senselessness remain. One of them, which we report and thus fulfill the promise given in the introduction, is precisely that the Galatians, in addition to the Greek language spoken by the entire East, had their own language, almost the same as the Trevirs [tribe of Gauls]; however, it is not particularly important that they spoiled something here and there, since the inhabitants of Africa in some respects changed the Phoenician language, and the Latin language itself changes daily in different countries over time. But let's return to the question taken for solution. Verse 10: Indeed, all who live by the works of the Law are under a curse, for it is written: Cursed is everyone who does not continue in everything that is written in the book of the Law, to do it (Gal. 3:10). – I have such a habit that, as soon as something is borrowed by the Apostles from the Old Testament, I turn to the books themselves (originales libros) and carefully consider how this borrowing is recorded in its place. Thus I found in Deuteronomy this very passage translated by the Seventy Interpreters as follows: Cursed is every man who does not continue in all the words of this Law, to keep (faciat) them; and all the people will say [or: says]: “Let it be.” (Deut.27:26). and Aquila says this: Cursed is he who does not establish the words of this Law in order to fulfill them. And all the people will say: “It is true.” Symmachus: Cursed is he who does not establish the words [or with the addition: these] of this Law to fulfill them. And all the people will say: “Amen.” Then Theodotion translated this: Cursed is the one who does not set [before himself] the words of this Law in order to fulfill them; and all the people will say: “Amen.” From this [comparison] we will understand that the Apostle, as in other places, cited the meaning of the words rather than the words themselves; and, in addition, it is unknown whether the Seventy added the words: every man and: in everything, or whether it was so in the Hebrew text, and then it was thrown out by the Jews. What prompts me to this assumption is the fact that the words: everyone and in everything in their meaning seem to be necessary to affirm that all who live by the works of the Law are under a curse, and the Apostle, the most learned man of Jewish education in the Law, would never have used them if they had not been in the Hebrew scrolls. Therefore, while re-reading the Hebrew Books of the Samaritans, I found there the word chol, which means: everyone or everyone, which is also consistent with the translation of the Seventy Interpreters. So, it was in vain that the Jews threw out these words, so as not to appear that they were under a curse if they could not do what was written [in the Law], because the most ancient copies of another people testify that these words were in the books. But since no one can fulfill the Law and do all that is commanded, the Apostle testifies in another place, saying: since this was impossible for the Law, before which because of the flesh [man] was weak, then God, sending His Son in the likeness of the flesh of sin because of sin, condemned sin in the flesh (Rom. 8:3). If this is true, then they may object to us: “Consequently, Moses, and Isaiah, and the other prophets who lived under the works of the Law are under a curse?” Anyone who hears the words of the Apostle: For Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us, let him not be afraid to answer this in the affirmative and affirm that each of the saints in his time was a curse for the people. But while we assimilate this advantage to the righteous, we should not seem to belittle the Savior, as if He had nothing special and excellent, having become a curse for our sake, when others were cursed for the sake of others. In fact, none of them, although he himself became a curse, freed anyone from the curse, except only the Lord Jesus Christ, Who with His priceless Blood redeemed us all from the legal curse, and those - I’m talking about Moses and Aaron, and about all the prophets and patriarchs. And lest you think that I said this as my own opinion (ex meo sensu), Scripture testifies to this: for Christ by the grace of God, or - as it is read in some copies (exemplaribus): without God - died for all (2 Cor. 5:14-15) 20. If for all, then for Moses and for all the prophets, not one of whom was able to tear up the old handwriting that was written against us and nail it to the cross ( Col. 1:14): All have sinned and have need of the glory (gloria, or: in grace - gratia) of God ( Rom. 3:23) Ecclesiastes also affirms this thought: Man is not righteous for earth, who would do good and not sin (Eccl. 7:20). Finally, the further word of the Apostle clearly teaches about this that neither Moses nor any other glorious man from the ancients could be justified before God through the law. For what follows: Verses 11, 12: But since no one is justified by the Law before God, it is evident that the righteous man lives by faith. But the Law is not of faith; but whoever does what is written in it (qui fecerit ea), he will live by it (Gal. 3:11-12). – The Apostle presented the proof (exemplum) that the righteous man lives from faith, and not from works, from the book of the prophet Habakkuk, since the Seventy Interpreters translated it as follows: The righteous man lives by My faith (Hab. 2:4), Aquila and Theodotion: The righteous man lives by His faith, that is, God. So, it is necessary to keep in mind that he did not say that a person or husband lives by faith, so as not to give reason to despise good works, but said: The righteous lives by faith; This is so that the one who is faithful and has to live by faith can only begin to approach faith or live in it, as soon as he first becomes righteous and has purity of life, ascending to faith as if by certain degrees. So, is it possible that someone will be righteous, and yet will not live without the faith of Christ? If the reader has doubts, then let him accept the words of Paul, who says about himself: According to the righteousness that corresponds to the Law, without reproach. So, Paul was then righteous in accordance with the Law, but he could not yet live, because he did not have Christ in him, who says: I am life (John 11:25), and believing in whom he then began to live. Let us also do something similar to what is said: The righteous lives by faith and we will say: “The blameless lives by faith, the wise lives by faith, the strong lives by faith,” and we will pronounce the corresponding judgment about the other components of the virtues in refutation of those who, not believing in Christ, think that they are strong and wise, self-controlled or just: let such know that no one lives without Christ, without Whom every virtue is insufficient (in vitio est) The real word of the Apostle can be read this way: that the righteous is by faith, and only then add: lives [or: will live]. And in the words of the Apostle: The law is not of faith; but he who observes his instructions will live by this, it is most clearly shown that he is not talking about a simple life, but about a life that is related to something. The righteous truly lives from faith and there is no added: “in this” or: “in that.” But he who lives in the Law, fulfilling its instructions, lives in this, that is, in what he did, what he considered good; The reward for his exploits for him is only the deeds he has done or longevity (according to the Jews) of life, or the avoidance of punishment to which a criminal against the Law is subjected. We think that the words: But he lives by this do not belong to the Apostle, but to the prophet Ezekiel, who says: I brought them out into the wilderness and gave them My commandments, and showed them My justifications, so that man would fulfill them and live by them (Ezek. 20:10-11). But although he says that those who walk in commandments and justifications will live, he adds the following: And he gave them ungood commandments and justifications in which they will not live in them (Ezek. 20:25) What caution in expressions! When he said: He gave them commandments and justifications in which they would live in them, he did not add: good ones; and when he said: in which they will not live in them, he added: I gave them commandments that were not good, and so on. But this will be discussed in more detail in the interpretations of Ezekiel; and now let us return to the order of speech of the epistle [to the Galatians]. Verse 13: Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us (Gal. 3:13) - Based on this passage, Marcion hastens to blaspheme the power of the Creator. He represents Him as bloodthirsty, cruel and vindictive [or a judge, i.e. instead of: vindicem, – judicem], and claiming that we are redeemed through Christ, Who is the Son of another good God. If he [Marcion] had understood the difference in the concepts of buying and redeeming (emere et redimere), then he would never have distorted the simple words of Scripture for the purpose of blasphemy of his teaching, because he who buys acquires something that belongs to others, and whoever redeems acquires in the proper sense what is his own, but which has ceased to be his. So, Christ has redeemed us from the curse on the basis of the Law [from the legal oath], which is determined by those who sin, whom He himself rebukes through the prophet in the following words: Behold, you were sold for your sins, and for your iniquities I released your mother (Is. 50:1). The Apostle repeats the same thing, saying: But I am carnal, sold under sin (Rom. 7:14). On the other hand, the curses recorded in the book of Leviticus and Deuteronomy are not fulfilled by God Himself, but are proclaimed by the prophetic spirit only what is to happen to people who will sin. Therefore, if he wants to defeat us [coarctare] with the word of the Apostle: Those who live by the works of the Law are under a curse, for it is written: Cursed is everyone who does not continue in everything that is written in the book of the Law to do it (Deut. 27:26), and assert that all those who were under the law were cursed, then we will ask him: “Whether those who live under the grace of the Gospel of Christ are cursed or not, if do they not fulfill His commandments? If he answers that they are cursed, then he will have in the Gospel what we have in the Law. If he says that they are not cursed, then the conclusion will follow that the commandments of the Gospel were given in vain, and those who fulfill them will remain without reward. So, both are resolved as follows: how Christ freed us from the curse on the basis of the Law, becoming a curse for our sake; Thus He delivered (eruit) us from the curse on the basis of the Gospel, the curse placed on those who do not fulfill His commandments, having become a curse for our sake, knowing also that the slightest part of this talent would not be released to us, and the very last coin would be exacted from us (Matthew 5:26, Mark 12:2) (?). Verse 14 [end of 13 and 14]: For it is written: Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree, so that the blessing of Abraham in Jesus Christ might be also for the Gentiles, so that through faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit (Gal. 3:13–14). – Before discussing the meaning in the Apostle’s expressions, it seems fair to us to explain in a few words the testimony of Deuteronomy, from which the Apostle took these words, comparing this place with the text of other publications. So, the Seventy Interpreters translated this passage as follows: But if there is a sin in anyone that is subject to the death penalty (et judicium), and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree: then let his body not fall asleep [non dormiet, Greek. οὐκ ἐπικοιμηθήσεται = will not rest, Slavs .: will not suffer, Russian .: should not spend the night] on a tree, but bury (sepelientes sepelietis) him on that day; For cursed of God is everyone who hangs on a tree, and do not defile your land, which the Lord your God has given you as an inheritance (Deut. 21:22-23). Aquila: And when a man has a sin subject to the death sentence [or: and death sentence], and he is killed, and you hang him on a tree, then his corpse should not remain on the tree for a long time, but bury him on that day, because the curse of God is on the one who is hanged; and do not defile your land, which the Lord your God has given you as an inheritance. Symmachus: If a man’s sin is worthy of death, and he is killed, and you hang him on a tree, then do not let his corpse remain on the tree overnight, but bury him on that very day, because he was hanged for blasphemy against God, and you shall not desecrate your land, which the Lord your God has given you as an inheritance. Theodotion: And when a person has a sin that deserves a death sentence, and he dies and you hang him on a tree, then let his corpse not sleep (non dormiet) on the tree, why should you bury him on that very day, because the hanged man is the curse of God, and you will not defile your land (adama) which the Lord your God has given you as an inheritance. Then adama (אדמה) in Hebrew means: earth, or soil. And in the place where Aquila and Theodotion translated in the same words: for the hanged man is the curse of God, in the Hebrew language it stands like this: chi calaluth eloim thalui. Evion, a famous half-Christian and half-Jew, translated these words as follows: ὅτι ὕβρις Θεοῦ ὁ κρεμάμενος, i.e.: because a hanged man is a disgrace to God. I remember that in the bickering between Jason and Papiscus, which is set out in Greek, I found the following translation: λοιδορία Θεοῦ ὁ κρεμάμενος, i.e.: a hanged man [is] a reproach to God. A Jew, who taught me some Scripture, told me that this passage can also be read in this sense: Because God was hanged with dishonor. We have collected all this because this is a very important question, usually raised by the Jews against us as a dishonor - the question that our Savior and Lord has become a curse in the eyes of God. So, first of all, we must pay attention to the fact that not everyone hanging on the tree became a curse before God, but only the one who sinned, and for a crime worthy of death, was condemned and ascended to the cross; he is cursed not because he was crucified, but because he fell under such responsibility that he deserved death by crucifixion. Then it must also be objected that the reason for death on the cross is more fully explained below, since Scripture says that such a criminal was crucified for a curse and blasphemy against God, which Symmachus more clearly translated in the words: Because he was hanged for blasphemy against God. Finally, let us ask them: “If Hananiah, Azariah and Mishael, who did not want to bow to the idol of Nebuchadnezzar, were hanged on a tree (Dan. 3) (?), as well as ninety-year-old Eleazar under King Antiochus of Syria and the famous mother with her seven sons (2 Mac. 7) (?); then should they be considered cursed, or worthy of every blessing. Of course, if Haman, by his own merit, had not ascended the cross that he prepared for Mordecai, then, in my opinion, Mordecai would have ascended it not as a damned man, but as a holy man. These and other similar considerations prove that the one who committed a crime worthy of the gallows is cursed, and not the one who was crucified as a result of the injustice of the judges, as a result of the violence of enemies, or as a result of the cries of the black people, or out of envy of his virtues, or as a result of the royal wrath. Once Naboth (or: Nabutham) was condemned by the entire city of Jezebel to death, according to a letter from Jezebel (1 Kings 21:8–11); however, his blood, in type of Christ, was avenged many centuries later, for the Lord says to Hosea: Call his name Israel, for a little while longer (adhuc modicum), and I will require the blood of Israel from the house of Jehu (Hos. 1:4). It's against the Jews. However, returning to my misunderstanding (ut ad nos redeat disputatio), I cannot say (scire) why the Apostle in the words of Scripture: Cursed of God is everyone who hangs on a tree (Deut. 21:23) or has missed something or added something. Indeed, since he already followed the opinion of the Seventy, he should have, as we have done, add the name of God. And if he, as a Jew of Jews, considered the most faithful what he read in his own language, then he should not have added the words: every and: on the tree, which are not in the Hebrew [list]. Therefore, it seems to me that either the Hebrew books once had something different from what they now [have], or the Apostle, as I said before, set forth only the meaning of the Scriptures, and not their words; or, which is more plausible, someone added the name of God in both the Jewish and our collections of sacred books in order to cover us with disgrace for the fact that we believe in Christ, supposedly cursed by God. So, I boldly enter this contest and, referring to the books, I affirm that no one has been cursed by God, and that where a curse is placed, the name of God is never added. The serpent is told: Cursed are you from all the beasts of the earth (Gen. 3:14); and to Adam it is said; Cursed is the earth because of your deeds (Gen. 3:17); and to Cain: Cursed are you on the earth (Gen. 4:11); and in another place: Cursed is the lad Canaan, he will be a slave to his brothers (Gen.9:25); and in another place: Cursed be their anger, for it is cruel, and their wrath, for it is fierce (Gen. 49:7). It would be very long if I began to list all the curses that are described in the books of Leviticus, Deuteronomy and Joshua; and, however, in none of them is the name of God added, so that even Satan himself, when he gives guarantee for Job that he will blaspheme under the oppression of the greatest suffering, expressed the highest degree of this with the words: If he does not bless You in person (Job 1:11). And in the book of Kings, Naboth is depicted as being stoned because he blessed God and the king (1 Kings 21:10), (in Russian: blasphemed). However, no one should be embarrassed that Christ became a curse for our sake, because God also appears to have made Him a curse; He Himself made Him to be sin for us (for Christ knew no sin); and Christ, by descent from the fullness of the Father's being, humbled Himself, taking on the appearance of a servant (Phil. 2:7): He was dead in life, and the wisdom of God was called foolishness, so that the foolishness of God was wiser than men (1 Cor. 1:25) and in the sixty-eighth Psalm He speaks of Himself: God, You know my foolishness, and my sins are not hidden from You (Ps.69:6). So the reproach of the Lord is our glory. He was killed that we might live; He descended into hell so that we could ascend to heaven; He became foolishness so that we might become wisdom; He took off the image and fullness of the Divinity from Himself, so that the fullness of the Divine might dwell in us, and from slaves we would become masters. He hung on a tree so that, nailed to it, he could use the tree to destroy the sin that we committed through the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. His Cross turned bitter waters into sweetness, and lifted up the ax that was lost and drowned in the waves of the Jordan (2 Kings 6:5-7). Finally He became a curse, I say: made, and not: born, so that the blessings promised to Abraham would be transmitted to the nations by the Creator Himself (auctore) and Leader, and the promise of the Spirit would be fulfilled in us through faith in Him, which we can understand in two ways: either in the sense of spiritual gifts of virtues, or in the sense of spiritual understanding of Scripture (1 Cor. 9). Verses 15-18: Brethren, I speak from human reasoning: yet no one despises the established testament of man, or determines more [in it]. The promises were given to Abraham and to his seed. He did not say: “to the seeds” [descendants], as if about many, but “to the seed,” as if about one, and your seed, which is Christ. And this is what I call a covenant established by God; that is, the law, which appeared four hundred and thirty years later, He does not make in vain, so that the promise becomes powerless; For if the inheritance is by the Law, it is no longer by the promise; but God gave it to Abraham according to the promise (Gal. 3:15–18). - The apostle, who became all things to all, who considered himself obligated (debitor) to serve the Greeks and barbarians, the wise and the foolish, even for the Galatians, whom he had previously called foolish, became senseless. For in relation to them he does not use the proofs that he used before the Romans, but uses simpler ones, which could be understood by unreasonable people, even [taken] from the street. And so that it does not seem that he is doing this out of inexperience and lack of art, he first reassures the reader and moderates what he had to say, prefacing the preface: Brothers, I speak according to man. Indeed, what I have to say, I speak according to man, and not according to God, I do not speak in accordance with revealed wisdom, and with the strength of those who can feed on solid food, but with the strength of those who, due to the tenderness of their belly, feed on the moisture of milk and are completely unable to assimilate that which is great (1 Cor. 7:2). Therefore, in addressing the Corinthians, about whom it became known that adultery had been revealed among them, and such that is not found even among the pagans, he said: I speak, not the Lord (1 Cor. 7:12); and in the second letter to them: What I say, I speak not according to the Lord, but as if in foolishness (2 Cor. 11:17). Some think that the Apostle said: Brethren, I speak according to man, meaning human wills, the death of a testator and other examples taken from human life; and it seems to me that these words are prefaced, both by the motive that they indicate, and by what especially follows, namely: And he did not say: “to the seeds” [descendants], as if in relation to many, but as if about one: and to your seed, which is Christ. Having carried my mind and memory to all the Scriptures, I did not find anywhere that it was written: “seeds,” that is, in the plural, but always in the singular, either in a good or bad meaning. Also about what he says: And this I call a covenant established by God, anyone who carefully compares the Hebrew scrolls and other publications with the translation of the Seventy Interpreters will find that where it is written: Covenant, there is a word that does not mean: Covenant, or testament, but agreement, which in Hebrew is expressed by the word Berith (ברית). From here it is obvious that the Apostle did what he promised, using not a meaning hidden for the Galatians, but an ordinary and simple one, which, if the Apostle had not warned that he was speaking according to man, reasonable people might not have liked. In this place we must understand the years that have passed from the time when the Lord said to Abraham: And in your seed all nations will be blessed (Gen. 22:18) until the time when Moses the lawgiver appeared. Did four hundred years really pass, or how in the book of Genesis does the Lord promise Abraham himself that after four hundred years his descendants will come out of Egypt? Indeed, this is an important question, studied by many, but I don’t know if it has been completely resolved by anyone. This passage also agrees with what is said in the same book about Tamar and her two little ones (Gen. 38), namely, that the first, named Zara, showed his hand [from his mother’s womb], and the midwife tied a red thread, and then when this hand moved back, the second, named Perez, put out his hand; this means that Israel showed its hand to fulfill the works of the Law, and then, staining it with the blood of the prophets and the Savior Himself, removed it; and then the pagan people came forward, about which the Scripture very often says that through them the barrier that separated the Jews and the pagans was destroyed and overthrown, so that there would be one flock and one shepherd, and so that there would be glory and honor and peace to every person who does good: first to the Jew, and [then] to the Greek. The simple meaning of this passage is that, as the Apostle teaches, the promise given to Abraham before the Law cannot be destroyed by the Law, and [should not] prefer the later to the previous: for in four hundred and thirty years the promise was given to Abraham that in him all nations would be blessed. And the observance of the Law, which if anyone fulfills, then lives in it, was prescribed thirty years later on Mount Sinai by Moses. Here we can say the other way around: Why was it necessary to give the Law after so many years from the time of the promise, if after the proclamation of the Law a suspicion could arise that the promise [the contract] was eliminated, and vice versa, with the retention of the meaning of the promise - the thought that the Law has no importance? Anticipating this objection, the Apostle, in his further speech, objects to himself in this sense and gives an answer. Verses 19, 20: So what? The law was given because of transgressions, until the seed came for whom the promise was given, it was established through angels in the hand of a mediator; but there is no mediator for one. And God is one (Gal.3:19–20). - Since, with the promise remaining in force, the Law, subsequently given through Moses, seems to have been given in vain, the Apostle explains why it was given: for the sake of crimes, he says. Indeed, after the rebellion of the people in the wilderness, after the worship of the calf and murmuring against the Lord, the law came into force to counteract transgressions, because the law was not assigned to the righteous, but to the unrighteous, the disobedient, the ungodly and sinners (1 Tim. 1:9), and returning to the highest [I say that] after idolatry - which they indulged in in Egypt, so that they forgot the God of their fathers and even became to say: Israel, these are your gods, who brought you out of Egypt - the order (rite - ritus) of worship and punishment of criminals against the Law was established by the hand of the Mediator, [i.e. e.] Jesus Christ, for through Him all things were made and without Him there was nothing: not only heaven, earth, the sea and everything that we see, but even that which through Moses was imposed, as it were, the yoke of the Law on a hard-hearted people (John 1:1-14). And the Apostle writes to Timothy: For there is one God and one mediator between God and people, the man Jesus Christ (1 Tim. 2:5). After, for the sake of our salvation, the Mediator between God and people, the man Jesus Christ, was deigned to be born from the womb of the Virgin, He is called the Mediator. But before He took on the body of man, even in the beginning God the Word was with the Father: He is called only a mediator without the addition: man, whom He had not yet perceived, - [mediator] in relation to all the saints, who was the Word of God, namely: Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and after that Moses and all the prophets mentioned in the Scripture. And his words: The Law was established through Angels, inspire the idea that throughout the Old Testament, where an Angel is first depicted speaking, after that it appears as if God is speaking. Indeed, out of very many ministering spirits, one Angel was visible, but through him the Mediator spoke, who says: I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob (Ex. 3:6). It is not surprising if God speaks in Angels, if even through Angels who are among people, God, according to the word of the prophet Zechariah, speaks in the prophets: And the Angel who spoke in me said (Zechariah 2:3); and at the beginning he made the remark: This says the Lord Almighty. In fact, even the Angel, who spoke in the prophet according to the word of Scripture, did not dare to say on his own behalf: This says the Lord Almighty. By the hand of the Mediator we must understand His power and strength. Although He himself is one with His Father according to Divinity (secundum Deum), yet according to the ministry of the Mediator he is understood as separate from Him. But since the order of words here is confused and the meaning is complicated by the rearrangement of words, it seems to us that it should be restored in this way: the Law was given through Angels by the hand of a Mediator, because of crimes it was established through Angels, until the seed comes to whom the promise is given. But there is no doubt that the seed signifies Christ, who, according to the words at the beginning of the Gospel of Matthew, appears to be the son of Abraham, for Scripture says: The book of the kinship of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham (Matthew 1:1). Verses 21–23: But, then, is the Law contrary to the promises of God? God forbid! For if a Law had been given that could give life, then indeed righteousness would have come from the Law. But Scripture has concluded all things under sin, so that the promise might be given to those who believe by faith in Jesus Christ. And before faith came, we were locked up under the Law for that faith that was about to be revealed (Gal. 3:21-23). – Just as the mediator between God and people is the middle between the giver and the receiver of the Law, so the Law itself, given after the promise, took a middle place between the promise and its fulfillment. It should therefore not be considered as excluding the promise, since, having followed the promise, it seems to destroy it. But from the fact that he could not revive and deliver what was promised in the original promise, it is obvious that he was given not to overthrow the promise, but to protect it. For if a Law were given that could give life and fulfill what was promised by contract, then, indeed, the Law could be considered to exclude the promise. But in reality (nunc) it was given, as we said above, because of crimes, and rather convicts sinners, to whom it was given after the promise, as if as a guard (in custodiam) and, so to speak, as a prison, so that those who did not want in innocence by free will to expect the fulfillment of the promise, encountering an obstacle in the bonds of the Law and brought to serve the Commandments, were preserved for the coming of the future faith in Christ, which represented the fulfillment (finem – end) of the promise. But Scripture should not be considered the author of sin due to the fact that it appears to have concluded everything under sin, since the Commandment, emanating from [legal] right, rather reveals and exposes sin than serves as its cause. And this is the same as the judge is not the creator of the crime, putting chains on criminal people, for he imprisons them and declares guilt with his imperious sentence, so that later, if he wishes, with the highest leniency he will release them, the guilty ones will suffer punishment. Verses 24-26: Therefore the Law was our teacher in Christ, so that we might be justified through faith, but when faith has come, we are no longer under the teacher. For you are all children of God through the faith that is in Christ Jesus (Gal.3:24–26). – A teacher is assigned to children in order to curb the liveliness of their childhood and restrain the inclination of their hearts to vices, until childhood is formed that is receptive to studies and, through the action of fear of punishment, will be prepared for the highest human wisdom and government. However, the teacher is not a teacher and father, and the person being educated does not expect from him either an inheritance or knowledge: the teacher protects someone else’s son, having to leave him after the legal time for accepting the inheritance. And the very name of the educator has exactly this meaning and [in the Greek form: teacher] is composed of the words: lead and children, because he guides them. In the same way, the Law of Moses was given to the people, who were in a childish state, as a strict educator, in order to protect them and prepare them for the future faith, after the onset of which and after our faith in Christ, we are no longer under the guidance of an educator: the protector and trustee departed from us, and we, entering our legal age, are already called true children of God, to whom we were not born by the destroyed Law, but by Mother Faith, who in Christ Jesus. Therefore, if anyone wants to live under the guidance of a teacher, when he is already called an heir, and a free man, and a son, then let him know that he can no longer live according to the laws of childhood. In the grandfather himself, where can that injunction be fulfilled, which reads: Three times a year shall every man of your sex appear before the Lord your God (Ex. 23:17), after Jerusalem has been destroyed and even the ashes of the church have been scattered? Where are salvation sacrifices and sin offerings offered? Where, in the likeness of the heavenly stars, does the fire of burnt offerings burn when the altar is completely destroyed? What punishment can now be determined for criminals according to the word of Scripture: Remove the evil one from among you (Deut. 13:5), when the Jews are in a slave state and the Romans dominate? At the same time, it will be that they will not live under the authority of their father or under the guidance of an educator, since the Law cannot be fulfilled after the onset of faith, and Faith is not preserved when they look for a guide in the Law. Verses 27, 28: For those who were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is no [now] Jew, there is no Greek; There is no slave, there is no free man, there is no man, there is no woman. For you are all one in Christ Jesus (Gal.3:27–28). - How we are converted into children of God (nascamur filii Dei) through faith, which is in Christ Jesus, he shows with the words: Those who were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. And that Christ is a garment is proven not only from this place, but also from another, which the same Apostle says: Put on the Lord Jesus Christ (Rom. 13:14). So, if those who were baptized into Christ put on Christ, then it is obvious that those who did not put on Christ were not baptized into Christ, for to those who are faithful and are considered to have followed the baptism of Christ, it is said: Put on the Lord Jesus Christ. If anyone accepts only this bodily and visible with the eyes of the flesh washing with water, he is not one who has been clothed in the Lord Jesus Christ. Indeed, the famous Simon of the Acts of the Holy Apostles also took a bath in water, but since he did not have the Holy Spirit, he was not clothed in Christ (Acts 8:9-22) (?). Also, heretics, and hypocrites, and those who lead an unclean lifestyle, although, apparently, have received baptism, I do not know whether they have the robe of Christ. So, let us pay careful attention to ensure that among us no one is convicted of not having received baptism, but since the one who once receives the robe of Christ and is placed in the flame [to be tested] will shine with the fiery light of the Holy Spirit, he will not raise doubts as to whether he is gold or silver. While the heat thus engulfs the entire substance (massam), one fiery brilliance is noticeable, and any distinction of gender and bodily characteristics is hidden by this kind of clothing. For there is neither Jew nor Greek. By the name Greek we must mean pagan, because the word Ἕλλην at the same time designates both Greek and pagan. And a Jew is not better because he is circumcised, nor is a Gentile worse because he has foreskin; but both the Jew and the Greek are better or worse in the quality of their faith. A slave and a free man also differ not in their living conditions, but in their faith, because a slave can be better than a free man, and a free man can be superior to a slave, [and all this] according to the quality of faith. In the same way, the male and female sexes differ in their comparative weakness and strength of body. But (caeterum) faith is determined by the strength of spiritual goodwill, and it often happens that a woman serves as the cause of salvation for a man, and a man precedes a woman in the matter of faith. And when this is the case, that is, when all distinctions between the origin of social conditions and bodily dissimilarity are destroyed by baptism into Christ and the putting on of Him, then we are all one in Christ Jesus, so that just as the Father and the Son are one in themselves, so we are one in them. Verse 29: If you are Christ's, then you are the seed of Abraham, heirs according to the promise (Gal. 3:29). - Since the promises were given to Abraham and his Seed, which is Christ, it follows that the children of Christ, that is, His seed, are also called the seed of Abraham, being the seed of his seed. It is true that whenever our Lord is called the seed of Abraham, this must be understood in a bodily sense, that is, in the fact that He was born from his root. And when we, after perceiving the teachings of the Savior, believe in Him and receive the nobility of the race of Abraham, to whom the promise was given; then we must understand the name in a spiritual sense, in the sense of the seed of faith and preaching. Finally, we must also pay attention to the fact that when it is said about the Lord: promises were given to Abraham and to his seed, that is, Jesus Christ, then he uses the word promise in the plural. When it speaks of those who are the seed of Abraham through Christ, the promise is placed in the singular, as in the present place: You therefore are the seed of Abraham, heirs according to the promise, because it was fitting that what is said in plural about the one Christ should be designated in the singular in relation to many people. Then follows: Gal.4:1–2. : I say: The heir, as long as he is the heir, is no different from a slave, although he is the master of everything; but he is under the direction of trustees and stewards until the time predestined of the father (Gal. 4:1-2). - This heir, no different from a slave, although he is the Master of all, is under the guidance of stewards and trustees - this is the entire human race until the coming of Christ and - even more (ut amplius dicam) - until the end of the world. For just as all those in the primordial Adam die before being born, so all those who were born before the coming of Christ are quickened in the second Adam. Moreover, the situation is such that we, in the person of our fathers, were in slavery to the Law, and by grace they will be saved in the person of the children. This understanding is in agreement with the Catholic Church, which asserts that the providence of the Old and New Testaments was one and the same, and does not distinguish by periods of time those who were placed in the same conditions. We are all built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, resting on the same cornerstone - Jesus Christ our Lord, who united both of them and, having destroyed the middle barrier, destroyed in His flesh the enmity of both peoples, and replaced the difficulty of fulfilling the ancient Law with the integrity of the Gospel teachings (dogmatum), (Eph. 2:20). Truly we are all one bread in Christ, and on earth the two are united together. And just as we were built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, so the patriarchs were built on the foundation of the apostles. And by leaders and rulers we can also understand the prophets, with whose words we were taught daily about the coming of the Savior, just as the Law of Moses was considered above as an educator, as well as the angels of children, daily contemplating the face of the Father and interceding for them; about these angels it is said: He will send the angels of the Lord around those who fear Him, and will deliver them (Ps. 33:8). By them we can understand the priests and princes who then ruled over the nations, and now give rules that must be obeyed. And, in fairness, those are considered under the guidance of protectors and rulers who, having a spirit of fear, have not yet been worthy to receive the spirit of freedom and adoption. In fact, childhood is afraid, committing sin, afraid of the teacher, and does not believe that he is free, although by nature he dominates [over everything]. But according to the twofold understanding, according to which educators and stewards, as we said, are either prophets or angels, this child is under the guidance of protectors and stewards until the legal age of a perfect man is fulfilled. And the legal age, according to Roman laws, is determined by the time of twenty-five years, thus determining the time of the coming of Christ for the perfection of the human race. And immediately after his coming and after we had become perfect men, our leader and protector departed from us. Then we took advantage of the power of the master and the property of the heir, to whom we were previously considered aliens, although we were born in this dignity. Verse 3: So we also, while we were children, were slaves in subjection to the constituent parts of the world (Gal. 4:3). – He calls the components of the world the same ones that he previously spoke of as protectors and stewards, because being first placed under the leadership of these primates and not yet understanding the coming of the Son of God to us, we were prepared through such media. Some people think that angels are those who rule over the four constituent parts of the world (elementis), that is, over earth, water, fire and air, and it is necessary that whoever believes in Christ should initially be under their control. Many people believe that by the constituent parts of the world we must understand heaven and earth and what is between them, because the Greek sages, the barbarian peoples, and the Romans, with the abomination of all sorts of superstitions, worshiped the sun, the moon, the seas, the gods of the mountains and forests; we freed ourselves from them when Christ came, for we understood that these are the essence of creatures, and not deities. Others understand by the components of the world the Law of Moses and the sayings of the prophets, because through them we perceive, as it were, the beginnings and preliminary knowledge of the Scriptures, [i.e. e.] the fear of God, which is the beginning of wisdom. Finally, to those who should already be perfect, but, having neglected the truth, are still only clinging to the firstfruits of Christian teaching, the Apostle in the Epistle to the Hebrews writes: Although in time you should be teachers, [but] you again have the need to learn what the essence of the firstfruits of the word of God is (Heb. 5:12). On the contrary, it may be objected to us that in the Epistle to the Colossians the Apostle calls something else the components of the world, saying this: See to it that no one deceives you with philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the components of the world, and not according to Christ (Col. 2:8). But from what he added: according to human tradition and: by empty deception he shows that in the epistle to the Colossians and Galatians he calls not the same thing the constituent parts of the world. Indeed, when the fullness of time came, we were redeemed from these constituent parts of the world and, ascending to the highest, we accepted the sonship of the children of God. However, nothing is said about them like what follows; and the Scriptures are simply called the constituent parts of the world. So, as we said, the Law of Moses and the Prophets can be understood in the sense of the rudiments of writing [or: Scripture], because through them syllables and names are connected, and they are studied not for the benefit of them themselves, but for another purpose, namely, so that we can read a composed prayer, in which attention is paid more to the meaning and arrangement of words than to the original laws of writing. As for the fact that we interpreted the Law and the Prophets in the sense of the firstfruits of the world, then [it must be borne in mind that] the world is usually used in the meaning of those who live in the world, as the same Paul says: God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself (2 Cor. 5:19); and in the Gospel: And the world was through Him, and the world knew Him not (John 1:10). Some speak even more freely when interpreting this passage - namely: since the Law has a shadow of future blessings, they ask whether we will first be children in that other world about which the Savior says: I am not of this world (John 8:23), and placed under the firstfruits and main parts, will we then gradually reach perfection and will again take the place of adoption that we once lost. Verse 4: And when the fulness of times had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman and under the Law, to redeem those who were under the Law, so that we might receive adoption as sons (Gal. 4:4-5). – Think diligently about what he did not say: born through a wife, which Marcion and other heretical teachings want to [introduce], saying that Christ took on ghostly flesh; but he said: from a woman, so that they may believe that he was born of Her, and not through Her. And the fact that he called the holy and blessed Mary a wife, and not a Virgin, we also find in the Gospel of Matthew (Matthew 1:19, 20, 24), [and then] when she is called the wife of Joseph (Luke 2:5), and when she is reproached from the Lord himself as a wife (John 2:4). This is because there was no need to always call Mary the Virgin with caution and prudent fear, since the word wife (mulier) rather denotes a difference in sex than marriage with a man, and according to the meaning of the Greek language, the word γυνή can be understood both in the sense of wife (uxor, conjunx), and in the sense of woman in general. But it is necessary to reconsider everything (ut cuncta praeteream): just as He was under the Law in order to redeem those who were under the power of 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 accepted baptism in the waters of the Jordan, as if repentant, although he was free from sin, in order to teach that others must also be cleansed through baptism and reborn into children (of God) through a new adoption of the Spirit. Completely not understanding this, John the Baptist forbade Him to proceed to baptism, saying: I must receive baptism from You (Matthew 3:14), but at the same hour he receives the sacramental instruction (sacramentum docetur): Now leave (sine modo), for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness (Matthew 3:15); this is so that the one who came to save people does not omit anything that relates to the behavior of people. But someone may ask and say: “If He was therefore under the Law in order to redeem those who were under the Law, then - since it was precisely impossible to redeem those who were under the Law if He Himself were not under the Law - it follows that either He was outside the Law (sine Lege) in order to redeem those who were not under the Law, or if He Himself was not outside the Law, then He does not redeem those who were not under the Law. Therefore, if it was possible to redeem those who were outside the Law, so that He Himself was not outside the Law, then it follows (ergo) that He was in vain and unnecessaryly under the Law in order to redeem those under the Law? This question can be briefly resolved by one who takes advantage of the well-known passage: And He was numbered among those who were without the Law. For, although in the Latin collections of St. Books and this place was incorrectly published, due to the simplicity of the interpreters, namely: He is numbered with the lawless (cum iniquis), (Luke 22:37); however, it is necessary to know that among the Greeks the word ἄνομος, which is used here, has one meaning, and the word ἄδικος, which is found in the Latin collections of the Holy Books, has another; for the word ἄνομος denotes one who lives without law and is not bound by any right, and the word ἄδικος means an unjust or unjust person. Therefore, the Apostle himself says in another place: Although I was not without the law of God; but was in the law of Christ (1 Cor. 9:21); and it is certain that in this testimony it is written in Greek: ἄνομος; and the one who translated correctly here could have translated the same word there in a similar way, if only he had not been deceived by the ambiguity of expression. And the other [translator] examines the word redeemed (redimeret) more carefully and says that the redeemed denote those people who were at first from among the people standing on the side of God, and then ceased to be such; but those who were not under the Law were not so much redeemed as purchased. Therefore, in his letter to the Corinthians, among whom the news of adultery had spread, and, moreover, of such adultery, which was unheard of even among the pagans (1 Cor. 5:1), the Apostle writes: You were bought and not redeemed precisely because they were not under the Law. So, we have accepted the sonship of the children of God and have been redeemed by Christ, and have ceased to be under the slavery of the main components of the world and under the authority of trustees. But we have already shown the difference between redeem and buy. In a similar way, let us think about what the difference is between: to receive and: to return the sonship of [God's] children. Verse 6: And since you are sons of God, God sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying: Abba, Father! (Gal.4:6). – The Apostle obviously calls Three Spirits: the Spirit of the Son of God, as in the present place: God sent the Spirit of the Son into our hearts (Rom. 8:16), and the Spirit of God, as in the well-known place: Those who are only led by the Spirit of God are the sons of God (Rom. 8:14) and, finally, the Holy Spirit, as in the following place: Your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, which is in you ( 1 Corinthians 6:19). But that the Holy Spirit is something different from the Spirit of the Son, there is clear evidence of this in the Gospel: Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, neither here nor in the age to come (Luke 12:10). This [I say] because many, out of ignorance of Scripture, as Firmian also does in the eighth book of the Epistles to Demetrius, assert that the Holy Spirit is often called either the Father or the Son. And although we very definitely believe in the [Holy] Trinity, yet they, destroying the Third Person, imagine that this is not a [separate] Being (substantia), but only a [separate] name. In order not to go too far, because I am not writing a dialogue (dialogus), but only an interpretation, I will briefly show that in the fiftieth psalm three Spirits are named; for the prophet says this: God, create in me a clean heart and renew a right Spirit in my womb; do not cast me away from Your presence, and do not take away the Holy Spirit from me. Give me the joy of Your salvation and strengthen me with the original Spirit (principali) (Ps. 50:12-14). He calls the Father the original Spirit, because the Son is from the Father, and not the Father from the Son. And by the name of the right Spirit, the Spirit of truth and righteousness, he calls Christ the Lord: For the Father has given all judgment to the Son (John 5:22), as David says: God, give Your judgment to the king and Your might to the Son of the King (Ps. 71:1). Finally, with a clear name, he calls forth the Holy Spirit. True, they are different in persons and names, but in essence and nature they are united: and therefore the same Spirit, by the unity of nature, is called either the Spirit of the Father or the Spirit of the Son. - With this ending, the Apostle concluded the proof on which he is trying to establish himself - namely, that we are no longer under the Law, but under the grace of the Lord Jesus. Above he said: So that we may receive sonship as children of God; now he says that we are the sons of God, which is proven by the Spirit, which we have in us, for never, he says, would we dare to say: Our Father who art in heaven; Let Your name be hallowed except by the awareness of the Spirit living in us and with a loud voice of feelings and teachings crying: Abba, Father (Rom. 8:15). Abba is a Hebrew word meaning the same as the word: Father. And in many places of the Scriptures the custom is preserved that the Hebrew word is placed together with its translation. So Bartimaeus [translated] is the son of Timaeus, Aser is riches, Tabitha is a roe (Acts 9:36), and in the book of Genesis Mesech is home-grown (a slave is not bought, but born from a slave belonging to the house), and so on and so forth. And since Abba in Hebrew and Syriac means Father and, on the other hand, since our Lord commands in the Gospel that no one but God should be called Father (Matthew 23:9), then I do not know by what right (qua licentia) in monasteries we call others by this name, and teach ourselves to be called that. If we do not swear, then we should not call anyone else father; and if in relation to the concept: father we introduce a new understanding, then we are forced to do the same in relation to the oath. At the same time, it is also necessary to note that the cry in Holy Scripture does not mean the emission of a loud sound with a voice, but the greatness of knowledge and teaching. In fact, in the book of Exodus the Lord says to Moses: Why are you crying out to me? (Exodus 14:15), although no words had been uttered by Moses before. Scripture calls a cry a truly broken heart that wept for the people with tears. So, just as he who has the Spirit of the Son of God is the Son of God, on the contrary, he who does not have the Spirit of the Son of God cannot be called the son of God. Verse 7: So he is no longer a slave, but a son; Therefore, if he is a son, then he is also an heir through Christ (Gal.4:7). - Having, he says, within you the Spirit of the Son of God, exclaiming: Abba, Father, you began to be no longer slaves, but sons; for before you were no different from slaves, although by nature you were truly God's; but you had to live under the supervision of trustees and leaders, as if you had not reached maturity; Therefore, if you are now sons, then the inheritance should belong to you, so that just as you became sons of God by receiving the Spirit of God, likewise, (ita) being turned from slaves to freemen, you became heirs, together with the heir of the Father Jesus Christ, who says in the psalm on behalf of the humanity He accepted: The Lord said to me: You are My Son, today I have begotten You. Ask of Me, and I will give You the nations for Your inheritance, and the ends of the earth for Your dominion (Ps. 2:7-8). And what we say in this place must also be kept in mind in relation to other places, [i.e. e.] that regarding the entire human race it is said in the singular; because we who believe are all one in Christ Jesus, and we are all members of His Body, and having been raised to the degree of a perfect man, we have Him as our head, because Christ is the head of a man (1 Cor. 11:3). Gal.4:8–9. : But then, not knowing God, you served as slaves to those who by nature were not gods, and now, knowing God, or rather brought by Him to know [Him], how do you return again to the powerless and insignificant principles (elementa), which you want to serve again slavishly? ( Gal.4:8–9 ). – He denounces the Galatians, whom the apostles turned from the veneration of idols to faith in God. [Convicts] that they, having left idols, which by nature were not gods, and knowing God, but rather having been brought to knowledge by Him and having even received the Spirit of sonship, again like little children and those who wish to be under the care of leaders and educators, return to the powerless and feeble principles of the world, which are therefore given for understanding to a weak and weak-minded people, that they cannot perceive and contain more. And the same principles, which he now calls powerless and insignificant, above he called only the principles of the world; and where it is said about the beginnings of the world, it is not added: powerless and insignificant. Here again, where the principles are called powerless, the name of the world is not used, as we said above. So, I think that as soon as someone is in childhood and since the time determined by the Father has not yet been fulfilled so that he can be called an heir and a son, he is under the authority of the principles of the world, namely, under the leadership of the Mosaic Law. And when, after returning to his son the freedom that belongs to him, he again returns to the Law, wanting to be circumcised and follow literally all Jewish superstitions, then what was previously for him only the beginnings of the world, [now] is called a powerless and insignificant beginning. Indeed, they are so completely useless to their admirers that they cannot even give what they gave before, since now Jerusalem, the church and the altar are destroyed. But someone, perhaps, will object like this: “If the Law, and the commandments written in the Law, are powerless and insignificant principles, and if those who knew God, or rather learned knowledge from Him, should not keep the commandments of the Law (in order to begin not so much to honor God, from whom they learned knowledge, but to turn to those who by nature are not gods); then [it follows that] either Moses and the prophets kept the Commandments and did not know God, and did not learn knowledge from Him, or if they knew God, they kept His commandments very little. But it is dangerous to assert both: either they did not fulfill the Law and thus knew God, or they did not know God, since they kept the powerless and insignificant principles of the Law.” This question can be resolved this way from our side (ut dicamus illos): as Paul was a Jew to the Jews in order to win the Jews (1 Cor. 9:20) and in Cenchrea he circumcised his hair according to a vow, and in the temple of Jerusalem he walked barefoot and with a shaved head to calm the hatred of those who spread rumors about him (catechizati de eo) that he was acting against the Law of Moses and God prophets: so the holy men, indeed, fulfilled what was prescribed by the Law (quae Legis erant), but they fulfilled it, following more the meaning of the Law than its letter. They, no less than Abraham, having taken off the veil from their faces, desired to see the day of Christ, and they saw and rejoiced, becoming weak for a weak people, in order to win the weak (1 Cor. 9:22) and for those who were under the Law as if they themselves were under the Law, in order to separate them from the idols which they were accustomed to serve in Egypt. It would be unreasonable to think that Moses and the other interlocutors of God were in such conditions that we do not believe them, and that the time has come, predetermined by the Father, and that they were redeemed from legal slavery and received adoption as sons, and with Christ received an inheritance. Indeed, each individual (quaecunque) wisdom of God is given to the entire human race, as if to [His] only begotten Son; it is always given to each of the saints according to His determination and permission. And since we call the Law of Moses powerless and insignificant principles, heretics find [in this] a reason to blame the Creator for creating the world and giving the Law (sanxerit). With them we will note - the same thing that we said above - these first fruits are powerless and insignificant for those who turn to them after the grace of the Gospel. But before the time predetermined by the Father comes, they are called not so much powerless and insignificant principles, but rather the beginnings of the world. Moreover, the commandments of the Law had their radiance before the Gospel of Christ shone throughout the whole world; and after the stronger light of the grace of the Gospel shone, and the Sun of righteousness appeared to the whole world, the brightness of the stars was hidden, and their rays were darkened, just as the Apostle says elsewhere: For that which was glorified on this side because of the excellent glory was not glorified (2 Cor. 3:10). What is now said, let him express in other words: The Law of Moses, which before the Gospel was rich, abundant and clear, at the coming of Christ became, as it were, powerless and insignificant in comparison with Him, and diminished and eliminated by Him Who was greater than Solomon and the church, and the prophet Jonah. I think that the well-known word: He must increase, but I must decrease (John 3:30) was said not so much from the person of John as from the person of the Law, because the lesser always gives way to the greater, and the perfect is preferred to the firstfruits. On the other hand, under the powerless and insignificant principles, we recognize with conviction (confirmabimus) the Jewish traditions and the literal understanding, which has no value, because they are not good commandments, and not good excuses. The spiritual interpretation of the Law (Ezek. 20) is powerful and rich [in content] (?), so that it either almost cannot be called the firstfruits, or, perhaps, (quidem) and the firstfruits in comparison with the future age and with the life in Christ Jesus, which is now lived by the Angels and the higher powers. But in comparison with the Jewish understanding, this should be called not so much a firstfruits, i.e., a beginning, as a perfection. And the fact that he says: Now knowing God, or rather (magis), having received knowledge from Him, shows that after worshiping idols, the Galatians understood God, or better yet, they themselves were recognized as worthy of knowing Him. These words do not mean that God, the Creator of everything, does not know anything, but the meaning that He is portrayed as knowing only those who have replaced their error with piety: The Lord knows those who are His (2 Tim. 2:19). And the Savior in the Gospel says: I am the Good Shepherd, and I know My [sheep], and Mine know Me (John 10:14). And, on the contrary, it is said to the wicked: I do not know you; depart from Me, you workers of unrighteousness (Luke 13:27); and to the foolish virgins: I do not know you, who you are (Matthew 25:12). Verses 10, 11: You keep days, months and years, I fear [for] you, lest I have labored with you in vain (Gal. 4:10-11). – He who does not honor the Father in spirit and truth does not know the Sabbath rest intended for the saints, about whom God says: If they enter into My rest (Ps. 94:11): and He does not remember those days about which it is said: Remember the days of the age (Is. 46:9); and in another place: I remembered the days of old and kept in mind the eternal years (Ps. 77:6). Such a one observes the days of the Jews, and the months, and the seasons, and the years. Days, such as: Saturdays, new moons and the time from the tenth to the fourteenth day of the first month, when the physical lamb was prepared for sacrifice, and from the fourteenth to the twenty-first of the same month, when unleavened bread was eaten not of purity in truth, but in the leaven of ancient malice and Pharisees' iniquity; [observes] also seven weeks, the one who, according to the Jewish rite of unleavened bread, counts and honors the day of Pentecost; as well as the sound of trumpets in the seventh month on its first day. Also on the tenth day of the same month they observe purification and fasting and the tabernacles that keep the Jewish days. And they observe the first and seventh months, not understanding the mystery of truth. Likewise, the days are honored by those who come to Jerusalem three times annually (ter per annos singulos), imagining that they are fulfilling the commandment of the Lord, who says: At three seasons of the year, keep a holiday for me: the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the Feast of the First Harvest, and the Feast of the End at the end of the year (Ex. 23:14) (ff.). And in another place: At three seasons your male sex will appear before the Lord your God (Ex. 23:17). And his words: and the years, in my opinion, refer to the seventh year of leave [of slaves] and to the fiftieth year, which they call jubilee. The Apostle explains this passage more fully in his letter to the Colossians, saying: Let no one therefore judge you in regard to food or drink, or in relation to the part of the feast day, the new moon and the Sabbaths, which are a shadow of the things to come (Col. 2:16-17). He used part of the holiday here to distinguish it from continuous celebration, so that, so to speak, we would spend not just some part of the whole body, but the entire course of our lives in continuous celebration of Christ. And to connect the previous with the following, I will say that immediately after that he adds in the same epistle what he thinks about the Law of Moses and about excessive care when choosing foods, saying this: For if you died with Christ to the beginnings of this world, then why, as if still living in this world, do you keep the instructions: Do not touch [one or the other], do not taste, do not touch; it is disastrous in its very use, and [this is done] according to the commandments and teachings of men only. But someone will say: “If it is impermissible to observe days and months, and times, and years, then we also commit something criminal by observing [fasting on] Wednesday (quartam sabbati) and Friday, celebrating the Lord’s Day and fasting on Pentecost, celebrating Easter and rejoicing on the day of Pentecost, and, finally, honoring the different times established in them in honor of the martyrs according to different countries.” Whoever answers this simply will say: “The days of the Jewish celebration are not the same as ours. For we celebrate the Passover not of unleavened bread, but the Passover of death on the cross and resurrection, and not according to the custom of the Jews at Pentecost we see the end of seven weeks, but we honor the descent of the Holy Spirit. And some days are established so that the unusual gathering of the people does not diminish faith in Christ, for which we all equally gather together. This is not because the day on which we gather is more glorious, but because on the day appointed for assembly, great joy arises from mutual contemplation of each other.’ And whoever will try to answer the given objection more wittily, let him firmly stand on the fact that all days are equal, and not because Christ was crucified on Friday, and not because on the day of the Lord He rose from the dead, but every day (semper) is a day of resurrection, and in every day let a person eat the Flesh of the Lord. But fasts and meetings were established by wise men for those people who are freer to serve the world than God, and cannot, or at least do not want, to gather in the Church at any time in their lives and, before the beginning of human affairs, to offer the sacrifice of their prayers to God. Indeed, how large is the number of those who always observe, at least these few times, established for fasting or prayer? So, while it is permissible for us to both fast and pray always, and in joy to continually celebrate the day of the Lord by partaking of the Body of the Lord; The Jews are not allowed to slaughter a lamb at any time, observe Pentecost, build tabernacles, or fast daily. Having the dignity of an Apostle, he [Paul] actually carefully and with the meekness of a holy man moderated his words, saying this: I am afraid of you, lest I accidentally labor for you in vain. In fact, if he wanted to make a decisive judgment, he would, of course, say: I am afraid of you; for I labored among you in vain. And now, seeing that they have zeal for God, but not according to reason, it does not instill doubts about salvation in those who were carried away by pious deception, but also does not leave them without reproaches, so as not to give them a reason for persistence in their error, and for the rest - for error of a similar kind. But he uses the expression: I'm afraid of you instead of saying: I'm afraid for you. The teacher works in vain (sine causa) when he calls his students to the highest, and through a fall they fall back to the lesser and lower. Verse 12: Be therefore as I am, for I also am as you are (Gal.4:12). – His words have the following meaning: how I became unstable for you who were not solid and could not speak as if they were spiritual, but spoke as if they were carnal and children in Christ, and since you could not yet eat solid food, I gave you only the milk of the Gospel, but not wanting you to always remain in childhood, but wanting to little by little bring you to the maturity of adolescence, so that you could take solid food: so and you should be like me, that is, know what is more perfect and, leaving milk, move on to a coarser diet, to food in a larger amount (ad pabula majora). But he says this as if in imitation of the Savior, Who did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but humbled Himself, taking on the appearance of a slave and becoming like a man, so that we from people would become gods, and would no longer die, but, having risen with Christ, would be called His friends and brothers, and so that the disciple would be like a Teacher, and the slave like a Master. But it can also be understood this way: “Brothers,” he says, I adjure you that, having despised the Jewish observance of days, months, times and years, which are a shadow of the future, you imitate me, who walked in the Law without resistance, but now began to consider everything as garbage and worthless for anything. Indeed, I was such as you are now, when I strictly adhered to the observance of the same and, like a persecutor, devastated the Church Christ, who did not do this. Verse 13 [end of 12 and 13]: Brethren, I swear to you that you have not offended me in any way; but you know that in the weakness of the flesh I preached the gospel to you the first time (Gal. 12–13). – Add the following to the previously expressed thought; and to make this more obvious, let the word order be the one we introduce. I conjure you, brothers, to be like me, because I am like you. The well-known word is similar to this: We ask in the name of Christ, be reconciled to God (2 Cor. 5:20). Also in another place: I adjure, first of all, that there be prayers, supplications, petitions, thanksgivings (1 Tim. 2:1). And also the words of the Apostle Peter: I plead with the elders among you, as an old man myself, a witness of the sufferings of Christ (1 Pet. 5:1). These words also call us to humility and strike at the pride of those bishops who, being placed, as it were, in some elevated place of observation, barely deign to pay attention to mortals and greet them as their fellow servants (conservos suos). Let them learn from the Apostle to call the erring and foolish Galatians brothers. Let them learn, after the rebuke, the kind words of the one who says: I adjure you (1 Cor. 11) (?). And his spell means that they must imitate him, as he imitates Christ; at least on the basis of this place (ut praesentem locum sequar), what he demands is not great, namely: that, just as for their sake he became lesser from the greater, so they too pass from the lesser to the greater. In no way, he says, you offended me. A student insults a teacher if, through his negligence, he turns into nothing (disperdat) his instructions and his work. The Galatians did not offend the Apostle, since even to this day they have observed his commands and followed his gospel. Or, of course, [can be understood] like this: When I initially proclaimed the Gospel to you and, due to the weakness of your flesh, preached to you as to babes - for you could not acquire the highest sacred things (sacramenta), - and showed myself as if weak in order to win you weak: then did you not receive me as if I were an angel, as if I were Jesus Christ? And since (cum igitur) you never insulted me and considered me in your cause rejected and humiliated like the Son of God; then how do I meet insults from you when I call you to the highest, so that my work is wasted, and you lament the compliance in which I presented myself as being of little age as a useless matter? But nevertheless, due to the weakness of the flesh, not of his own, but of his listeners, Paul preaches to the Galatians, who could not subordinate the body to the word of God, and, as carnal, were incapable of spiritual understanding. And to make this obvious, we will present an example. In view of the weakness of the flesh, he teaches the one who says: If they do not restrain themselves, then let them marry, and: a woman, if her husband dies, is free to marry anyone she wants, but only in the Lord (1 Cor. 7:9, 39). But in no case does he teach in view of the weakness of the flesh who reminds of the following: Having separated from a wife, do not seek a wife and: The time is now (tempus est) for those who have wives to be as if they have not (1 Cor. 7:27, 29). Indeed, some commandments are given to the spiritual, and others to the carnal. And some things are what are commanded by command, and some things are permitted by condescension. Verse 14: And your trial, which was in my flesh, you did not despise or reject; but they accepted me as a messenger of God, as Jesus Christ (Gal.4:14). – This is a dark place, and should be explored with more than ordinary attention. Indeed, he says, in view of the weakness of your flesh, I have already preached the gospel to you as if to infants and those fed on milk, starting with less and, so to speak, almost in childish babble. Such condescension and imitation of weak preaching was, indeed, deliberate on my part (mea gubernatio); but for you this was a test: will it be pleasing to you and will seem great that which was conventionally less than itself and was presented on my part as base. And, indeed, you, accepting this, not as insignificant, but as great, were so surprised that I, who proclaimed this, were accepted as a messenger (angelum) [of God] or, even more, as if the Son of God. Thus, this test of yours, to which I subjected you to the humiliation of my speech, understandable to the carnal understanding, was not despised by you, nor was it of little value in your eyes; on the contrary, it was accepted with more respect than I thought. This passage can also be explained as follows: When I came to you, I did not come with wise speech, but as a low and despicable person, not communicating anything great, except [only] about the Crucified One. So, when you saw me clothed with a body subject to infirmities, you did not mock the man who promised the kingdom of heaven and did not consider him worthy of contempt; because you understood the humiliation of my flesh and the fact that the little value of its outer shell was intended for your test: did you despise the one who was considered worthy of contempt by the unbelievers? No, on the contrary: you accepted him, despised, humiliated and insignificant, as a messenger of God and even more than as a messenger (angelum). Of course, we can also think that the Apostle at the time when he appeared for the first time to the Galatians was sick and overcome by some bodily infirmity; however, he did not stop [preaching], and did not keep his voice silent in order to preach the gospel he had begun. For they say that he was often tormented by severe headaches; and it was precisely this angel of Satan who was assigned to him to cause trouble for him, so that he would not become arrogant. This weakness and this weariness of the body was a test for those people to whom the Gospel was proclaimed: whether they would accept it when he proclaimed something more sublime - he, subject to bodily infirmities. You can also say [in explanation of this text] the following. At first, after his arrival to the Galatians, he endured curses, persecution and bodily blows from those who went against the preaching of the Gospel, and for the Galatians this was an even greater test when they saw that the Apostle of Christ was being beaten. And his words that they received him as a messenger of God (angelum), as Jesus Christ, show, firstly, that Christ is greater than an angel [or: angels]; although the Psalmist proclaims Him to be less than the angels, saying: He made Him less than few compared to the angels (Ps. 8:6); and secondly, he shows at the beginning such a meaning of his words that the angels are recognized as anointed (et Christi). Verses 15, 16: So where is your happiness? For I testify before you that if it had been possible, you would have plucked out your eyes and given them to me. Therefore, by speaking the truth to you, have I become your enemy (Gal. 4:15–16). – Blessed is the one who walks on the path of virtues, but only if he has reached the virtues. Abandoning vice serves no purpose if you do not comprehend higher (good deeds), because in good deeds it is not so much the beginning that is worthy of praise as the end. For, how many degrees are there in a vineyard before the time of squeezing the wine from the grapevine in the winepress: first, it is necessary for the vine to produce buds on the branches, [then] for it to arouse hope [for the harvest] by flowering, then, after the fall of color, the external characteristics of the grapevines are formed and so that little by little the swelling sprout produces berries that can be squeezed in the winepress and yield sweet juice: so in teaching there are separate degrees of approach to bliss [or: perfection in bliss], so that it is necessary for people to listen to the word of God, to perceive it, so that it reaches a degree of maturity in the depths (utero) of their soul and reaches before birth; It is necessary that when they give birth to him, they raise him with milk and bring him to a perfect husband through infancy, childhood, adolescence and youth. So, when each separate degree, as we said, according to its elevation, has [a certain share of] bliss, then - if there is no due end and, so to speak, the last blow of the hand in the matter - all the work will be in vain, and it will be said: Where is your bliss? Although, he says, at the time when you accepted the Gospel according to the flesh, you were called blessed by me, because you were ardent in your undertakings; however, now, when I do not yet see that the building has been completed, and the foundation of the building has not yet been laid, I am forced to say: So, where is your bliss, for which I previously praised you, considering you blessed. For truly, I myself confess that at the beginning you so loved me, who preached to you in base images (humilia), or was subjected to persecution, that if it had been possible (what is said here must be taken in an exaggerated sense), you would have plucked out your eyes and given them to me, so that I could see better with all your eyes. Indeed, you would like, out of inexpressible love for me, to be blind; so that the light of the Gospel may shine (orietur) in my heart, you wanted to increase my success with your loss; and this at the very time when I proclaimed to you insignificant and simple things, as if they were babies and those feeding on milk because of the weakness of your flesh, or when, due to the suffering of my flesh, I was in your eyes unworthy of trust. And now, when I began to call you from the rudiments and syllables and children's reading, - began to call you to higher pursuits, so that you hold books in your hands and study words full of learning and [deep] meaning, you push away (recalcitratis - kick), get angry; improving your teaching seems very difficult to you; and you changed so much in your feelings (in alios mutati estis affectus) that I was received as if a messenger of God (angelum), as Christ; the one to whom you wanted to entrust your eyes is now like an enemy to you, for I proclaim to you the complete truth. But he skillfully finished his thought by saying: So, have I become your enemy by telling you the truth? to show that the rudiments of the sermon were not so much the truth as a shadow and image of the truth. The well-known thought of the famous Roman poet (Terence, in And. I, 1.) is similar to this: “Complaisance produces friends, truth arouses hatred.” But pay attention to how much better the first [thought of the Apostle] is than the last. In fact, the Apostle moderated his thought and gave it a special meaning, addressing precisely those whom he [previously] called foolish and regarded as infants, that is, in fact, only personally to the Galatians; and the said poet was very mistaken when he declared this judgment of his to be universally applicable, having meaning in relation to everyone. In fact, servility, which, in his opinion, makes friends when it is devoid of truth, is not servility, but rather flattery and indulgence, which, obviously, should be called hidden enmity rather than friendship. But at the same time, it is necessary to pay attention to the fact that even now, while they are still babies and those who are fed milk, and among those in whose hearts Christ has not yet grown and has not advanced in age and wisdom and grace before God and people, we explain the Scripture to them literally, and for this we meet with praise, honor and surprise. And when little by little we begin to call on them to move on to the highest, then they turn from our praisers into enemies and prefer to follow the Jews rather than the Apostles, although they, deviating from the teachings and traditions of the Pharisees, approached Christ and the perfection of the Law; they are not worthy to accept the word of God, which commands the teachers of the Church to ascend to the highest teachings (dogmata) and to raise their voices with all their might and not to be afraid of the cries of the children running around, saying: Zion brings good news! go up to the exalted mountain; Jerusalem, preaching! lift up your voice with strength, lift up your voice, do not be afraid (Isa. 40:9). Verses 17, 18: They show unkind jealousy towards you and want to excommunicate you so that you will compete with them. – You always have good zeal for good things, and not only when I am with you (Gal.4:17-18). - Those who have good zeal are those who, seeing goodwill, talents and virtues in someone, want to be the same themselves and strive to imitate the faith in life and works of such people, for whom these latter have gained fame, in order to gain for themselves those talents that are worthy of good imitation. Regarding them, St. Apostle: Strive earnestly for spiritual things, and most of all, to prophesy; and before that: So are you; since you are zealous for the spiritual, then in order to build the Church, strive to abound; and again: Therefore, brethren, strive earnestly to prophesy and do not forbid speaking in tongues. Unkind jealousy is revealed by those who not so much want to be the best themselves in order to imitate those who are worthy of competition, but, on the contrary, want to make them worse and drag them back with depraved jealousy. For example, we can say this: Any Christian who reads Moses and the prophets knows that everything that was previously only in the shadows and in the form of [unclear] images was presented to that people, but this was written for our sake, for whom it was fulfilled at the end of the ages. By circumcision he means not so much the circumcision of the foreskin as the circumcision of the ears (aurium) and the heart. He rose with Christ and strives for high things. He is freed from the burden and slavery of the Law, which commands: “thou shalt not touch,” “thou shalt not taste,” “thou shalt not defile [thyself].” If someone wants to convince such a person from the Scriptures so that he accepts what is written not in a figurative (figurative) meaning, but according to the killing letter, with the goal of making him not a secret, but an open Jew, then such a person will show unkind jealousy towards him; on the contrary, he hastens to draw back the one who with a quick movement strives for the highest, so that the latter, returning back, will more closely imitate the first. So, the speech turns to those Galatians who were carried away by the worshipers of the Law, so that they imitate these latter, although the latter should rather imitate them. Indeed, it is natural that the higher should follow the lower, and not the lesser after the greater; That’s why he says: Always have a good zeal for what is good, that is, do not want to imitate the strict followers of the Jewish precepts, but imitate what is good. Indeed, as one who jealously strives for the wealth, power and dignity of someone else, he is jealous not so much of what is good as of what should be avoided; So you too have a good zeal for good, striving more for the spiritual than for the carnal, so that not they teach you to be Jews, but you teach them to be Christians. And do this always, so that with continuous movement you can reach the complete completion of the good deed. And although you were good zealots for good before, when I was with you; however, after I left you, you lost everything that I gave you; from a safe pier and a completely reliable anchorage, you were again lifted to a height by a swelling wave. It is not surprising if after the departure of the Apostle, the chosen vessel in whom Jesus Christ the Lord spoke, the Galatians changed, since even now we see the same thing in the Churches. Indeed, if some teacher ever appears in the Church, famous for his eloquence and [good] life, and incites his listeners to virtues, as if with some encouragement, then we see that the whole people with fiery zeal rushes to alms, fasting, chaste life, to caring for the poor and burying the [poor] and the like. And when he leaves, the people little by little wither and with the decrease in food they turn pale, lose weight and become sad, so that there comes an end to everything that was previously in a flourishing state. For this reason the harvest is abundant, but those who work are few (Matthew 9:37); He will ask the Lord of the harvest to send laborers to the harvest who, preparing the future wheat, would cut, bind and carry into the granaries the ears of the Christian people standing in the Church, in no way allowing them to perish. And this speaks of that zeal and that depraved jealousy, which is said in another place: Do not be jealous of evil people (Ps. 36:1) and here: They show unkind jealousy towards you. But we also find another jealousy, which the sons of Jacob showed towards their brother Joseph (Gen. 37:1) (ff.), and Mary and Aaron towards the friend of the Lord Moses (Num. 12). But in reality, neither one nor the other was prompted to jealousy by the desire to be better than Joseph and Moses, but by bitter sorrow that these were better than them. This kind of jealousy borders on envy. It would be too long if I wanted to present from the treasury of Holy Scripture all types of jealousy, good or evil. We read about the good zeal of Finesse, Elijah, Mattathias (Num. 25, 1 Kings 19, 1 Mac. 2) and the Apostle Judas [not a traitor], who, for the well-known virtue of jealousy, even received the name Zealot (zealot); and about the evil jealousy between Abel and Cain (Gen. 4) and others; the same is the jealousy of that husband about whom it is written: And the spirit of jealousy came upon him (Num. 5), unless it is an indifferent (medius) jealousy, which cannot be taken either for good or for bad, but is something in between and is rather called jealousy. [It could also be] otherwise: The circumcision, seeing that the Galatians from the Gentiles had in abundance the powers bestowed by the Holy Spirit, and themselves, having neither the gift of tongues, nor the gift of healings, nor the gift of prophecy, moved by jealousy, wanted to distract them towards the yoke of the Law, so that they too would be like the circumcision. Verse 19: My beloved children, whom I beget again until Christ is formed in you (Gal. 4:19). – With what difficulties and with what illness the fetus comes from the womb, the original curse speaks about this in these words: You will give birth to children in illnesses (Gen. 3:16). So, the Apostle, wanting to show the care of teachers for their students [and what feelings they endure out of fear that their followers will not depart from salvation, says: My beloved children, whom I am begetting again. Indeed, the one who in another place said as a father: Although you had ten thousand educators in Christ, you [have] not many fathers (1 Cor. 4:15), now addresses the disciples not as a father, but as a mother about Christ, so that they recognize in him the sufferings and favor of both the first and the second. This is the same as Moses said about the people: Did I conceive all this people in my womb (Num. 11:12). Which of us, in your opinion, grieves so much for the salvation of the disciples that not for a few hours or not for two or three days, but throughout his entire life he suffers until Christ is portrayed in them? We must carefully adhere to the example adopted by the Apostle, that is, the example of the fruit of a woman conceiving and forming seeds within itself, so that we can understand what is said. One should not blush for nature; on the contrary, it should be an object of respect. Just as an ugly seed is first introduced into the bowels (vulvam) of a woman so that through the channels and inside of her it is caught as if by some kind of sticky substance - the prophet speaks about this, remembering his conception like this: Thy eyes have seen my birth (Ps. 139:16) - and then over the course of nine months, under the action of blood, the future person hardens, receives a body and appearance, is nourished and becomes noticeable, so that after that it moves in the womb and at a certain time is born; at the same time, he is born with as many difficulties as he is then nurtured, so as not to subsequently perish: so the seed of the word of Christ sinks into the soul of the listener, grows in its degrees and - I will skip a lot, because we can easily translate the physical description into spiritual understanding - remains in an uncertain position for as long as the one who has conceived gives birth. The work does not end immediately; and then another work begins, which consists in raising a childhood that lives on milk food with carefully prepared dishes and bringing it to the full age of Christ. And just as in married life it often happens that the husband’s seed is the reason that children are not born, and sometimes a barren woman does not retain the seed, and often neither one nor the other of the spouses is capable of giving birth, and, conversely, both are fertile; so in those who sow the seed of the word of God, the same phenomenon is observed in four forms: it happens that, although the teacher fulfills his duty, the listener is unfruitful; or the listener may have good natural talents, but due to the inexperience of the teacher, the seed of the word perishes; or it undoubtedly happens that both the one who teaches and the one who perceives [the teaching] are foolish; and it is rare that teacher and student agree with each other, precisely in the respect that the former teaches as much as the latter can learn, or the student is able to perceive as much as the teacher communicates. We do not know which psalm, which part of the prophecy, which chapter of the Law, and yet, having freedom of speech, we boldly interpret what we do not understand in any way. But what applies to us is that Christ will be portrayed among the people in such a way that everyone, returning to his home, has in himself the seed of the word of God, which, when he receives it, he can say together with the prophet: From your fear, Lord, we have conceived and given birth; We have created sons of Your salvation on earth (Is. 26:17–18). Such are converted into Apostles and deserve [or: will deserve] to hear from the Lord: Whoever does the will of My Father is My brother and sister and mother (Matthew 12:50), while the difference in perfections is shown in the difference in names. Christ is also depicted in the hearts of believers when all sacred rites (sacramenta) are revealed to them and what was apparently dark becomes clear. But we must also pay attention to the fact that through sin, man in some way ceased to exist, but through repentance he is again conceived by the teacher and again the image of Christ is promised in him. This is said against the Novatians, who refuse to restore [to the dignity of members of the Church] those who have once committed sins. Verse 20: But I would like to be with you and change my voice, because I am in trouble among you (Gal.4:20). – Divine Scripture has a creative effect even when it is read; but it is much more useful if they turn from the letters to the word, that is, so that the one who first taught with the help of the message began to instruct the listeners in his personal presence. Indeed, the living word has great power - namely, the word sounding from the lips of its creator, pronounced with the shades with which it originated in the human heart. So, the Apostle, knowing that speech delivered in the presence of listeners has great power, wants to replace the word of the epistle - the word written on paper - with a word addressed to the listeners present, and, since this is more useful for those who have been corrupted by error, to draw them back to the truth with living speech. And this is because he was confused [or embarrassed] among them; however, in Greek this place is expressed by a more appropriate word; for ἀποροῦμαι does not so much mean confusion - which they express by the words αἰσχύνη or σύνχυσις, 21 - as lack, or need. So, the meaning is this: I would now like to be with you, to speak the word expressed in writing personally before you, not because I have a lack of you. This is because I do not have the fruits that students usually have from teachers, and that the seed of teaching was thrown in vain (sine causa), since I completely suffer poverty among you; so I can add here the word of the prophet Jeremiah: I have brought no benefit and no one has benefited me (Jer. 23:32). This passage can be interpreted in other ways. The Apostle Paul, who became a Jew for the Jews in order to win the Jews (1 Cor. 9:20), and for those who were under the law, as if he himself were under the law, and for the weak - weak, in order to win the weak, changed his word according to the qualities of those whom he wanted to save and in the likeness of those participating in the performances (for indeed he became a spectacle for the world, both angels and people, (1 Cor. 4), adapts his voice and clothing in accordance with the well-known image. This does not mean that what he depicted was in fact; but that it should have appeared to those who were watching that it was useful for others. He sees that the Galatians need a different teaching, that they must be saved in a different way, and not by the one by which they were previously brought to the faith of Christ from paganism, and now he is forced to say: I now wanted to be with you and change my word because I am in confusion regarding you, he says. what would help you if I told you what I did before; and therefore, not knowing what to do, and having used various means (in diversa distractus), I am tormented, tormented and in confusion. And just as doctors, seeing that the power of their art is ineffective in the first treatment, move on to another and continue to try what is useful from many medicines until they reach the healing of the patient, so that what is incurable with the help of some emollient is cured by cauterization or an even more potent remedy; So I, too, being confused and ignorant regarding you, turning first one way or the other, would like to produce the real written word with my lips and personally correct you with greater than usual severity; in fact, the word of the message cannot express the shades of the voice of an angry person; it is unable to reflect the cry of an angry person, and to represent the sorrow of the heart in appropriate shades. I used a term of endearment towards you: Brothers! I conjure you, and: My beloved sons, whom I beget again, until Christ is portrayed in you; but I, affectionate and meek, who spoke to you like a father, out of love, which does not allow me to endure your destruction and eternal errors, now would like to be with you personally, if I were not constrained by the bonds of confession, and change my affectionate word to the word of an angry one. It is not an easy matter for me to be affectionate today, and angry tomorrow: love prompts me to do this, that is, to address you with the expression of various feelings, and sorrow prompts me. Indeed, at first I do not know myself what words I will suddenly speak (prorumpam), and what medicine I should treat you with, because I am confused about you. Verse 21: You who wish to be under the yoke of the law, tell me, are you not subject to the law? (Gal.4:21). – It should be noted that the Law named here refers to the narratives of the Book of Genesis, and not, as is usually believed, what should be done or what should be avoided; and everything that is said about Abraham and his wives and children is called the Law (Gen. 15). And elsewhere we read that the prophets are also called the Law. So, the one who listens to the Law is the one who, according to the words of the Apostle, looks not at its surface, but at its inner content (medullam); but he who, like the Galatians, follows only its superficial meaning (exteriorem corticem) does not listen to the Law. Verses 22, 23: For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by a bondwoman, and the other by a freewoman. But he who is of a maidservant was born according to the flesh, and he who is of a freewoman was born according to promise (Gal.4:22-23). – Explaining [this passage] presents great difficulties. Only Isaac, born of Sarah, was born according to the promise, but not Ishmael, born of the Egyptian Hagar. Indeed, Scripture reports that when, due to the persecution of Sarah, Hagar fled pregnant, and an Angel appeared to her in the desert and commanded her to submit to her mistress, the same Angel said the following: I will greatly multiply your seed, and due to its multitude it will be countless (Gen. 16:10). And after that about Ismail (of course, no one will doubt that these are words of promise) it is said: He will be a wild man, and his hands will be against everyone, and everyone’s hands will be against him, and he will live against the face of all his brothers. But [to this] we can answer that the promise of an Angel has less significance than the promise of God, for, just as a star does not give off rays after the sun rises, so the words of the Angel darken when compared with the promise of God, and disappear and are considered as nothing. However, such an answer only apparently has some significance, because it is then destroyed by the words of Scripture that are obligatory for us; for it is written: Abraham said to God: Let this Ishmael live before You (Gen. 17:18); and God answered Him thus: Behold, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a Son, and thou shalt give him the name Isaac, and I will establish My covenant with him, and an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him. About Ishmael: behold, I have heard you, and behold, I have blessed him, and will multiply him, and will increase him greatly. He will make twelve nations, and I will make him a great generation; and I will establish my covenant with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you at this time next year (Gen. 17:19-21). From these words it is evident that by the word of God himself [it is confirmed that] Ishmael was born according to the promise; but this is also resolved in such a way that the promise is given in actual fulfillment of the Covenant and one means to bless, multiply, greatly increase, which is written regarding Ishmael, and the other is to make an heir by will, which is said about Isaac: I will establish My Covenant with him, and an everlasting Covenant and with his seed after him, and also in further words: And I will establish My Covenant with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you ( Gen.17:19). And just as gifts are one thing, and property is another, or what is determined by law is one, and what is received by inheritance is another (after all, we read that the sons of Abraham’s concubines were given gifts, and the son of Sarah was left an inheritance over all property); So, as we said, a blessing, even if legal, is one thing, but a Testament is another. But regarding Ishmael it can also be said that after his conception there was a word either from an Angel or from God. And regarding Isaac, God made a promise before he was conceived in Sarah's womb. By the way, we said this to the extent that the mediocrity of our natural mind can comprehend. However, if anyone can come up with (invenire) anything more to explain how Ishmael, born of a maidservant, is not the son of promise - but such is Isaac, born of a freewoman: then it is better to listen to him. And although, says the Apostle, you have different feelings, yet God revealed this to you. Now, in brief words, we need to reach out to the highest to say that each of us is not born according to a promise at first, while we are instructed in the simple words of the Scriptures and still delight in Jewish interpretations; but when he moves on to something more sublime and comprehends the spiritual Law, then he is born of the promise, and, to express it more clearly, all those who constantly do the works of Abraham are born of Abraham; and those who still have the spirit of slavery and fear were born of an Egyptian maid; those who received the spirit of sonship were born of the free Sarah: we are gifted with this freedom from Christ. To the Jews, who even to this day desire to be the sons of a maidservant, the Lord says: If you continue in My Word, then truly you will be My disciples and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free (John 8:31-32). Therefore, they, not knowing that what was said should be understood mysteriously, say: We are the seed of Abraham and have never served anyone, how can you say: “You will be free.” Jesus answered them: “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave of sin. And a slave does not stay in a house forever, but a son remains forever” (John 8:33-35). If we are slaves of sin, then the Egyptian Hagar gave birth to us, but if sin does not reign in our dead body, then we are truly sons of God. Verse 24 [beginning]: These words contain an allegory (Gal. 4:24) [this is said in a figurative sense (per allegoriam dicta)]. – In its proper sense, allegory is one of the expressions of grammar; and how it differs from metaphor and other figures of figurative speech (caeteris tropis), we learn about this as children in schools. She says one thing in words, and another in the meaning associated with them. The books of representatives of eloquence and poets are filled with allegories. And the divine Scripture was compiled in large part with their help. With this in mind, the Apostle Paul (for he partly concerned secular books as well) used the very name of the phrase, so that he called it an allegory, as was said by his compatriots, in order to show the real meaning of this place how Greek writers abuse [this phrase]. And that the Apostle Paul, although not perfectly, still knew the secular scriptures, his own words testify to this: Some of them said, their own prophet: “The Cretans are always deceitful, evil animals, lazy bellies” (Titus 1:12). This is the so-called heroic verse of the writer Epimenides, which Plato and other ancient writers recall. Also before the Athenians, when he spoke in the Areopagus, he added: Just as some of your poets said: “For we also are His race” (Acts 17:28). This hemistich is found in the [verses] of Arotus, who wrote about the sky and stars. Another place: The most wicked inventions have corrupted good morals (1 Cor. 15:33). This is iambic trimeter, borrowed from the comedy of Menander. From these and other places it is obvious that Paul was not ignorant of secular books, and what he here called allegory, in another place he called spiritual understanding, for example (ut ibi): We know that the Law is spiritual (Rom. 7:14) instead of saying that it is an allegory or an allegorical figure of speech. And in another place: All ate the same spiritual food and all drank the same spiritual drink. And they drank from the spiritual stone that followed them, and the stone was Christ (1 Cor. 10:3-4). There is no one who would doubt that here the manna and the sudden formation of the spring, and that next stone should be understood in an allegorical meaning. I know that the opposite can be contrasted with the word: Brothers! If a person is suddenly in the power of some sin, then you who are spiritual, instruct him in the spirit of meekness (Gal. 6:1). And in another place: The spiritual one judges everything, but he himself is not judged by anyone (1 Cor. 2:15), precisely because the word: spiritual has a different meaning compared to what we said above. But by the spiritual one, who judges everything and is not judged by anyone, we mean a man who, knowing all the sacred things of the Scriptures (sacramenta Scripturarum), understands them perfectly, and seeing Christ in the divine books, does not allow anything from Jewish tradition into them. Verses 25, 26 [End of 24th, 25th, 26th]: For these are the two Testaments, namely, the one from Mount Sinai, the one who gives birth to slavery, which is Hagar. And Sinai is a mountain in Arabia; she corresponds to what is now Jerusalem, and is in bondage with her sons. And that Jerusalem, the highest, is free; he is the mother of us all (Gal.4:24–26). - The explanation of almost everyone regarding this place is that by Hagar the servant they understand the Law and the people of the Jews, and by the free Sarah - the Church, which is gathered from the pagans, and which, according to the word of the Apostle, is the mother of saints: He is the mother of us all. She did not bear children for a long time and was barren before Christ was born of the Virgin, and Isaac, the laughingstock of the world, did not yet proclaim with his lips the sublime teaching - Isaac, the son of the chosen father, for the word Abraham in our language means: father chosen with laughter. And Hagar, what does παροικία mean, i.e. dwelling, or: wandering, or: slowing down, gives birth to Ismail, who only listens to the commandments of God, but does not fulfill them - a wild, bloodthirsty man who runs through the desert; he is an enemy to all his brothers born of a free woman and resists them with a hostile face. And it is not surprising that the Old Testament, which is from Mount Sinai - located in Arabia and neighboring what is now Jerusalem - was established and written, [but] it is not eternal, since a settlement is different from an eternal possession, and the name of Mount Sinai means test (experience), and the word Arabia means: West (fall); but, on the contrary, the highest Jerusalem - which is free and is the mother of saints - shows that this Jerusalem of the present time is below and immersed in the lowest and deepest place. There are those who understand the two Testaments differently, namely (ut): the divine Scripture, both ancient and new, according to the difference in meaning and judgment of those who read it, these interpreters understand now as a slave, now as a free woman, and those who even to this day serve the letter and have a spirit of fear into slavery, they consider the Egyptians born of Hagar, and those who ascend to the highest and wish to understand what is written in an allegorical way sense - sons of Sarah, which in our language means: primacy (ἄρχουσα), i.e. dominant (princeps in the feminine gender). And according to them, they do this due to this kind of necessity: it would be unfair to say that Moses and all the prophets descended from a maidservant, and any of the pagans from a free woman. But for this reason, it will be better, due to the difference (as we said above) in the degree of understanding, to consider some as slaves and others as free, not only from those who belong to the Church, but even about the same person to think that he is the son of a slave, as long as he follows the literal meaning; and when, during the explanation of the Scriptures by Jesus, his heart is kindled, and when, during the breaking of bread, he sees Him whom he had not seen before (Luke 24:31), then call him the son of Sarah. Marcion and Manichaeus did not want to throw St. books of the place in which the Apostle says: Although this is allegorical, etc., thinking that these words are directed (relinqui) against us, precisely in the sense that the Law should be understood differently from what is written in it. But, of course, although it should be understood allegorically (which we also recognize, what the Apostle also teaches), it is not understood at the request of the reader, but this is the case due to the unconditionally obligatory meaning of the Writer; but in this way they [Marcion and Manichaeus] are defeated, precisely by what they meant to use against us; for God's servant Moses wrote spiritual things; but at the same time the Apostle also teaches, whom they themselves consider to be the herald of another Christ and a better God. Verse 27: For it is written: Rejoice, barren one who does not give birth; exclaim loudly (erumpe et clama) who did not suffer from childbirth; for many are the children of a barren woman, more numerous than of one who has a husband (Isa. 54:1). – The assembly (synagoga) of Judah has [its] husband in the Law, and according to Anna’s prophecy it was indeed abundant in descendants (1 Samuel 1:5); and the barren Church, without a Husband - Christ, and without any conversation with the Bridegroom, was in the desert for a long time. But after the first one received the divorce decree in her hands, she used all the jewelry received from her Husband to decorate the idol. [Her] husband, as a result of her desecration of the first girdle, wove for His loins another girdle, another girdle from the pagans: this [wife] as soon as she was united [with her husband] conceived and gave birth. And in Isaac [in the book of Isaiah?] he exclaims through the prophet: If there is a people born together (Is. 49:54) (?), when in one day, according to the book of the Acts of the Apostles, three thousand and five thousand people believed (Acts 3) (ff). I see no need to talk about the multitude of Christians and the small number of Jews, when the banners of the cross flutter throughout the world, and a noble Jew rarely appears in the cities, Verse 28: But we, brethren, are the children of the promise according to Isaac (Gal.4:28). – There is no difficulty in understanding that the Apostle and those like him are the sons of promise according to Isaac. But since Origen, explaining this passage, stated the words (exemplum) of the Apostle in this way: But you, brothers, are children of the promise according to Isaac; then the question is: how does the Galatians, whom he called foolish and about whom he said that they began in the spirit and ended in the flesh, now call children of the promise according to Isaac? So, we say that the Apostle calls them children of promise according to Isaac because he did not yet completely despair of their salvation and believed that they would again turn to the spirit with which they began and would be sons of the free woman. But if (qui si) they were swallowed up in the flesh, they would be the sons of a slave. Verses: 29-31: But just as then he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so it is now. And what does Scripture say? “Drive away the maidservant and her son, for the son of the maidservant will not be heir with my son Isaac.” So, brethren, we are not the children of a slave woman, but of a free woman (Gal. 4:29–31). [Chapter 5. – Verse 1, beginning:] With such freedom as Christ has set us free (Gal. 5:1). I don’t think it was possible [in Scripture] to find that Isaac was once persecuted by Ishmael, but only [we find that] when the son of the Egyptian woman, who was the eldest, was playing with Isaac, Sarah was indignant and said to Abraham: Drive away the maid and her son: For the son of the maid will not be an heir along with my son Isaac (Gen. 21:10). And of course, a simple resentment between children could not be the reason (indignus est) for expulsion and refusal. But the Apostle, as a Jew of the Hebrews and as raised at the feet of the teacher Gamaliel - who once curbed with his advice the Pharisees who were raging against the Lord [or: him] - [The Apostle] from the words of Sarah: For the son of the maid will not be an heir along with my son Isaac, understood that this was not a simple insult. But since Ismail, perhaps, as the eldest and as the circumcised one, at a time when he could understand and feel what he had endured, disputed his birthright, the Scripture called the childish quarrel an insult. Therefore [perhaps] Sarah, not tolerating such words and not putting up with the habit of the servant’s son seeking the birthright for himself, passionately demanded (erupit in vocem): Drive away the servant with her son, etc. And since this seemed too strict (durum) to Abraham - for the first-born should always have owned the majority of the property - God, who was pleased that the free woman should remain and the maidservant should be expelled, confirmed the words of Sarah and said to Abraham: Let it not seem harsh in your eyes regarding the maidservant and the boy. Whatever Sarah told you, do according to her word, for in Isaac your seed will be named. So, just as then the elder brother Ismail pursued the boy who was still feeding on milk, seeking for himself the advantage of circumcision and the birthright, so now Israel according to the flesh [or: Ismail] raises its head, gets excited and expresses arrogance against the younger brother, that is, the people of Christ from the pagans. Let us pay attention to the madness of the Jews, who killed the Lord, persecuted the prophets and the Apostles, and resist the will of God, and we will see that the Jews instigated much greater persecution against Christians than even those that were carried out by the pagans. Are we surprised at the Jews? Now even those who are infants in Christ and live according to the flesh persecute those who are born of water and the spirit, and, rising with Christ, seek things above and not things below. They live willfully (faciunt, quod volunt): in alliance with Ishmael they pursue Isaac; they are driven out with their mother, the Egyptian servant; such do not accept the inheritance that only he who is born according to the promise receives. It is also quite suitable to understand that he who is born of the flesh persecutes him who is born of the spirit (spiritualem). Indeed, the spiritual never persecutes the carnal, but forgives him, like a simple brother: he knows that he can improve over time. And if he ever sees the anger of the son of the Egyptian woman, he remembers the same Parent, who created the light, the ox and the gnat, and that in the great house there are vessels not only of gold, but also of silver, and wood, and clay (2 Tim. 2:20); Therefore, let us say together with the Apostle Paul: We are not the children of a slave, but of a free woman, and renewed in Christ, we will hear the words of the Lord saying to the Jews: If you continue in My word, you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free (John 8:31-32). Freed by this kind of freedom, the Apostle said: Because I am free from everyone. He who commits sin is a slave of sin (1 Cor. 9:19). Since he was aware of his freedom from all vices and knew that he was free from all lust and delusion, then, in justice, he rejoiced for freedom in Christ, saying: We are not the children of a slave, but of a free woman, by which freedom Christ freed us (John 8:36). Gal.5:1. [end]. Stand firm and refuse to be put under the yoke of slavery again (Gal.5:1). - This shows that the one who is under the yoke of slavery is not worth it, and that the one who is gifted with freedom from Christ will remain under the yoke as long as he is in fear of the spirit of slavery and follows the rudiments of the Law. and his word: Stand encourages us to firm and constant faith in Christ, so that the Churches of Galatia may stand firmly in the Savior. The righteous man speaks about this in another place: I set my feet on a rock (Ps. 39:3) instead of saying: on Christ, so that they would not be carried away by the wind of doctrine and not carried away in different directions (Eph. 4:14). Therefore, it is said to those who stand: Let him who stands take heed lest he fall (1 Cor. 10:12); and in another place: Stand, be like men, be strong (1 Cor. 16:13), so that they stand with the One whom Stephen saw standing at the right hand of the Father when he firmly endured suffering (Acts 7:55) and who said to Moses: Stand thou with me (Ex. 34:2). And he calls the yoke of slavery a strict Law, difficult to fulfill, which devours its followers with hard work day and night. Peter also says in the book of Acts: Why are you trying to put a heavy yoke on the necks of the brothers, which neither we nor our fathers could bear (Acts 15:10). And his addition: Do not covet again does not mean that the Galatians had previously kept the Law, but that the yoke of idolatry is also heavy, so that the Egyptian people, burdened with it, drowned like lead in the Red (Red) Sea (Ex. 15:4-5). According to this meaning and above, he said: How have you turned again to the weak and insignificant principles of the world, which you again want to serve, observing days and months, and times and years? In fact, as a result of the preaching of the Apostle Paul, the Galatians, having left idols, immediately switched to the grace of the Gospel, and were no longer returning under the yoke of the Jewish Law, which they had never known before: but, desiring to observe the times, to be circumcised in the flesh and to offer bodily sacrifices, they returned, in a way, to those services that they had previously performed as idolaters; for they say that both the priests of Egypt and the Ishmaelites (Ishmaelites) and the Midianites are circumcised. And that the [pagan] peoples observe days, months and years, let us not know this [better], so that we will never have a common celebration with them. Verse 2: Behold, I, Paul, tell you that if you undergo circumcision, then Christ is of no use to you (Gal. 5:2). – In the Gospel, the Savior says to the disciples: Whoever listens to you listens to Me; whoever receives you receives Me (Luke 10:16); and the Apostle testifies, saying: But it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me (Gal. 2:20), and in another place: Or do you want to test Him who speaks in me [i.e. e.] Christ? (2 Cor. 13:3). This quite clearly shows what he says now: Behold, I, Paul, say to you, that is, that his words should not be accepted as the words of Paul, but as the Lord’s. For since he also predicted in the first letter to the Corinthians: But to those who are married, I proclaim it not I, but the Lord (1 Cor. 7:10), and immediately after that he added: To the rest I command (1 Cor. 7:12), so that the obligation of his word does not seem insignificant, he says: I think that I also have the Spirit of God, so that when both the Spirit and Christ speak in him, he is not subject to contempt. who, following the example of the prophets, says: This says the Lord Almighty. But what is said will seem even greater: Behold, I, Paul, say to you: since you receive circumcision, Christ is of no use to you; if this word is connected with the beginning in which he says: Paul, an apostle, not from men, nor through man, but through Jesus Christ, etc., so that those who listen are prompted not so much by the great significance of the one sent, but by the [authority] of the One who sent. But someone can say: "This place is contradicted by what is written to the Romans: Circumcision is indeed beneficial if you keep the Law (Rom. 2:25) and below: So what more is available to the Jews, and what is the benefit of circumcision? In any case, many. First, namely, that they were entrusted with the words of God (Rom. 3:1-2). In fact, if those who were circumcised, Christ is not at all useful, then how does circumcision benefit people who keep the Law? This [perplexity] is resolved by the following answer. It is enough (ut) to say that the letter addressed to the Romans was intended for those who believed [in Christ] from Jews and Gentiles, and this forced the Apostle Paul not to offend either one or the other people, namely: since both people have their own advantage, so as not to subject the Gentiles to circumcision, nor to persuade the Jews to [retain] the foreskin; and in addressing the Epistle to the Galatians, the Apostle uses another proof, for they were not from among the circumcised, but from the Gentiles who believed, and circumcision could not be useful for them when they (qui) after the grace of the Gospel again returned to the firstfruits of the Law. And in the Acts of the Apostles it is related that when some of the circumcision rebelled with the assertion that those who believed among the Gentiles should undergo circumcision and keep the Law of Moses, then the elders who were in Jerusalem, and likewise the Apostles, having gathered together, determined in writing that they should not be burdened with the yoke of the Law, and that they should not observe anything else, but should abstain from food sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from fornication, or, as it is written in some lists: and from strangulation. And so that there should be no doubt that circumcision does not bring any benefit, and that only for the sake of those who believed from the Jews, he softened his judgment on circumcision in his epistle to the Romans, gradually approaching the end of the same epistle, he showed that neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any power; he says: So circumcision is nothing, and the foreskin is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God (1 Cor. 7:19). Circumcision is so insignificant that even the house of Israel, which boasted of circumcision, does not help at all; The prophet also shows this: All nations are uncircumcised in the flesh, and the house of Israel is uncircumcised in heart (Ezek. 44:9), and the uncircumcised Melchizedek also blessed the circumcised Abraham (Gen. 14:18-19). For the words: “If you are circumcised” are such in their meaning that he seemed to want to say: “If you are circumcised according to the flesh.” In another place he calls this not circumcision (circumcisio), but cutting off (concisio), saying: Look at the cutting off (concisio), for we who serve God in the spirit represent circumcision (sumus circumcisio) and are glorified in Christ, and do not rely on the flesh (Phil. 3:2-3). He who expects every benefit from Christ does not rely on the flesh, and does not sow in the flesh, so that from the flesh he may experience corruption, but sows in the spirit, from which comes eternal life; in the words of the Apostle: If you are circumcised, then Christ is not at all useful to you, you need to look more subtly. [They mean] not only that if they are circumcised, then circumcision itself is not beneficial to them; but even at least in addition to circumcision, they apparently had other virtues, but they will perish altogether when they are circumcised after believing in Christ. So what? Didn't circumcision help Timothy? A lot anyway! For he was circumcised not so much in order to receive any advantage from the circumcision itself, but in order to win others (1 Cor. 9:19, 23): he became a Jew for the Jews, so that by his circumcision he would lead the Jews to faith in Christ. But in fact, it does not help at all when they think that it brings some benefit in itself. Verse 3: But I testify emphatically that every person who circumcises himself must fulfill the whole Law (Gal. 5:3). - God, who gave the commandment about circumcision first to Abraham, and then in the Law through Moses, commanded that not only circumcision be observed, but also many other things: to visit Jerusalem on holidays, [to perform] burnt offerings, always in the morning and in the evening, to slaughter a lamb only at one certain time of the year, to hold festivals of the land in the seventh summer, to leave [slaves] in the fiftieth year, and so on, which every reader can easily learn from Scriptures. So, we have the opportunity to attack Ebion and his followers, who think that believers in Christ should be circumcised after the Gospel, so that either they should accept circumcision and observe everything prescribed in the Law, or, if it is impossible for everything to be observed without exception (cuncta), then circumcision itself should cease, which should be abandoned along with the other, as useless. Therefore, if they answer that we must fulfill only what is possible to fulfill, since God does not require from us what we cannot fulfill, but only what we can, then we will tell them that it is not characteristic of the same God to desire to keep the Law, and to abandon those who keep the Law. Or how, as a result of the abolition of the Law, should we hold responsible those who cannot fulfill absolutely everything, although they would like to? But we follow the spiritual law, which says: Do not put a bridle on the mouth of an ox that is threshing (Deut. 25:4), and we understand like the Apostle: Does God care for oxen (1 Cor. 9:9): but he speaks undoubtedly for our sake and commands that the Sabbath be solemnly observed (Is. 58:13), so that not our ox and donkey, and small livestock should rejoice on the Sabbath, but those people and cattle about whom it is written: You will save people and cattle, O Lord (Ps. 35:7). People are some intelligent and spiritual men, and animals are those who are slower by natural qualities and who receive instruction from the spiritual about keeping the Sabbaths of the Lord. This reasoning of ours does not contradict what is said above: If you are circumcised, then Christ is of no use to you, and the following: I testify that every person who is circumcised must be a doer of the entire Law. For it is not the hearers of the Law alone who are righteous before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified, since only he is a doer of the Law who can say: We are not the circumcision, and: In secret the Jew, and: We know that the Law is spiritual. And whoever follows the cutting off (concisionem) and the killing letter is not a doer of the Law, but truly an enemy of the Law, especially after the coming of the Savior, who removes the veil from the hearts of those who come to Him, so that everyone, contemplating God with an open face, will be transformed from the oldness of the letter into the newness of the spirit. Verse 4: Those who are justified by the Law! you have been set free from Christ and have fallen from grace (Gal.5:4). “Just as no one can serve two masters, so it is difficult to fulfill the shadow and truth of the Law.” There is a shadow in the ancient Law until the day shines and the darkness is removed; and the truth is found in the Gospel of Christ, for grace and truth were through Jesus Christ ( John 1:17 ) So, he loses the grace of Christ and leaves the gospel that he held, who thinks that he can be justified by any fulfillment of the Law; and since he has lost grace, he withdraws from the faith of Christ and calms down from His works, because: κατηρήθητε ἀπὸ τοῦ Χριστοῦ rather means: they stopped doing the works of Christ, rather than, as it is poorly conveyed in Latin: they were freed from Christ, so then, What he previously commanded exclusively in relation to circumcision, he now understands in relation to the entire Law in the sense that those who do not advance at all in the work of Christ who believe that they should be justified for observing certain (in quacumque observatione Legis) prescriptions of the Law. Verse 5: For we in the Spirit wait with hope for justification by faith (Gal. 5:5). – He posits “Spirit” to differentiate from “letter”. And the hope of justification must be understood in the person of Christ, for He is truth, patience, hope, justification and all the virtues - [He] is the second coming of Whose we await, because He has to judge everything, no longer appearing with long-suffering, but with the righteousness of the Judge, to reward everyone according to his deeds. Waiting for the coming of this God [or: day, i.e. diei instead of: Dei] the Apostle and those like him say: Thy kingdom come (Matthew 6:10), so that when the Son hands over the kingdom to God and the Father and in those who are subject to Him and Himself submits: then the Head will submit in the body, and God will be all things to all (1 Cor. 15:28), because He who is now only in part for each individual, then it will be everything to everyone. Verse 6: For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision can do anything, nor uncircumcision, but faith working through love (Gal. 5:6). – For those who wish to live in Christ Jesus, they must strive with effort for virtues and avoid vices; and the indifferent (media), standing between virtues and vices, need not be strongly desired or avoided, such as, for example, circumcision or uncircumcision and other similar things. Indeed, circumcision only benefits if you keep the Law. And therefore it is understandable to those who lived according to the Law, and not because they were circumcised, but because they were entrusted with the words of God, which, turning into actions among them, did not remove them from salvation. Let us not be confused by the fact that Zipporah took a sharp stone and circumcised her son and removed the Angel from her husband, who wanted to strangle him (Ex. 4:24-27) or so, as it is written differently in the Hebrews. The Apostle, after all, testifies that circumcision is not at all useful, not so much in itself as it has no power in Christ Jesus, namely: from the time when the Gospel shone like the sun throughout the whole world, suffering from circumcision became unnecessary; although it (quae) was valid, like other provisions of the Law, when carnal blessings were given to those who kept the Law. Therefore, it was those who fulfilled it who were blessed in the city, blessed in the field, had full barns, and many other things that are contained in the promises (Deut. 28:1-14). We want to have strength and be strengthened in Christ Jesus, that is, in true circumcision, and not in the circumcisione (concisione) of the Jews. For he is not one who is openly a Jew, nor is the fleshly circumcision obvious to everyone, but he is an inward Jew (in abscondito) and the circumcision of the heart is in the spirit and not in the letter (Rom. 2:28-29). So, in Christ, circumcision of the flesh does not help at all, but circumcision of the ears and heart, which is indicated by the well-known reproach against the Jews: Behold, your ears are uncircumcised, and you cannot hear (Jer. 6:10). Circumcision of large lips is useful, which Moses, in his humility, considers himself not yet having, as it is written in the Hebrew list: I have the foreskin on my lips. Circumcision brings many benefits in matters of the flesh, since through abstinence (per castitatem) shamelessness is suppressed. So, in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision of the body has power, because they stand in an indifferent position, that is, they stand in the middle between virtues and vices; but faith has power, revealing its effect in works, so that in this way faith is approved, which is imputed to Abraham for righteousness, and every act of faith is based on love, since the whole Law and the Prophets are based on [this commandment about] love (ex charitate pendentibus). Indeed, in these two commandments: Love your God and: Love your neighbor, according to the immutable word of the Savior, consist of the Law and the Prophets. And the Apostle Paul says in another place: For the commandments: “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” “Thou shalt not steal,” “Thou shalt not covet,” or any other commandment, boil down to one saying: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself (Rom. 13:9). So, if each Commandment boils down to what it says: Love your neighbor as yourself, and faith exercised through love has the greatest strength, then it is obvious that the exercise of faith through love contains the fullness of all the commandments. But how, according to the words of the Apostle James, is faith without works dead, if works, although good, without faith are considered as dead (James 2:14, 18). Therefore, those who do not believe in Christ, but have good morals, what more do they have if not works of virtue? An example of faith realized in love is given by that Gospel harlot who, when the Lord was reclining in the Pharisee’s house, washed His feet with tears, dried Him with her hair and anointed Him with oil; and when the Pharisee began to express indignation, the Lord proposed a parable about the debtor’s fifty and five hundred denarii and added at the end: Therefore I say to you: Her many sins are forgiven, for she loved much (Luke 7:47); and turning to the woman herself he said: Your faith has saved you: go in peace (Luke 7:50). Indeed, in this place it is openly shown that this woman had a faith realized through love, which was of great importance in Christ. But maybe someone has doubts about uncircumcision, so he will say: Doesn’t uncircumcision [have the same meaning]? However, if we pay attention to the fact that very many of the Christians, that is, of ours, who were grafted from the wild olive into the good olive (Rom. 11:17-24) speak out against the fallen branches of the people of Judah and say that uncircumcision has greater power than circumcision, because Abraham was the first to please God, and his faith was credited to him as justification; and the second was given only as a sign of faith and did not help Israel who had it: then we will see that even this claim of some is now very carefully eliminated [St. Apostle]. Paul and Eustochius, this is the third scroll of interpretations we have compiled to explain the Epistle to the Galatians, knowing our weakness and feeling that the weak stream of [our] natural talent barely emits a quiet murmur. The fact is that now even in the Church they are already looking for something, leaving the simplicity and purity of the words of the Apostles, as if in the Athenaeum or in front of a large number of listeners, to evoke loud applause from those listening, so that speech, tinted with the lies of the art of eloquence, appears before society as if a shameless woman, intending not so much to instruct the people, but to gain the favor of the people and, like a stringed psalter and a sweet-voiced pipe, to caress the feelings listeners, thus, in fairness to our time, the famous word from the book of the prophet Ezekiel, addressed by the Lord to him, can be applied: And you became to them like the sounds of a pleasantly ringing and skillfully constructed lyre, [a stringed instrument], and they listen to your words, but do not do them (Ezek. 33:32). So what should I do? Should I remain silent? But it is written: Do not appear before your Lord empty; and the prophet Isaiah (as this is found, however, only in the Hebrew scrolls) exclaims with a sigh: Woe is me! for I have fallen silent. Should I speak? But all the elegance of Latin speech and the beauty of its composition were spoiled by the clatter of Hebrew reading. After all, you yourself know that more than fifteen years have passed since neither Tullius [Cicero], nor Maro [Virgil], nor any other creator of pagan writing fell into my hands at all; if sometimes we bring something from them, it happens by chance - we remember it, as if in a long-ago dream through a cloud of fog. And how much I have succeeded in that [Hebrew] language through tireless work, I leave it to others to judge; How much I have lost in the knowledge of my language, I [myself] know. Added to this is the fact that, due to the weakness of my eyes and my whole body, I now do not write with my own hand, and I cannot compensate for the slowness of my speech either with work or diligence. This is also said about Virgil - namely, that he brought his books into proper shape, so to speak, like bears, licking them like [a bear] children. And I invite a scribe and tell him what came directly to the tongue; and if I want to think a little in order to express something better, then he reveals a silent reproach, impatiently wrings his hands, rubs his forehead and with every movement of his body shows that he is sitting here in vain. But speech, even if it was improved by natural high talent and was distinguished by resourcefulness, and was decorated with flowery words, however, not purified, not decorated with the compiler’s own hand, is not smooth and does not have the proper beauty combined with its importance, and, as happens with rich village people, its wealth serves more as a reason for reproaches than as an adornment for it. But why all this [I say]? This is precisely to give an explanation to both you and others (who may want to read) that I am not composing a laudatory speech or writing objections on a controversial issue, but I am composing an interpretation, that is, I mean precisely that it is not my words that become the subject of praise, but that what was said to others is understood as it was said to them. My job is to clarify the dark, briefly state what is clear, and dwell longer on the doubtful parts. Therefore, the work of interpretation is called explanation by many. If anyone seeks eloquence from me, then let him delight in reading the elegant speeches of other writers; for this he has in both languages ​​(Greek and Latin) Demosthenes and Tullius, Polemon and Quintillian. And the Church of Christ was gathered not from students of the Academy or Lyceum, but from the common people. Therefore, the Apostle says: You see, brothers, your calling: few of you are wise according to the flesh, few are strong, few are noble; But God has chosen the foolish things of this world to confound the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to confound the strong things, and the base things of this world, and God has chosen the despised things, and the things that are not, to confound the things that are (1 Cor. 1:26-28). Indeed, since the world through wisdom did not know God through consideration of the order, diversity and constancy of creatures, it pleased God to save believers through unwise preaching (per stultitiam praedicationis). For where is the wise man, where is the scribe, where is the student of natural causes? Not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in the demonstration of virtue [virtus - strength] and spirit, so that the faith of believers is not in the virtue of people, but in the power of God. Therefore, the Apostle to the same Corinthians says: Therefore, brethren, I did not come to you with exalted speech and wisdom, to proclaim to you the testimony of God, for I judged that I knew nothing [being] among you, except Jesus Christ, [but] Him crucified (1 Cor. 2:1-2). But lest anyone think that he who speaks this way is a preacher of unreason, he prudently (mente praesaga) refutes what may serve as an objection to him. He says: But the wisdom of God is preached in mystery, which is hidden, which none of the princes of this age knew (1 Cor. 2:7-8). Who would read Aristotle now? How many people are there now who know either the name or the books of Plato? Only idle old people, perhaps, re-read them in the back streets. and the whole world is talking about our simpletons and fishermen and the universe is screaming. Thus their simple words must be explained in simple speech. I say: words, not meaning. However, if, with the help of your prayers, when expounding the meaning of their messages, I will be able to discover the spirit that they had when composing them; then you will see that in them there was such greatness and breadth of true wisdom, which for secular writers to achieve would be an empty claim (arrogantia et vanitas). I will briefly confess to you the secret of my mind: I do not want anyone who intends to understand the Apostle with my help to have difficulty understanding my own writings and to understand an interpreter to look for a new interpreter (alium). But it’s time to continue further. Verse 7: You went well; who hindered you from obeying the truth? (Gal.5:7). – What the Latin translator conveyed here with the words: disobey the truth and what is expressed in Greek with the words: τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι, he conveyed above with the words: do not trust the truth. In our place we noted that in the ancient collections of St. books (codicibus) do not have this, although the Greek lists (exemplaria) are spoiled by this error. And the meaning of the passage is this: You worshiped the Father in spirit and truth and, receiving from the fullness of Christ, you learned that the Law was only given to the people through Moses, but was not composed [by him]; and grace and truth were not only given through Jesus Christ, but were from Him in origin. So, when you walked so well, serving the truth rather than images, what corrupt teacher hindered you, [and] you follow the shadow of the Law, and forsake the grace of the Gospel? What follows: You won't agree with anyone. - But since we do not find this written down either in the Greek books or in those who expounded the writings of the Apostle, it seems that this should be omitted. Verse 8: Your conviction [comes] not from Him who called you (Gal. 5:8). - In the Latin collections of St. books we find written thus: Your conviction is from God, who called you. But I think that here it was: from That (ex eo) and was not understood, but by similarity little by little crept in: from God (ex Deo) instead of what was before: from That (ex eo). But even this meaning cannot be taken for granted (nec potest stare), because now about those whom the Apostle has just accused of not obeying the truth, showing that it depends on their freedom whether to obey or disobey, he, on the contrary, affirms that their conviction and obedience depends not so much on those who are called, but on Him who called them. Thus, it is better and more accurate to read this way: Your conviction is not from Him who called you. Indeed, one is the work of God, and the other is the work of people. The work of God is [man’s] calling; It’s already a human matter to believe or not to believe. If somewhere in St. Scripture affirms free will in man, as, for example, in the following place: If you will and will listen to Me (Exodus 19:5) and the words: And behold, O Israel, what the Lord your God wants of you (Deut. 10:12), then this thought from this place is most decisively confirmed. But more simple-minded people, thinking to submit themselves to God, so that even our conviction is in His power, destroyed the part of the speech: no, and assimilated to the Apostle a different meaning. So, whether for good or for bad, neither God nor the devil is the reason that our conviction does not come from the One who called us, because we (qui) either agree or disagree with the Caller. In other words: This conviction that you now follow does not come from God, who originally called you, but from those who subsequently confused you. Verse 9: A little leaven leavens the whole lump (Gal.5:9). – In our meetings St. books there is a bad translation (male): A small leaven infects (corrumpit) the whole piece (massam), so the translator conveyed his own meaning rather than the words of the Apostle. The Apostle expresses this same thought in his letter to the Corinthians, when he orders that he who has his father’s wife be expelled from among them, in order to exhaust and pacify his flesh through fasting and suffering, so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord [others add: our] Jesus Christ. Indeed, the Apostle says: It is a bad report about you: you do not know that a little leaven contaminates (spoils - corrumpit) the whole piece [of the mixture] (1 Cor. 5:5-6), or, as we have already conveyed, a little leaven leavens the whole lump, and immediately after that he added: Cleanse out the old leaven, so that you may be a new mixture, as if you were unleavened bread, for Christ was slain by our Passover. Therefore, let us feast not on old leaven, not on the leaven of malice and unrighteousness, but on the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth (1 Cor. 5:7-8). And now, by the same instruction, he teaches that the spiritual bread of the Church, which comes down from heaven, should not be subject to the violence of Jewish interpretation; The Lord commanded the same thing to His disciples, namely: that they should abstain from the leaven of the Pharisees (Matthew 16:6). The evangelist makes this clearer, adding: And He spoke to them about the teaching of the Pharisees (Matthew 16:12). Then, what other teaching of the Pharisees can be understood as not keeping the Law according to the flesh? So, the meaning is this: Do not think that you should treat with contempt the machinations of those few people who, coming from Judea, teach otherwise. A spark is something small, and is not even visible while it is being shown, but if a fire, even a small one, falls on the hearth and finds food for itself, it destroys walls, cities and vast forests and [devastates] countries. Also, leaven, presented in a different meaning in the parable (Luke 13:21), seems to be an insignificant and even insignificant thing; but when it, in combination with flour, ferments the entire piece with its acid, then the whole mixture succumbs to its power; Likewise, a false teaching, starting with one person, at first finds only one or two listeners; but little by little it spreads like cancer in the body, and, as the popular saying goes, the lousy cattle infects the entire herd. So, the spark must be extinguished immediately after its appearance, and the leaven must be removed from the dough and the infected piece of meat must be cut off, and the lousy animal must be expelled from the flock of sheep, so that the whole house does not burn down, the dough does not turn sour, the body does not rot, and the flock does not die. Arius in Alexandria was one spark; but since it was not immediately extinguished, the flames from it engulfed the entire universe. Verse 10 (1st part): I trust in you in the Lord, because you will understand nothing else (Gal. 5:10). – Not by guesswork, as some want [to prove], but by a prophetic spirit, the Apostle Paul foretells that the Galatians will return to the path of truth, which they left (1 Cor. 12). Indeed, the one who urged them to zealously strive for spiritual gifts, and especially to prophesy, himself, filled with the same grace, says: In part we know, and in part we prophesy (1 Cor. 13:9). So, foreseeing in spirit that they will not believe otherwise, but only what they learned from the message, he says: I trust in you in the Lord, because you will not understand anything else, for adding the name of the Lord means the same thing; in fact, if he thought so by guess, he could simply say: I rely on you, and now adding: in the Lord, he, trusting in someone to the divine Spirit, he prophesied about the fulfillment of which he knew. Verse 10 (2nd part): But whoever troubles you will suffer condemnation, no matter who he is (Gal.5:10). – They say that with these words he rebels against Peter (lacerat Petrum = torments Peter), whom, as he himself writes, he openly opposed to his face, because he walked with the wrong foot in the truth of the Gospel. But neither [Paul expressed himself with such impudent slander against the primacy (principem) in the Church (Gal. 2), nor Peter deserved to be responsible for the indignation of the Church. From this one should think that he is talking about someone else who either was with the Apostles, or came from Judea, or believed from among the Pharisees, or was considered, perhaps, great among the Galatians so much as to be condemned for the indignation of the Church, no matter who he was. And to bear condemnation means the same thing as is otherwise expressed in the following words: Each one bore his own burden, and I think that the word burden in Scripture can be understood both in a good and bad way, that is, both in relation to those who are suppressed by serious sins, and in relation to those who bear a light burden of virtues. The penitent speaks of those who have sinned in the Psalm: My iniquities have risen above my head; They weighed me down like a heavy burden (Ps. 37:5). The Savior says about virtues and the teaching of virtues: For My yoke is pleasant and My burden is light (Matthew 11:30). And that teaching is sometimes understood in the meaning of a burden is clear from the Gospel. In fact, the Pharisees bind heavy burdens and those that they cannot bear, and lay them on the shoulders of people, but they themselves do not want to touch them with one finger (Matthew 23:4). And how serious a crime it is to disturb the calm and stir up, as it were, with some stormy waves, the clear hearts of people, this is evidenced by the words of the Savior to the Apostles when He says: Do not let your heart be troubled, do not be afraid (John 14:1), for it would be better for him who disturbs and seduces anyone in the Church to have a millstone hung around his neck, and he and he to be thrown into the sea, than to seduce him one of the least of these who instructed by the Savior. So the Galatians were perplexed regarding the spirit and the letter, circumcision and cutting off, secret and open Judaism, and did not know what to do. In short, it can be understood this way. Whoever it is who draws you towards the teaching of the Pharisees and desires carnal circumcision, even if he were eloquent and boasted of knowledge of the Law, I say nothing more than what you cannot reject, namely, that he will be condemned for this act, and will receive due reward for his work. Verse 11: But I, brethren, if I preach circumcision, why do I suffer persecution even to this day? So, the temptation of the cross was eliminated (or, as it better stands in Greek: ceased) (Gal. 5:11). – We read in the Acts of the Apostles, and the Apostle Paul often mentions in his letters, that he endured very frequent persecution from the Jews, because he taught that those who from among the pagans believed in Christ should not be circumcised. And those about whom he said above: He who disturbs you will suffer condemnation, no matter who he is, in order to deceive the Galatians they said: “Not only Peter and James and John, but also the other Apostles in Judea observe circumcision and other precepts of the Law, and Paul himself, who taught you differently than the truth requires, circumcised Timothy and, forced by the truth, was often for The Jews are the Jews." Wanting to remove such an opinion from the thoughts of the Galatians, Paul now says: But I, brothers, if I preach circumcision, why am I still being persecuted to this day? He says: "All the hatred of the Jews towards me and the fury with which they burn (furiunt) against me [come] from no other reason (ob nihil aliud), but only because I teach the pagans that they should not be circumcised and keep the excessive and already abolished yoke of the Law. And since I suffer persecution, it is obvious that I do not preach circumcision, which I destroy, for I suffer persecution from the Jews not so much because I preach the Crucified One and say that Jesus is the Christ [i.e., the Anointed One = Messiah], whom the prophets foretold, but because, according to my preaching, the Law has already been fulfilled. And that the cross is a temptation for the Jews, and foolishness for the pagans, this was shown by our Lord himself, who is called a stumbling block and a stone of temptation. (petra scandali), (Matthew 21:44, Luke 20:18); I think that this is for no other reason than because the preaching [of the Gospel, so to speak] came upon the hearers in full sail, so that it immediately ran into the cross and could not move freely further. But this cross, which is a temptation for the Jews and madness for the pagans, is strength and wisdom for us believers. For Christ is God's power and God's wisdom (1 Cor. 1:24), so that because He is called madness, the foolishness of God was wiser for men, and because He was a temptation and weakness, the weakness of God was stronger for men. “But since,” he says, “the temptation of the cross of Christ still remains, and I still suffer persecution, which I should not have endured if there had been no temptation, it is in vain that some spread rumors that I preach circumcision, for rebelling against which I endure persecution.” Verse 12: Oh that those who trouble you were cut off [from fellowship]! (Gal.5:12). - The question arises: how is Paul a disciple of the One who said: Bless those who curse you (Matthew 5:44-45), when he himself says: Bless and do not curse (Rom.12:14) and in another place: And those who curse will not receive the kingdom of God as an inheritance (1 Cor. 6:9-11): and in the present case he curses those who rebel [or: disturbed] the churches of Galatia, and slandered with a word of desire: O that those who disturb you were cut off [from fellowship] 22 . The suffering from castration is so disgusting that those who inflict it on those who do not want it are punished according to state laws, and the one who castrates himself is subject to reproach, so that, they say, if it is true that Christ lives in me (Gal. 2:20) and also: Or are you seeking to test Him who speaks in me (2 Cor. 13:3) [i.e. e.] Christ, then of course, the word of the One who says: Learn from Me that I am meek and lowly in heart (Matthew 11:29) cannot be understood as a curse, and therefore they prefer to think (magis putabur 23) that the Apostle could not refrain from Jewish rage and some uncontrollable anger rather than imitate Him Who is like a lamb before the shearers him, did not open his mouth, and those who slandered him did not slander each other (Is. 53:7), but, condemned, he gave himself up to death. Whoever responds to this objection against Paul, let him say the following: "The words spoken by him are not so much words of irritation against enemies, but words caused by love for the Church of God. In fact, he saw that the entire region, which he himself with his own blood with dangers converted to faith in Christ from idolatry, was outraged by the unexpected sermon, and in his Apostolic sorrow, in the sorrow of his father, he could not resist: he changed the expression of his speech and spoke with anger to those whom he had previously addressed kindly, so that at least with curses he could restrain those whom he could not restrain with meekness.” And it is not surprising if the Apostle, as a man still imprisoned in the weak church [of the body] and seeing in his body another Law captivating him and distracting him to the Law of sin, one day began to speak in the same way in which we often see holy men speaking. But, on the other hand, it may also be said - although to some this seems unnecessary - that Paul did not so much curse them as pray for them, so that they would lose those parts of the body through which they could sin. And just as it is said in the Gospel that it would be better for someone without an eye, without an arm, or a leg, or any other part of the body to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, than, having the whole body intact, to go to Gehenna (Matthew 18:8-9), and now the Apostle wishes them that they would rather lose one part of the body than be condemned to eternal fire due to keeping the body intact. If this passage ever meets with an objection from the pagans, then we have given instructions above how to answer them. Now we will present objections against heretics, namely against Marcion and Valentine and all those who rebel against the Old Testament, namely: on what basis do they, accusing God the Creator as a bloodthirsty warrior and [seeing Him] only as a Judge, dare to justify these qualities in the Apostle of the good God. And in my opinion, there is no doubt that in the Old Law in no other place was such a terrible and bloody sentence pronounced as the sentence: Oh, if those who disturb you were cut off [from communication] [or: beheaded, or: castrated]. And they cannot say that the Apostle prayed for the enemies of Christ who outraged His Church. And that this sentence, breathing with indignation and anger, was not pronounced out of love, this is shown by the very meaning (pondere - weight, heaviness) of the words. So, whatever they say to justify the Apostle, we will not refuse to recognize all this as suitable for the defense of the Old Testament Law. Verse 13: For you, brothers, were called to freedom; but only your freedom is not a reason for [justifying] the flesh (Gal. 5:13) (implied: let us, - the last word, which we do not find in Greek, was added by the Latin translator). – This place is very dark; therefore we have decided to literally translate the interpretation to it from the tenth book of the Stromatus [of Origen]; not because individual expressions cannot be explained in their place and according to their own meaning, but because, separated from the above in themselves, they represent a difficult to digest whole (difficile corpus), and if understood as they are expressed, they seem to follow with unexpected inconsistency and contradict themselves. So, here are the words of Origen: “This passage is difficult and, in our opinion, should be explained as follows: He who is free and follows in the highest sense the spirit and truth, [he] despises the former images and the letter. Therefore, he should not look down on the lesser and not give a reason to humiliate himself to those who cannot rise to the highest meaning; for although they are weak, and in comparison with the spirit they are called flesh; however, they are the flesh of Christ. For if [such a one] understands the mystery of the flesh serving the weaker, then he does something for the sake of the weak, so that while he has the knowledge, his brother, for whom Christ died, will not perish. So, pay due attention to whether this meaning can be deduced from what follows. You, brothers, he says, are called to freedom and says, perhaps because not everyone could understand the calling to freedom. Therefore, now you hear: Just do not give your freedom as an excuse [for justification] to the flesh. For the greater must serve the lesser out of love, since he who wants to be greater will be the slave of all (Matthew 20:26, Mark 10:43). So, let the spiritual one not torment the flesh of Christ and let him not give them a reason to bite Him, calling them not to destroy themselves mutually. So, it is necessary that he who walks in the spirit and follows the words of the scriptures in the spirit should not have any desire for their carnal meaning. If we understand his words: Walk in the spirit and do not follow the desires of the flesh, we understand simply, then it seems (as many people think) that in them Paul unexpectedly opposes the evidence and purpose of this entire epistle, because immediately after this follows: If you are led by the spirit, then you are no longer under the Law. And while up to this point the speech is somewhat coherent - if again we follow a simple understanding - on the contrary, here suddenly he takes us to instructions that are difficult to connect [with the previous one], namely to discussions about the flesh and spirit. i.e.: The works of the flesh are known, such and such, and vice versa: The fruits of the Spirit: love, etc. But even in these words we should not despair of [seeing] consistency, because the historical books of the Divine Scriptures contain an indication of the works of the flesh; but they do not help very much those who understand them as they are written. In fact, who will not learn intemperance and will not consider fornication as nothing when he reads about Judas going in to an indecent woman and about the patriarchs who had several wives (Gen. 28)? How will he not be inclined to idolatry if he thinks that the blood of bulls and the other sacrifices of the book of Leviticus have no more meaning than is indicated by the letter [of the Law]? As for enmity, it is taught by the openly expressed word of Scripture, and it is approved by the following passage: Despicable daughter of Babylon! Blessed is he who rewards your deed that you have done to us; Blessed is the one who takes and dashes your children against a stone (Ps. 136:8-9), as well as the following: In the morning I will destroy all the sinners of the earth (Ps. 100:8) and others like this, namely: those who speak of enmity, jealousy, anger, disputes and disagreements. If we do not have more sublime feelings, then the examples of our past life will rather encourage us to do so than remove us from it. And heresies themselves have their source rather in the carnal understanding of Scripture than in the action of our flesh, as so many think. In addition, through a literal understanding of the Law, we learn envy and intemperance in drinking. After the flood, Noah becomes intoxicated in the same way as the patriarchs of his brother Joseph in Egypt (Gen. 9:21, 43:34). And in the book of Kings, excess in food is depicted, as well as David’s dancing and his playing on tympanums in front of the Ark of the Covenant of God (2 Samuel 6:15–19) and the like. The question is: how will the simple word of Scripture, called flesh, call us to sorcery and atrocities if we turn to the spirit of the same Scripture? I think that this means that Daniel and the three youths turned out to be ten times wiser than the magicians and fortune-tellers of Gazarene and the Chaldeans, and Moses was instructed in all the wisdom and science of Egypt. Therefore, if someone remains in the carnal understanding of Scripture, then this is the cause of many evils. Those who do this will not inherit the Kingdom of God. Let us therefore seek the spirit and fruits of Scripture, which are not said [by the Apostle] to be known. Indeed, the fruits of the spirit in the Scriptures are obtained with great labor and effort and proper study. Therefore, it seems to me, the Apostle Paul cautiously and cautiously said about the carnal meaning of Scripture: But the works of the flesh are known (Gal. 5:19), but regarding the fruits of the spiritual he did not say, as it is: The fruit of the Spirit is known, but said this: But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, etc. ( Gal.5:22 ). Therefore, if we, leaving the images, move on to the truth and spirit of Scripture, then immediately love will be revealed to us first of all, and, moving from it to joy, we come to peace, through which we inherit patience. And who will not learn mercy and kindness when he understands that the punishments addressed through the prophets to the nations and which seem to some to be heavy in the Law, that is, wars, the extermination of nations and threats to them, are rather cures than punishments? For the Lord will not be angry forever (Is. 57:16). So, when this becomes clear to us, we will have a more reasonable faith, abstinence will accompany improved morals; this will be followed by moderation and integrity, and after that the Law will become everything to us.” Until this point, Origen. To these words of his we can add our thought that people who were called from the slavery of the Law to the freedom of the Gospel (to whom it was said above: Stand still and do not attach yourself again to the yoke of slavery) and are now convinced that, having accepted the yoke of Christ and the sweet commandments of the Gospel, they do not at all think that they are allowed to use this very freedom of life as an excuse for the [lusts] of the flesh, namely: to live according to the flesh, so that to be circumcised according to the flesh; but that they prefer to stand firm in the spirit, spiritually cut off the foreskin and, reaching into the highest regions of the spirit, leave the base side of the letter. But this can be understood differently. Perhaps someone will say: “Paul! I have ceased to be under the Law and from slavery have been called to freedom; therefore I must live in a manner befitting freedom and not adhere to any commandments, but do, fulfill and follow what only pleases me and what my will dictates.” To this the Apostle replies: “True, we are called to the spirit of freedom, but in such a way that freedom itself should not be in slavery to the flesh. And let us not think that everything is allowed to us, everything is possible. Therefore, it is better that we, ceasing to be slaves of the Law, prefer mutual service to ourselves through love, so that the commandments of the fragmentary parts of the expressed Law are contained in one chapter on love. Verse 14: But serve one another through love, for the whole Law is fulfilled in one word: Love your neighbor as yourself (Gal. 5:14). – Since he became free from everything, out of love he became a slave of all in order to win many (1 Cor. 9:19); therefore, he directly convinces the others that they too should serve each other (sibi) with love, which does not seek one’s own and what belongs to one’s neighbor. In fact, whoever wants to be first will be a slave to all (Mark 10:44), just as the Savior, who was in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but humbled Himself, taking on the form of a servant and being in appearance like men, humbled Himself, becoming obedient even to the point of death, the death of the cross (Phil. 2:6-8). So we are: before, under the Law, out of necessity, we apparently did something, but now we know, when we are free, that this should be done primarily out of love. Love is so beautiful that it stands at the head of the entire Law. The Apostle in another place calculates the benefits of love, saying: He is not jealous, he does not do wrong (1 Cor. 13:4-6). And pointing to many [other things] in the middle, he ends like this: He hopes for everything, endures everything, love never ceases (1 Cor. 13:7-8). And the Savior in the Gospel says that the sign of His disciple is revealed in the fact that [or: if] he loves his neighbor. And in my opinion this is suitable not only for people, but even for angels. The same thing is said in other words: If you do not want something done to you, then do not do it to others, and if you want people to do something to you, then do it to them in the same way (Matthew 7:12). I don’t want my wife to be inclined to commit adultery, I don’t want my property to be stolen, I don’t want false witness to weigh heavily on me and, embracing everything in one short statement, I undeservedly bear anything done to me unjustly. If, due to the love operating in me, I either do not desire the same thing or do not do this to another, then the entire Law is fulfilled. And it is not difficult to understand how all the commandments: do not kill, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not bear false witness, and so on, are contained in the fulfillment of the commandment of love. It is difficult to show how also the sacrifices prescribed in the book of Leviticus, and abstinence from [certain] food, and on the other hand permission to eat it - that is, when one is considered unclean and the other clean - and the continuous yearly circle of festivals can be reduced to one commandment about love, unless perhaps someone goes on to assert that the Law is spiritual and that we served the images and examples of heavenly things until it appeared the true High Priest, Who, having sacrificed Himself once, redeemed us with His Blood, and thus all the truth and difficulty of the former Law was fulfilled in His love for people; in fact, the Father so loved the world that He gave up His beloved Only Begotten Son for us. But to him who already lives in the spirit and has put to death the deeds of the flesh, and is beloved by the Savior, is no longer called a slave, but a friend, the Law is no longer valid - [the Law] which is intended for sinners, the ungodly, the disobedient and the indecent. Now, when we have completed, at least in some part, everything that was more difficult, we do not do only one thing, which is really easy, and without which everything we have done is in vain. The body undergoes the troubles of fasting, vigils torment the flesh, alms are begged for with violence (cum labore); and although there would be ardent faith, in martyrdom blood is shed with fear and suffering. There are those who experience all this (faciant); only love is discovered without suffering. And since it alone makes the heart pure, it is expelled from us by the devil so that we do not contemplate God with a pure heart. For when I, sitting, speak against my brother and set a temptation for my mother’s son (Ps. 49:20), when I am tormented by the happiness of others, and consider the good of another to be evil for myself, then is not what is said in the following words fulfilled on me: If you decide to kill and eat yourselves mutually, then be careful not to destroy yourself mutually. Love is a rare commodity. Who would want to be excommunicated from Christ for his brothers, imitating the Apostle? Who, rejoicing with those who rejoice and weeping with those who weep, is struck by someone else’s wound? Who is shocked by the death of his brother? We all love ourselves more than God. Look at the benefits that come from love. If we suffer martyrdom in such a way that we only want veneration from our other remains; if, following the opinion of the crowd, we fearlessly shed blood and gave away our property to the point that we became poor, then for such a deed there follows not so much a reward as a punishment, and rather torment for treachery than a crown for victory. Verse 15: Therefore, if you kill and devour yourselves among one another, be careful that you do not destroy yourselves among one another (Gal. 5:15). - This can be understood simply: so that we do not curse each other with curses, do not think of taking revenge on the one who curses us, do not want to sadden others, being in grief and, like wild animals, bite and be bitten, so that after the bite follows death and extermination. But it is much better if we understand everything that has been said to relate to circumcision and keeping the Law, so that, contrary to the meaning and consistent reasoning of the entire epistle, we do not imagine [the Apostle] Paul suddenly turning to extraordinary instructions. If, he says, others outrage you, then you will be outraged; if you, reading all the Old Testament Scripture, understand as it is written: An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth (Deut. 19:21), [i.e. e.] that anger desires revenge, and revenge causes suffering, because the Law not only does not prohibit, but even prescribes retribution equal to the offense; then it follows that one who is deprived of clothing can take it off [from another], and one who has received a wound can inflict it, and one who is devoured can devour it; and thus what appears to be justice is destruction, since it does not repay only one, but [on the contrary] it devours both. Verse 16: But I say, walk in the Spirit and do not gratify the lusts of the flesh (Gal.5:16). – And these words, in accordance with the above, should be understood in a double sense; so that we can say that those who by the Spirit have put to death the works of the flesh and have sown in the Spirit in order to reap eternal life from the Spirit, as soon as they feel the tickling of carnal lust, do not satisfy its desire (which, being fulfilled for a time, apparently caresses us), but bridle it with the Spirit and, in the words of the historian (Sallust), “live primarily not by the power of the Spirit, but by the slavery of the flesh.” Moreover, the Law is spiritual (Rom. 7:14) and not the Jew who [is] openly, but who is the Jew in secret, and circumcision is the circumcision of the heart in the spirit, and not in the letter; so that we affirm that they do not satisfy the desires of the flesh, who came spiritually out of Egypt and drew spiritual food and drink from the spiritual stone, who do not condemn food or drink, or any participation in the festival, or for the new moons, or for the Sabbaths, but who walk in all things spiritually, not satisfying the desires of the Law of the flesh or the letter, but reaping the fruits of spiritual understanding. Some have proposed a third interpretation of this passage, which, however, deviates little from the second: they claim that the lust of the flesh exists in those who are still infants in Christ. And the spiritual path is found in perfect men, so the meaning of the passage is this: Walk in firm confidence of spirit, that is, in the path of a husband, and do not satisfy children’s wishes. Verse 17: For the flesh lusts against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh; so that you do not do what you desire ( Gal. 5:17 ). – The flesh delights in the present and short-term, and the spirit in the future and eternal. Between this enmity and the mediator stands the soul, which really has in its power good and evil, will and unwillingness, but it does not have the power to want or not to want the same thing, because it may be that although it agrees with the flesh and does its works, but then, tormented by repentance, again enters into an alliance with the spirit and does its works. This is what his words mean: Indeed, they mutually oppose each other, that is, the spirit and the flesh, so that you do not do what you want, not because it is our free will that prompts us to agree either with the spirit or with the flesh, but because this action in the proper sense is not ours, namely (ipsum) should be considered the work of either the flesh or the spirit. But it is a matter of great difficulty and a very controversial matter, after indicating the works of the flesh and the spirit, to discover some intermediate works, which, apparently, do not relate to either the flesh or the spirit. We are called carnal when we completely surrender ourselves to the power of pleasure; and spiritual - when we follow the Holy Spirit leading us, that is, when we become wise according to His instructions and learn from Him Himself. And those who are spiritual are, in my opinion, philosophers who consider their own inventions to be wisdom, about which it is rightly said: But a natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, because for him it is foolishness. To make this clearer, let’s take an example: Let the flesh be called earth, the soul gold, and the spirit fire. While the gold is in the earth, it loses its name and is called by the name of the earth with which it is mixed, but when it is separated from the earth, then it receives both the appearance and the name of gold, and in reality is called gold, although it has not yet been tested. But if it is burned out and purified through fire, then it acquires the luster of gold and beauty worthy of it. Similarly, the soul is between earth and fire, that is, standing between flesh and spirit; when it is given over to the flesh, it is called flesh; when it is given over to the spirit, it is called spirit. Therefore, if she relies on her own thoughts and thinks that without the grace of the Holy Spirit she has found the truth, then she will be called by the name of a natural man. This place can be explained in another way and represents, as it were, an integral series or body that interconnects itself and does not contradict itself. Brothers! you are called from the bondage of the Law to the freedom of the Gospel. But I conjure you, do not abuse freedom for self-will and do not imagine that everything that is permissible (possibly - licent) is useful to you, and do not give occasion to the flesh and its excesses. Therefore, learn better that this kind of freedom is a much greater service [slavery], because previously the Law demanded [of you] obedience against the will (ab invitis), but now, prompted by love, you serve yourself mutually; although the whole weight of the Law and [its] numerous commandments are not so much excluded by the grace of the Gospel as they are briefly presented in a single word about love: that we love our neighbor as ourselves. In fact, whoever loves his neighbor fulfills the Law (Matthew 22:37–40), bringing him good and not bringing evil. Therefore, if love (dilectio) ceases and there is no goodwill (charitas), then some social robbery will occur between people, so that, mutually raging against each other and gnawing at themselves, [people] are destroyed by each other. And you, brothers, since you must live according to the spiritual Law, do not satisfy the desires that come from the flesh. In fact: the flesh is afraid of cold, abhors hunger, exhausted by insomnia, heated by lusts and desires something tender and pleasant. On the contrary, the spirit strives for what is contrary to the flesh and what can weaken it. And so the situation is that you should not consider yourself free because you have ceased to be under the slavery of the Law; but you should know that you are more restrained by the law of nature, because if the Law does not demand, then nature did not immediately fall silent [with the demand that] things do not go in accordance with your desire; on the contrary, you are often called to do things that you do not want to do, because the flesh is warring against the spirit. Therefore, brethren, I adjure you not to give your freedom to the [lusts] of the flesh, but to prefer service (magis serviatis) to the spirit, in order to begin to do what you want and not to be in debt to the Law for anything, that is, not to be in subjection to the flesh; because then in truth you will have freedom from the abolished Law in the Gospel, when the flesh will not at all urge you to do what you do not want, but by serving the spirit you will learn that you are not under the Law. And since we began to present this passage above according to its double meaning, we must add what we missed. The flesh discovers lust contrary to the spirit, i.e. events of the past life and the carnal understanding of Scripture rebel against the mysterious meaning and spiritual teaching. And the spirit is against the flesh, that is, the more sublime resists the overthrown, the eternal – the short-term, and the truth – the shadow. And the carnal sense of Scripture, which cannot be fulfilled (because we are not able to fulfill everything that is written), shows us that we are placed in the impossibility of fulfilling the Law, since even if we wanted to follow the letter, impossibility does not allow us [to do so]. Verse 18: Therefore, if you are led by the Spirit, you are no longer under the authority of the Law (Gal. 5:18). - This is not the spirit that the Apostle speaks of elsewhere: the Spirit Himself bears witness to our spirit that we are children of God (Rom. 8:16), that is, it does not mean the spirit of man who is in him, but the Holy Spirit, following Whom we become spiritual and cease to be under the authority of the Law. So, it should be noted that this spirit is not called with a grammatical member or with any other requirement, as we read in other places, for example, about the spirit of meekness, about the spirit of faith, but simply: Spirit. However, this detail has some meaning more in Greek than in our language, which has no member at all. Regarding this passage, the question arises: “If he who is guided by the Spirit is not under the authority of the Law, then did Moses and the [other] prophets act in the Spirit and live [at the same time] under the Law? But the Apostle denies this. Or were they, having the Spirit, not under the Law? To this the Apostle gives [seemingly] an affirmative answer. Or, thirdly, perhaps they lived under the authority of the Law, but did not have Spirit? But it is wicked to think so about such men. To this we will answer briefly: It is not the same thing to be under the Law and to be as if under the Law, just as it is not the same thing to be in the likeness of sinful flesh and to be in sinful flesh. And it does not mean the same thing - a real serpent and the likeness of the brass serpent, which Moses hanged in the desert (Num. 21: 4-9). From this it follows that the holy prophets and Moses, who walked in the Spirit and lived in the Spirit, did not live under the Law, but only as if under the Law, in order to apparently be under the Law in order to acquire those who were under the Law, and to call them from the baseness of the letter to the height of the spirit. For Paul, who was a Jew to the Jews and all things to all in order to win all (1 Cor. 9:22) did not say: He was under the Law, but: He was, as it were, under the Law, to show that he did not preserve the truth of the Law, but only its likeness. It appears that we have resolved the proposed issue. But what should we do with that passage in Paul's letter that says: When the time was fulfilled, God sent His Son, born of a woman who was under the Law, to redeem those who were under the Law (Gal. 4:4-5)? In fact, if Christ was under the Law, and not as if under the Law, then all our previous reasoning does not matter. But this objection is resolved by its very meaning (de suo loco); because He who was under the Law in order to redeem those who were under the Law, of course, submitted to the Law of his own will, since he was free from the Law, and [of course] was much freer than Paul, who testified that he was not under the Law, but as if under the Law. And just as for our sake He descended into the abyss and abyss of death - us, crying out in prayer: Who will free us from the body of this death (de corpore hujus mortis) (Rom. 7:24), - so He was pleased to be born of a woman and to be under the Law, in order to save those who were born of a woman and [were] under the Law. However, it is certain that He was born not from a wife, that is, not from one who was in a marital state, but from a Virgin. But the Virgin was called a wife inconsistently [with reality], for the sake of those who did not know that she was a Virgo. Thus, for the sake of those who believed that Holy Mary had a husband, the Virgin is called a wife; so also for the sake of those who thought that Christ was under the power of the Law, not knowing that He was, as it were, under the Law, for the sake of those who were actually under the Law, it is said that He was under the Law. Verses 19–21: But the works of the flesh are clearly known (manifesta); these are: fornication, uncleanness, intemperance, serving idols, witchcraft (veneficia = poisoning), enmity, quarrels, jealousy, anger, strife, disagreements, divisions (heresies), envy, drunkenness, untimely consumption of abundant food, and the like, about which I warn, as I said before, that those who do this will not be owners of the Kingdom of God (Gal. 5:19-21). – Above, when we explained the passage about the flesh and the spirit, we spoke about a threefold understanding, i.e., carnal people are either those who are like children and carnal, and cannot perceive the solid food of Christ and the nourishment of perfect age, or those who, according to the custom of the Jews, follow only the actual past examples of the past life and the letter [of Scripture], or, without a doubt, in accordance with the direct meaning, it is said here that that in the composition of a person there is flesh and spirit, and according to the difference in their essence, there are either carnal or spiritual deeds. And now what are called works of the flesh, namely: fornication, uncleanness, intemperance, etc., which are then indicated, in my opinion, rather relates to the understanding here of simply the flesh and spirit than to the flesh of the Law and the infancy of people about Christ, although in the place where we (above) translated word for word the reasoning from the tenth book of Origen’s Stromatus, it is expressed that one can also think about this. The words of the Apostle: But the works of the flesh are known to the point of obviousness, show that these works are known either to everyone, because they are obvious in themselves, as evil, and such as should be avoided; and are so obvious that even those who do them want to hide what they are doing. Or perhaps they are known only to those who have believed in Christ, because many of the pagans place their glory in their disgraces and think that if they have satisfied their lusts, they have won victory over dishonor [have gotten rid of dishonor]. But it is also wonderful that he appropriates works to the flesh, and fruits to the spirit; because vices themselves have an end and perish, but virtues grow into abundant fruits. But let us not think that the soul has nothing to do when vices are recognized as the work of the flesh, and virtues are assimilated to the spirit; because. - as we said above, the soul, placed as if in a certain interval, either joins the flesh and then it is said about it: My Spirit will not abide in these people, because they are flesh (Gen. 6:3), or unites with the spirit and then becomes a spirit, for: Whoever cleaves to the Lord is one and the same spirit (1 Cor. 6:17). So, the first work of the flesh is fornication. It is placed as obvious at the beginning, so that we have no doubt about what is in the middle. Indeed, whatever a person does, he does outside the body, and he who commits fornication sins against his body [in suum corpus – into his body]. But we do not belong to ourselves, for we are bought with a price and carry God in our body. Therefore, the fornicator commits a greater crime [compared to others]: he takes the members of Christ and makes them members of the harlot, for the two of them become one body. He who is not faithful and does not believe in Christ makes his members the members of a harlot, but he who believes in Christ makes the members of Christ the members of a harlot. But I don’t know, on the contrary, whether the one who is unfaithful builds or corrupts the church of the idol with his fornication, because through vices demons even receive very great respect. I know one thing: he who commits fornication after believing in Christ corrupts the church of God. The second work of the flesh is called uncleanness, and its companion is intemperance. For as in the Old Testament about unspeakable crimes that are committed in secret, and about which it is very shameful to speak, so as not to defile either the mouth of the speaker or the ears of the listener, Scripture generally says: Make the children of Israel ashamed before all uncleanness (Lev. 15:31); so in this place he called other extraordinary acts of lust, even marriage relations themselves, intemperance and impurity, if they are shameless and dishonest, as [they should not have been] in the eyes of God for procreation. The fourth place on the list of works of the flesh is idolatry. In fact, whoever has once given himself over to intemperance and lust does not look to the Creator; and otherwise: in all idolatry, a person delights in festivities, the satisfaction of the throat, the belly and what is below the belly, and so that somehow (forsitor) it does not seem that witchcraft and evil tricks (artes) are not prohibited in the New Testament, then they are also named among the works of the flesh. Because often, with the help of magical means, unhappy people can fall in love and fall in love. And what degree of guilt there is in enmity, delivered after sorcery, this shows a clear idea of ​​​​the obviousness of [this] crime. As far as it depends on us, we should not be anyone's enemies, but have peace with everyone. Therefore, if, by speaking the truth, we make some enemies, then we are not so much their enemies as they are the enemies of the truth. This is what is said in the book of God to Abraham: I will be an enemy to your enemies and will resist those who oppose you, and should, as above, be understood in the sense that not so much Abraham was an enemy to them as they were enemies of the virtues and faith of Abraham, according to which he, after trampling on idols, began to worship the God he knew. Also, what is commanded to Israel, namely: that they should be enemies of the Midianites with eternal hatred, with enmity transferred to their descendants (Numbers 31:17-18), is said, as it were, to those who were under the guidance of a teacher and deserved to hear another word: You will hate your enemy (Matthew 5:43). But perhaps this indicates not so much the enmity of individuals as the disagreement of their morals, so that, just as God put enmity between the woman and the serpent, so that their friendship would not harm the man, [friendship] because of which he was expelled from paradise, there was rather a difference in life between the Midianites and the Israelites, rather than the fact that one of the nations was condemned. The seventh place among the works of the flesh is occupied by enmity: it is placed among vices in a certain sacred, as if exalted place (numero): the servant of the Lord should not start quarrels, but should be meek with everyone, a patient teacher, instructing with meekness even those who resist (2 Tim. 2:24-25). After enmity, the eighth vice is jealousy, which is better designated and more accurately called by the Greek word ζῆλος; I don't know which of us is free from this evil. In fact, the patriarchs also expressed jealousy towards their brother Joseph; both Mary and Aaron, the prophetess and priest of God, were seized by this passion in relation to Moses (Gen. 37, Num. 12:1-9), and so much so that the first one, about whom Scripture narrates, says this: Mary the prophetess, throwing the tympanum (Ex. 15:20), etc., then thrown outside the camp, was struck by the disease of leprosy and had to bring prolonged repentance, being in excommunication for seven days (Num. 12:10–15)). Then comes anger, which does not fulfill the righteousness of God (James 1:20) and is a type of wrath. And between anger and anger the following difference is revealed: an angry person is always angry, but an angry person is excited only for a while. And I do not know whether anyone who is angry can inherit the Kingdom of God, because he who is angry is separated from the Kingdom (Matthew 5:5). Also, quarrels, which the Greeks, calling differently, mark with the word ἐριθείας (although quarrel = rixa is called μάχη = battle), remove a person from the Kingdom of God. But there is a quarrel (ἐριθεία), when someone, always ready for contradiction, delights in someone else’s womb (stomacho), argues with feminine pickiness and provokes disputes (contendentem = opponent). The Greeks call this by another word φιλονεικία (love of competition). Also, disagreements are works of the flesh. [This happens when] someone else imperfect with the same meaning and decisively says: I am Paul, and I am Apollo, and I am Cephas, and I am Christ (1 Cor. 1:12). But this kind of disagreement also appears in domestic life, namely: discord between husband and wife, father and son, brother and brother, one slave with another in the house (conservi ad conservum), one warrior with another living in the same tent with him, or one artist with another fellow artist. Sometimes it happens that when interpreting the Scriptures, disagreement arises, which gives rise to divisions (heresies), which are now ranked among the works of the flesh. For if wisdom is hostile to God (Rom. 8:7), - all false teachings (dogmata falsitatis) contrary to God are hostile - then consistently and hostile to God all divisions [heresies] relate to the works of the flesh. And the word heresy in Greek comes from the word election, because everyone chooses for himself exactly the teaching that seems best to him. Thus, everyone understands Scripture differently than what is required by the understanding of the Holy Spirit, by whose inspiration it was written; even though such a person has not apostatized from the Church, nevertheless he can be called an apostate (heretic) and [a man of] works of the flesh, since he chooses the worst. Following divisions comes envy, which we should not think of in the same way as jealousy, because jealousy can also be understood in a good sense; it is when one strives to be an ardent follower of one who is better. But envy is tormented by the well-being of another and it breaks down into two passions, namely: when [the envious person] himself is in a position in which he does not want another to be, or when he sees that the other is better, he grieves that he is not like him. Some of the newest writers, translating Greek verse, ridiculed envy in the following verses of elegiac meter: “There is nothing more just than envy, which immediately gnaws at the very culprit [it] and torments [his] soul.” And blessed Cyprian wrote a magnificent book about jealousy and envious malice (de Zelo et Livore); Whoever reads this book will not doubt to classify envy among the works of the flesh. And the difference between an envious person (invidus) and one who arouses envy is this: the first envies the one who is happier, and the second himself suffers from the envy of the other. Fourteenth place among the works of the flesh is drunkenness; for drunkards will not inherit the kingdom of God. And the Lord said to His disciples: Beware lest your hearts be somehow burdened with excess in wine and food (Luke 21:34). Wine perverts a person's meaning, weakens his legs, weakens his thoughts, and arouses lust. Therefore, the Apostle exclaims: And the wine in which is debauchery (luxuria) (Eph. 5:18). Everyone has the opportunity to express their opinion (interpretation). But I follow the Apostle: in wine there is debauchery, in wine there is drunkenness. And that drunkenness and debauchery are considered among the works of the flesh, this cannot be denied even by those who are overcome by these passions. And although some say that I am subject to reproaches for the book that I wrote “on the observance of virginity,” because I said that youth should avoid wine as poison: but I do not repent of this decision, because we condemned the effect of wine rather than the creation of God and do not allow a girl who is burning with the fire of her age to drink, so that under the pretext of drinking too little she drinks no more [than possible] and did not die. On the other hand, we knew that wine is sanctified into the Blood of Christ, and Timothy is allowed to drink [a little] wine. But intoxication can occur both from wine and from other types of drinks that are prepared in different ways. Therefore, it is said about the saint: He will not drink wine or strong drink (Luke 1:15). And so that someone who does not drink wine does not think that he can drink something else, every reason for this is eliminated, since along with wine everything that can cause intoxication is prohibited. The fifteenth, which is also the last among the works of the flesh, is the untimely consumption of abundant food. Because the people ate and drank and rose up to indulge in games (Ex. 32:6). Intoxication is always associated with debauchery. A certain well-known speaker, when describing a drunken person awakening from sleep, said: “A drunken person can neither stay awake nor sleep after waking up.” With this thought he expressed the fact that a drunk person in some way turns out to be neither dead nor alive. It took a long time to identify all the works of the flesh and make a list of all the vices. Thus [the Apostle] united them all in one word, saying: and the like. Oh that we could avoid them as easily as we understand them. “I predict to you,” he says, “as I said before, that those who do such things cannot inherit the Kingdom of God.” And where he previously predicted, he says: Let not sin reign in your mortal body so that you must obey its lusts (Rom. 6:12). Sin has all those types, in indicating the differences between which we have now delayed, perhaps longer than we should. So, in that soul in which sin reigns, there cannot be the kingdom of God: For what communion is there between justice and lawlessness, or what communion is there between light and darkness, or what concord is there between Christ and Belial? (2 Cor. 6:14–15). And we think that we will inherit the Kingdom of God if we are clean from fornication, idolatry and witchcraft. But enmity, disputes, anger, quarrels, disagreements, as well as drunkenness and other things that we consider insignificant, remove us from the Kingdom of God. And it does not matter whether anyone who takes part in bliss is excluded by one thing or by many, since everything equally excludes us. In the Latin collections of St. books in this list of vices seem to include adultery, uncleanness and murder. But you should know that (in Greek) the works of the flesh are named no more than fifteen, which we discussed. Verses 22, 23: But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, generosity, kindness, kindness, faith, gentleness, self-control. There is no law against [deeds] of this kind (Gal. 5:22–23). – Among the fruits of the spirit, what else should take first place if not love, without which other virtues are not considered virtues and from which everything that is good is born. Indeed, both in the Law and in the Gospel it occupies the first place: Love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and love your neighbor as yourself (Deut. 6:5, Matt. 22:37). What kind of benefits love is revealed, we briefly reviewed this before, and even now it is enough to say a little about it - namely, that love does not seek its own, but someone else's (1 Cor. 13: 4-7). And although someone, due to his vice, is hostile to the lover and tries to disturb his calmness with violent hatred, the latter is never embarrassed, never considers God’s creation worthy of hatred, for love covers a multitude of sins (1 Peter 4:8). This is the same thing that the Savior says: A good tree cannot bear evil fruit, or an evil tree good fruit (Matthew 7:18), and which, in my opinion, is said not so much in relation to people as in relation to the fruits of the spirit and flesh, because neither the spirit can ever commit those vicious acts that are listed among the works of the flesh, nor the flesh can abound in those fruits that come from the spirit. But due to the negligence of the owner, the spirit abiding in a person may not have the fruits characteristic of it (suos), and vice versa: the flesh may, after mortifying its deeds, cease to sin. However, they will never move forward so much that the neglected tree of the spirit begins to bear fruits of the flesh, and the cultivated tree of the flesh produces spiritual fruits. Joy is given second place to spiritual fruits; The Stoics, who make a more subtle distinction between concepts, think that joy (gaudium) is something different from pleasure (laetitia), for joy, they say, is the elevation of the spirit above what is worthy of rejoicing, and pleasure (gaiety) is an uncontrollable rise of the spirit, which knows no measure and rejoices even in what contains an admixture of vice. Others believe that from joy comes pleasure (voluptas - pleasure), not that which excites the body to lust, caresses the senses and is caressed by a pleasant stimulation of the senses, but another similar (ὁμώνυμον) to that which bursts out immoderately and indecently in laughter. If this is true, and if such a distinction between words is correct and not misleading, then let us pay attention to what may be, therefore it is said: The wicked must not rejoice, says the Lord (Is. 57:21). But at the same time, it should be noted that after love [in second place] comes joy. In fact, if someone loves someone, he always rejoices at his joy, and if he sees that he is engulfed in some delusion and has fallen on the slippery path of sin, he will also grieve and hasten to pull him out of there. But he cannot replace joy with sorrow, for he knows that not one of God’s rational creations perishes with God forever. The third fruit of the spirit is peace, from which Solomon, who was a type of Christ, received his name. And about the Church the Psalmist exclaims: His place was in the world (Ps. 75:3). And among the eight blessings [beats] of the Gospel it is written: Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called the sons of God (Matthew 5:9). Also in the first sedate Psalm it is sung: With those who hated the world I was at peace (Ps. 119:6). And let us not think that peace should be sought only when we do not quarrel with another person, but the peace of Christ, that is, our inheritance, happens to us when a calm thought is not disturbed by any passions. After peace comes generosity, or patience, because we can understand the word μακροθυμία in both senses. Opposite to it is cowardice (pusillanimitas) [or: timidity], about which it is written: The faint-hearted is very foolish, but the one who is truly patient and endures everything is a wise man (Prov. 14:29), and is called with increasing meaning: much wise, as it is written in Proverbs: A generous man is great in wisdom (Eccl. 7:19). Benevolence, or good-heartedness - for among the Greeks χρηστότης has both meanings - is a meek, gentle and convenient virtue for participation in all virtues, inviting to family intimacy, sweet in conversation and moderate in behavior. In addition, the Stoics define it this way: “Benevolence is a virtue voluntarily disposed towards good action. Kindness differs little from benevolence, because it too, apparently, is disposed towards doing good.” But they differ in that kindness can be sadder, with a brow covered with wrinkles from the severity of morals, from the desire to act exactly well and deliver everything that is asked, without at the same time finding a pleasant community and not attracting everyone to oneself with his kind treatment." The followers of Zeno also define it in this way: "Kindness is a virtue that is useful," or: "a virtue from which benefit comes," or: “virtue in itself,” or: “mental movement, which is the source of benefit.” Among the fruits of the spirit, the seventh and most sacred place is occupied by faith, which even in another place is considered among three: faith, hope, love. It wouldn't be surprising if hope wasn't listed on this list; indeed, in faith what is given is that which serves as the content of hope, and the Apostle in the Epistle to the Hebrews defines it this way: Faith is the essential content (substantia – ὑπόστασις) of things that are to be hoped for, and the proof of those that are not yet (Heb. 11:1). Indeed, what we hope for to come, and what is not yet in the present, we possess by faith, hoping that we already hold what we believe in. There is also the question: How does faith consist (posita est) in love? He who loves never thinks that he will suffer harm: he never suspects anything other than that he loves and that he is loved. And when love is eliminated, then faith will also be eliminated. After faith, the Apostle names meekness, which is the opposite of anger, strife, and disagreement. She is never called to actions that are contrary to her essence, giving birth to truly good fruits from the good tree of the spirit. Through her, God's servant Moses was honored to receive the testimony of Scripture, which says: Moses was meek more than all the people on earth (Num. 12:3). “On earth,” it says; but he could not be higher than those who beheld God face to face, because we are often moved to do many things by the weakness of the flesh. Also about David, the Holy Spirit, as a type of Him who will come [to earth], sings: Remember, O Lord, Divid and all his meekness (Ps. 131:1), although many think - and we do not deny this - that he spoke this about our Lord with a prophetic spirit. His meekness in relation to Saul, Absalom and Shimei was even clearly shown by it [Scripture] (1 Samuel 24, 2 Samuel 15); because one wanted to kill him; another, plotting new things, wanted to deprive him of power by deception, and the third, throwing stones at him and blowing dust over him, drove him with a cry: Come out, come out, you wicked man (2 Samuel 16:7). The last among the fruits of the spirit is called abstinence. By it we must understand not only chastity, but also abstinence in food and drink, in anger and movements of the mind and passions for carnal desires. There is such a difference between modesty and abstinence. Modesty belongs to people of perfect and high virtue (consummataeque - complete), about whom the Savior says: Blessed are the meek, for they will possess the earth (Matthew 5:5) and about Himself: Learn from Me that I am meek and lowly in heart (Matthew 11:29). And abstinence is on the way to virtue, but has not reached its peak, because in the one who still abstains, lusts arise from thoughts and defile the main part of the soul, although they do not gain victory and do not attract the one who has the thought to action. Abstinence is necessary not only in desires and lust, but also in the other three disturbances [of the spirit], that is, in sorrow, joy and fear. For this kind of fruit of the spirit there is no Law, for the Law is not laid down for the righteous, but for the unrighteous, the disobedient, the ungodly and sinners (1 Timothy 1:9). The law tells me: Do not commit adultery, do not murder, do not bear false witness, do not deceive, do not covet the things of others, do not commit perjury, do not steal (Ex. 20:12) (ff.). If I do not do all this, since the fruit of the spirit—love—reigns in my soul, then the commandments of the Law are unnecessary for me. Finally, even the wise of this world thought of philosophy in such a way that it convinces people to do voluntarily what state laws encourage people to do out of necessity. Verse 24: But those who are Christ's have crucified their flesh with its vices and lusts (Gal. 5:24). - Origen, connecting this passage with the above, reads this passage as follows: There is no law against this kind of people who crucified the flesh of Christ with vices and lusts, so it is not so, he says, as it is in the Latin translation, that is, not that the people of Christ crucified their flesh with vices and lusts, but that Christ’s flesh was crucified by these [people] with vices and lusts, And [Origen] asks: how is it that in people who have the fruits of the spirit, and have ceased to be opponents of the Law, the crucifixion of the flesh of the Lord is brought to praise, when in the Epistle to the Hebrews this is brought to people's reproach: They again crucify the Son of God within themselves and have Him to shame (Heb. 6:6). Instead of: again crucifying (rursus crucifigentes) in the Greek language, one word is much better used: ἀνασταυροῦντες, which we can translate with the word recrucifigentes (repeating the crucifixion) 24. So, first of all, it should be noted that it is another thing to crucify, and another: to repeat the crucifixion; and then the fact that it does not mean the same thing to repeat the crucifixion of the Son of God and to crucify the flesh of Christ with its vices and lusts. In fact, the flesh of Christ is not from the beginning and in the proper sense the Son of God; but Jesus Christ, since He was with the Father in the beginning, God the Word became flesh and destroyed Himself, taking on the appearance of a servant, in order to crucify the flesh and weaken the principalities and powers, triumphing over them on the tree, so that the well-known word of the Apostle was fulfilled: For that He died, He died to sin once (Rom. 6:10). So, if our bodies are members of Christ, therefore, your flesh is the flesh of Christ, which we crucify, killing through it on earth fornication, uncleanness, passion, evil desire and stinginess; and so they speak of us with praise, [of those] who crucified the flesh of Jesus Christ with its vices and lusts, and we always carry the mortification of Jesus around our body, so that His life may be clearly manifested in our body. It is worth a lot of work to live in this way in this age so that the life of Jesus is already manifested in our body, for in this way our mortal bodies will be quickened through the spirit living in us. Where the Latin translator used the word vitia, the Greek reads the word παθήματα, that is, passions. And since the word passion (suffering) can mean sorrow and other needs of our body, the Apostle carefully used the expression desire, so that it would not seem that he was rejecting nature in spiritual men, but only its vices. Thus, it must also be pointed out that, following the reading of the ordinary translation (Vulgatae): And those who are Christ’s crucified the flesh with its vices and lusts, we say that they did not crucify Christ’s flesh, but their own. I almost forgot about the second one [i.e. e. allegorical] interpretation. For I said above that all the following must be attributed to the Law and circumcision. So, the meaning will be this: Those in whom there is the fruit of the spirit: love, joy, etc. They crucified the carnal understanding of Scripture, which is now called the flesh of Christ, with its passions and desires, which in children and those who feed on milk are the source of sins (vitiorum). He crucified the flesh of Christ, who does not fight according to the flesh of the literal sense (historiae), but follows the predominant spirit of the allegorical understanding. Verse 25: If we live by the Spirit, we will also walk by the Spirit (Gal.5:25). – Let us use this testimony against those who do not want to understand Scripture in a spiritual way. But who lives in the spirit if not our hidden man, who sometimes lives in the flesh. But when he lives according to the Spirit, he walks according to the Spirit. When he desires to walk in the flesh, he is a living dead man. A man perfect in Christ always lives in the spirit: he obeys the spirit, never lives in the flesh and vice versa: He who has given himself entirely to the flesh and passions never lives in the spirit. Between these there are the middle ones, which we cannot call either spiritual or carnal, and which, vacillating between virtues and vices, sometimes (nunc) are distracted for the better and are spirit, and sometimes (nunc) rest on the unsteady soil of the flesh and are flesh. Verse 26: Let us not become greedy seekers of empty glory, provoking each other and being jealous of each other (Gal. 5:26). – One Greek word κενόδοξοι, the Latin translator expressed by combining three words. And how many meanings and definitions the word gloria (glory) has, proof of this is the countless books of the sages and the two scrolls of Cicero that he wrote about glory. And we, who are trying to talk not about word production, but about the meaning of the meaning of Scripture, will connect this passage with the above as follows. If we live by the spirit, then we will obey the spirit, serving ourselves mutually not through the Law, but through love. We should not argue about the meaning of Scripture and say: “Circumcision is better,” “No, uncircumcision.” “One must despise the literal meaning (historia) and follow the allegory.” - “On the contrary, allegory is meaningless and dark and is not attached to any foundations of truth.” This is where mutual hostility arises. He says: They want to separate you [from us] so that you will zealously follow them, wanting not so much to teach the truth of the Law as to conquer. But in order not to completely ignore the word: glory, giving the sages primacy for their useless explanations, we will show something from Holy Scripture. The word glory denotes the public opinion and human praise acquired through favor, as it is said: But they do everything to be glorified by people (Matthew 23:5) and in another place: How can you believe, seeking glory from one another? And then he points out the good side of this concept in the same place: But do you not seek glory from Him who alone is? (John 5:44). From this we can understand that the same word means either virtue or vice. If I seek glory from people, then this is a vice, but if from God, then it is a virtue, for He also calls us to true glory, saying: And those who glorify Me, I will glorify (1 Samuel 2:30). In the divine Scriptures, the word glory has another meaning, namely: when something most sublime and divine appears to human eyes. For example, the glory of the Lord, which appeared in the tabernacle of the Lord and in the church built by Solomon (1 Kings 8:10–11). And also the glory that shone on the face of Moses, although he himself did not know that his face was so glorified (Ex. 34:29). I think the Apostle also speaks about this glory: All of us, beholding face to face the revealed glory of the Lord, will be transformed into the same image, from glory to glory, as if by the Holy Spirit (2 Cor. 3:18). And the Savior himself is called the radiance of glory and the image of the being of God (Heb. 1:3). And Stephen saw the glory of God and Jesus standing at His right hand (Acts 7:56). But may we also receive freedom to invent new names, because, as someone said, new names must be created for new objects, since here [the Apostle] it is said: Let us not become greedy seekers of empty or meaningless glory. We affirm that they are zealous seekers of full glory, who desire the glory of God and the praise worthy of virtue and the contemplation of something more divine. Therefore, in very many places our [Christian writers] translated instead of glory: greatness. I have long wished for the free flow of my speech, but I am held back from speaking by fear. However, I will speak and will not keep silent about my passion - an almost general passion, not for wealth, not for power, not for beauty and bodily charms, because all this is clearly listed among the works of the flesh. If alms are given because of praise, then this is empty glory; so is prolonged prayer and paleness from prolonged fasting. These are not my words, but the words of him who proclaims the Lord in the Gospel (Matthew 6:1-7). Often even the purest purity in married life, in widowhood and in virginity, achieves human praise, and also - what I have long been afraid to say - martyrdom itself is a vain bloodshed if it is committed in order to be the subject of surprise and praise from our brothers. But let, says the Apostle, let the chosen vessel speak: If I have given up my body in order to gain glory, and have not love, then it is of no use to me (1 Cor. 13:3), and this is to him who said: I know a man about Christ fourteen years ago, but whether in the body [this] I do not know, or outside the body, [and this] I do not know, God knows - caught up to the third heaven (2 Cor. 12:2 ). And a little later: He was caught up into paradise and heard secret (arcana) words that it is not lawful for a man to speak - to him, I say, who labored more than anyone else, and to whom, so that the greatness of the revelation would not destroy him, was given a stimulant of his flesh, the angel of Satan, to strike him with blows, so that he would not become arrogant. And there is no doubt that he asked the Lord three times to depart from him; but it was said to him: My grace is sufficient for you, for My power is made perfect in weakness (2 Cor. 12:9). What work is so much the work of God as reading Scripture, preaching in the Church, striving for the priesthood (sacerdotium) and serving before the altar of God? But this also comes only from the desire for praise, unless someone guards his heart with all care. Look (Cicero also says this): many writers inscribed their books with the word “contempt for glory,” and, however, because of glory, they put their names in the table of contents. We expound the Scriptures, we often use the reed to correct our writing, we write what is worthy of reading; but if this were not the work of Christ, but the desire to achieve memory in posterity and popular fame, then all our labor will be in vain, and we will be like ringing brass and a clanging cymbal (1 Cor. 13:1). You see that many argue among themselves about the Scriptures, and turn the word of God into a field for fighters; They mutually challenge each other and, if they are defeated, they hate, because they are greedy seekers of glory. – I know that in the Latin Collections of St. Books, in the place that we presented above: If I give up my body in order to be an object of glory, there is: to burn, instead of: to be an object of glory; but this misconception has crept into ours due to the similarity of words - the words: to burn and: to be glorified, which among the Greeks differ only in one letter (καυχήσομαι and καυθήσομαι). However, the Greeks themselves have different lists. Gal.6:1. : Brothers, if a person is overcome by some sin, then you who are spiritual, instruct him in the spirit of meekness, watching over yourself, so that you too do not fall into temptation (Gal. 6:1). – Paul, knowing that he is a worshiper of that God who does not want the death of the sinner, but that he repent (Ezek. 8, 33:11), and that with the exception of the Holy Trinity, every being, although it does not sin, can sin, convinces even the one who is spiritual to give his hand to the one who hesitates, even under the fear of falling into sin himself. And he beautifully calls someone who has fallen into sin a person who can die, and thus by the very name he shows the weakness of nature; so he is worthy of condescension who, due to human weakness, is engulfed in delusion and has plunged into the abyss and cannot get up on his own without an assistant and help. And the name spiritual is not added: man, but it is as if God commanded him to instruct a person who has fallen into sin, or, as it is better in Greek, to perfect him in the spirit of meekness. But whoever improves does not lack everything, but only some. Finally, if a sinner does not fall into many sins, but only into one sin, then to correct the sinner, one must use the spirit of meekness and condescension, so that the erring person is not wanted to be corrected with coldness, anger or sadness, but is called to salvation voluntarily with confidence, promising him forgiveness; Let such a one be given the testimony of Christ that He calls those oppressed by the weight of the law and the burden of sins to a pleasant yoke and a light burden, so that they may learn that He is quiet, meek and humble in heart (Matthew 11:29), and that they will find rest for their souls. Let us use this evidence against heretics who, inventing fables about different natures, say that the spiritual is a good tree that never bears bad fruit. But the Apostle, whose judgment they themselves consider obligatory, says that even the spiritual can sin if, out of the arrogance of their hearts, they begin to be proud and fall; We also confess the same thing; but those who are earthly (χοϊκοὺς) can become spiritual if they turn to something better. They can object to what is written in the Epistle to the Corinthians: What do you want? Whether to come to you with a reed or with love and a spirit of meekness (1 Cor. 4:21). Indeed, if there he says that he will come to sinners not with a spirit of meekness, but with severity, then how here does he apply not a reed, but a spirit of meekness to those who find themselves guilty of some sin? But there the word is addressed to those who, not feeling their error, did not want to obey their elders (majoribus) and be corrected by repentance. and where a sinner, aware of his spiritual wound, surrenders himself to be healed by a doctor, there is no need for a cane, but a spirit of meekness is needed. But perhaps they will also ask that if one has to instruct a sinner in the spirit of meekness, he must do so in order to take care not to fall into temptation himself; then, therefore, a righteous person who is firmly confident in his own soul, who knows that he cannot fall, should not instruct a sinner in the spirit of meekness? To this we will say that although the righteous will win, knowing with what great efforts he has overcome himself, the sinner is given greater leniency. For this is why the Savior was subjected to temptation—He, who was similar to us in everything except sin—so that He could sympathize with us and grieve over our weaknesses, taught by His own experience how difficult victory over the flesh is. If any virgin remained a virgin until old age, then let her forgive the one who was carried away by the fervor of youth, because she knows with what difficulties she reached such an age. If someone tormented for confessing the name of Christ sees that another has denied during the torment, then let him sympathize with the suffering of the apostate and let him be surprised not so much that he was defeated, but that he himself won the victory. Pay also attention to the caution of the writer, for he did not say: Watching over yourself, so that you do not fall, but: So that you do not be tempted. Indeed, to win or be defeated is not in our power; Moreover, to subject someone to temptation is in the power of the tempter; in fact, even if the Savior was tempted, who can be sure that he will cross the abyss of real life without temptation? and those who believe that Paul out of humility and not in truth said: And if he is not skilled in speech, but not in knowledge, reject the sequence of this passage, for in order he should have said: You who are spiritual, instruct such a one in the spirit of meekness, seeing to it that you yourself are not tempted and do not introduce the singular into the plural. So, the Jew of the Jews, who was an excellent connoisseur of his natural language, could not express deep meaning in a foreign language and did not care at all about word expressions, when in general the meaning was clear. This is according to simple understanding. However, in order to apply the second method of interpretation to the matter, it is necessary to open this place on the basis of the end of the letter to the Romans, because there, when he also wrote about food and the observance by the Jews of the precepts of the Law, he called those who despised the literal meaning of the precepts [of the Law] solid and perfect, and those who were still carried away by the old customs, he considered weak and infants, and saw that between the carnal and with the spiritual there is enmity; then he admonished the spiritual not to despise the carnal and said: Do not accept the one who is not firm in the faith in disputes about opinions, for one thinks to eat everything, but let the one who is not firm eat vegetables. Let the one who eats not despise the one who does not eat, and the one who does not eat does not condemn the one who eats, for God has accepted him. Who are you, judging an alien slave? He stands or falls before his Lord. But he will rise, for God has the power to restore him (Rom. 14:1-4), and after a long discussion about the meaning of this passage, he added at the end: but we, who are more steadfast, should support the weak in their weakness, and not please ourselves: each of you should please his neighbor for the good of edification (Rom. 15:1-2). Verse 2: Bear each other's burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the Law of Christ (Gal.6:2). -That sin is a burden, the Psalmist testifies to this, saying: My iniquities have risen above my head, like a heavy burden they have fallen heavily upon me (Ps. 37:5). And the prophet Zechariah saw that under the image of a woman on a large piece (talentum) of lead sat untruth (Zechariah 5:7–8). The Savior bore this burden for us, teaching by His example what we should do. For He Himself bears our iniquities and suffers for us (Is. 53:4), and He invites those who were oppressed by the weight of sins and the Law to the light burden of virtue, saying: My yoke is pleasant and My burden is light (Matt. 11:30). So, he who does not despise the salvation of his brother, but extends his hand to the one who asks, and, as far as is in his power, weeps with the one who weeps, is weak with the weak and considers the sins of others as his own, he fulfills the Law of Christ out of love. What is the Law of Christ? This is my commandment, that you love one another (John 13:34). What is the Law of the Son of God? Love one another as I have loved you. How did the Son of God love us? Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends (John 15:13). Anyone who does not have mercy and is not imbued with regret and sorrow, even if he were spiritual, will not fulfill the Law of Christ. But let us connect this passage with the above, for we follow a twofold understanding. He who is weak in faith and still feeds on the milk of childhood cannot so quickly move from observing the precepts of the Law to spiritual sacred rites (sacramenta): you, who are stronger, bear its burdens, so that your knowledge will not be the cause of the death of your brother, for whom Christ died. Likewise, he bears the need of a brother who helps the poor, burdened with the burden of need and makes friends for himself from unrighteous wealth (Luke 16:1-9) and to whom after the resurrection Christ will turn with the words: Come to Me, you blessed of My Father, and take possession of the Kingdom prepared for you from the creation of the world, for if I was hungry, then you gave Me to eat, if I was thirsty, then you gave Me to drink ( Matthew 25:34–35). According to this meaning, in another epistle, Paul, instructing Timothy, added: Command the rich of this age not to be arrogant (instead of the words: not to be proud) and not to place their hope in unfaithful wealth, but in God, who abundantly supplies everything for use; to do good, to be rich in good works, to give easily, to be sociable, to lay up treasures for yourself as a good foundation for the future, to receive true life (1 Timothy 6:17-19). and whoever receives true life, that is, the One who says: I am life, he has fulfilled the Law of Christ, which directs to life. Verse 3: For anyone who thinks that he is something when he is nothing deceives himself (Gal. 6:3). – If someone does not want to bear someone else’s burden and who, without mercy, is content only with his own work and virtue, seeking not someone else’s, but his own, that is, loving only himself and not God, he deceives himself. But this passage can be read and divided [into parts] in two ways. First: If anyone thinks of himself that he is something when he is nothing. Secondly: If someone thinks about himself that he is nothing, then later we add: Since he is nothing, he deceives himself. And this arrangement of words is more noticeable in Greek than in Latin. The meaning of the first division is this: “Whoever considers himself to be something, but is nothing, deceives himself.” The meaning of the second division is more sublime and we like it more: “If someone considers himself to be something, then the fact is that he considers himself to be something and not out of mercy towards his neighbor, but judges on the basis of his work and labor, being content only with his virtue, such by his very claim is nothing, and deceives himself.” This latter is much better expressed in Greek by the word φρεναπατᾷ, i.e. deceives one’s soul, and instead of which the Latin translator used: Deceives oneself. and he deceives his soul who thinks that he is wise and, according to the word of the prophet Isaiah, wise in himself and understanding in his own eyes (Is. 5:21). This passage in relation to circumcision and the Law in its meaning is as follows: “Whoever is spiritual, but has no mercy towards his neighbor, despising the humble, because he himself [in his own eyes] is superior, deceives himself, not knowing that this Law is of such a spirit that we love ourselves mutually. Verse 4: But let each one test his own work, and thus have his glory only in himself, and not in another (Gal. 6:4). – The meaning is this: You, who consider yourself spiritual and stronger in comparison with the weakness of another, should not pay attention to the weakness of the person lying, but to your own strength. In fact, if another cannot perfectly transition from Judaism to Christianity, then it does not follow from this that you are a perfect Christian. But if you are not troubled by your own conscience, then you have glory in yourself, and not in another. A wrestler in a competition is not recognized as strong because he defeated the weak and gained the upper hand over the slow members of the enemy; but because he is strong, he receives the glory for his strength, and not for the weakness of his opponent. This can be understood in another way: He who has the consciousness of a good deed and, paying attention to himself, does not reproach his own deed, should not seek glory for it from another, spread his praise outward, enter into communication with everyone and seek praise in the goodwill of people; but let him have glory in himself and let him say: Let me have no [other] praise than the praise of the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom the world has been crucified to me and I to the world. Whoever seeks glory from another, the world has not been crucified to him, and he himself has not been crucified with Christ; because he received his reward, which is what he sought from people. Verse 5: For each one will bear his own burden (Gal.6:5). – These words seem to go against what he said: Bear one another’s burdens; in fact, if everyone carries his own burden, he will not be able to bear each other’s burden. But we must see that there he commanded that we who sin should support ourselves mutually in this life, and in the present age serve to help each other. and here he speaks of God’s judgment over us, namely, that we will be judged not in relation to the sin of another, and not in comparison with the worst [of us], but according to our own deed, either as sinners or as saints, for each will accept according to his own deed. Through this sentence, although it is unclear, we learn a new teaching, namely: while we live in this life, we can mutually help ourselves either with prayers or advice. But when we appear before the judgment seat of Christ, then neither Job, nor Daniel, nor Noah can ask for anyone, and each will bear his own burden (Ezek. 14:14). Verse 6: But the one who gives the announcement, let him share every good thing with the one who makes the announcement (Gal. 6:6). - Marcion interpreted this passage in such a way that he thought that believers and catechumens should participate together in prayer with the disciples, affirming themselves mainly on the last words: every good. Of course, if we were talking only about prayer, then the Apostle should not have given the commandment to the one who receives instruction, but to the one who instructs himself [or without: himself], that is, to the student, and not to the teacher. Finally, also the rest that follows does not coincide with his understanding, [namely the words:] Whatever a man sows, that he will also reap and: But let us not weaken in doing good, for without weakening we will reap the harvest in due time. Thus, the meaning will be this: Since above he commanded the spiritual, that they should instruct those who have fallen into any sin in the spirit of meekness and bear the burdens of one another, fulfilling the Law of Christ; now, on the contrary, he commands those who were even weaker than others, who were still disciples and carnal, so that they themselves would gather the spiritual harvest from the teachers, and also deliver the carnal to the teachers, because they, completely devoting themselves to instructions and labors, need what is necessary for this life; and thus it will be what is written about manna: Whoever [gathered] much did not have abundance, but whoever gathered little did not have need (2 Cor. 8:15). and in this place he called blessings, according to popular usage, means of life, clothing, and other things that people count among goods: For having means of life and clothing, we are content with these (1 Tim. 6:8). And it is not surprising if Paul called what is necessary for the body by the name of good, since even our Savior said to those who had not yet reached the pinnacle of virtues, but still walked humbly and asked that their faith be increased: So, if you, being evil, know how to give to your children the blessings given [to you], how much more will your heavenly Father give good things to those who ask (Matthew 7:11). I believe that Job also spoke about material wealth when he addressed his wife - as one of the foolish women, according to her view, for she thought so, - If we have accepted good things from the hand of the Lord ( Job 2:10 ) and then about disasters, suffering and temptation that have prevailed: Why then will we not endure evil too? Of course, when good and evil are not found in wealth and suffering, but in virtues and vices, as the righteous man says in the Psalm: Who is the man who wants life, who wants to see good days? Remove your tongue from evil and your lips so that they do not speak deceit. Turn away from evil and do good (Ps. 33:13-15). In the proper sense, evil is what we should avoid, and good is what we should do. Also, the famous rich man in the Gospel, who had no knowledge of good and evil, [in his own way] correctly considered the abundance of fruits in the fields to be blessings, saying: Soul, you have blessings laid down for many years: rest, eat, drink and be merry (Luke 12:19). and the other, dressed in purple and drowned in pleasures, being in hell, hears from Abraham: In your life you have received good things (Luke 16:25). It must also be borne in mind that, perhaps, this passage should be understood this way: the disciples are given a command that they communicate the word to their mentors, obey and be obedient and receptive, but, however, only in what is good, what is spiritual and not perverted by heretical or Jewish corruption. Verse 7: Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked, for a man will also reap what he sows (Gal. 6:7). - Seeing in spirit that those who are studying and must provide the maintenance and necessary for the life of teachers can fall into poverty and says this: “This year my field suffered a drought, the vineyard was spoiled by hail, and the income that they could give was spent on taxes, and I do not have what I could give what is commanded, [the Apostle] added: Do not be deceived, God is not mocked. He knows,” he says, “ your hearts and your abilities are not unknown to Him. This kind of justification, similar to the truth, may perhaps be useful to calm a person, but it cannot deceive God. And at the same time, he convinces that this command must be fulfilled, calling it a seed [fulfillment], so that a person does not think that what he intended to receive in multiplied form is lost. In his letter to the Corinthians, he also showed by a similar example the meaning (rationem) of what is given and what is received: He who sows sparingly will also reap a harvest sparingly, and he who sows in blessing will also reap a harvest in blessing. Each according to what he intended in [his] heart, not with sorrow or under compulsion, for God loves the one who gives joyfully (2 Cor. 9:6–7), compare (1 Cor. 9:6–7). Verse 8: For whoever sows in his flesh will also reap corruption from the flesh. and whoever sows in the Spirit will also reap eternal life (Gal.6:8). – Everything we say, think, do is sown in two fields: the flesh and the spirit. If what comes from the hand, mouth and heart is good, then it is sown in the spirit and will bear abundant fruit of eternal life. and if it is bad, then it is borrowed from the field of flesh and will infect our harvest with corruption. In other words: He who understands the law in a carnal way expects both the promises of the flesh and what is perishable in this life. but whoever is a spiritual hearer sows in the spirit, and from the spirit he will reap eternal life. At the same time, let us note the sequence of speech and connect it with the above: a person who sows in the spirit is called one who once began to reap eternal life and accidentally ceased to be a man. Cassion, recognizing the flesh of Christ as illusory, considered every union of husband and wife unclean, he, the most rude leader of the Encratite heretics, based on this passage, used the following proof against us: “If anyone sows in the flesh, from the flesh he will reap corruption, and precisely (autem) in the flesh that is united with the wife. So, whoever has a wife and sows in her flesh, he from the flesh he gathers into harvest corruption.” He must, firstly, answer that Paul did not say: “Who sows in the flesh,” but: in his flesh. But no one combines with himself and sows in his flesh. Then, let us make a broad concession to him in the interpretation of the increase we noted: in their flesh, - it is necessary to add that those who drink, eat, sleep and do something else to refresh the flesh, and sow precisely, as he says, in the flesh, and from it they will gather corruption into the harvest. and if he resorts to asserting that those who eat, drink and sleep do all this rationally, in the name of God, and sow not in the flesh, but in the spirit; then we will answer him that also those who, wisely following the first command of God, in the words: Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth (Gen. 1:22), sow not in the flesh, but in the spirit (Gen. 1:22). So, his conclusion (syllogismus) is empty and shaky, and at first glance deceives the listener with a verbal trick (sophismate). However, more carefully examined, it is easily resolved: after all, we cannot admit that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and other holy men born of the promise, as well as the very Forerunner of the Lord, born of the flesh, were infected with the seed of corruption; In the same way, you need to pay attention to the fact that he who sows in the flesh relies with the addition: in his flesh. But about the one who sows in the spirit it is not said: in his spirit, but simply: in the spirit. In fact, whoever sows good sows not in his own spirit, but in the Spirit of God, from Whom he will reap eternal life. Verse 9: But let us not grow weary in doing good, for without weakening we will reap a harvest in due season (Gal.6:9). – He convinces to persistent work those who in this life expect a reward for a good deed, not knowing that, just as in a seed there is one time for sowing, and another for reaping, so in this life the seed is deeds (which will give a harvest either in the spirit or in the flesh), and the harvest is the future judgment, and that according to the quality of the different seeds we will reap a different harvest, namely: a hundred fruit, in sixty, thirty times; No one who is weak can reap this harvest, for only he who endures to the end will be saved (Matthew 10:22). Similarly, in another place it is commanded: be steadfast (Is. 57:10). but [in reality] how is it that when sinners daily become stronger in evil deeds, we become more and more weak in good deeds? Verse 10: Therefore, while we have time, let us do good to everyone, but especially to those close to us in the faith (Gal. 6:10). – The time for harvest is, as we said, the present time and the life that we are experiencing. During it we are allowed to sow what we want; and when this life passes, the time of doing is taken away. Therefore, the Savior says: Work while it is day: night will come when no one can work (John 9:4). The Word of God, the true Sun, has risen for us, and the animals have gathered to retreat to their lairs, so that we, people, can set out on our work and work until the evening, as is mysteriously sung in the Psalm: You put down darkness and night came. During it, forest animals came out, roaring young lions to grab [prey] and find food for themselves from God. The sun rose and they gathered and slept in their lairs. A man will go out to his work and to his work until evening (Ps. 103:20-23). Whether we are sick, or healthy, whether we are humble, or powerful, whether we are poor, whether we are rich, whether we are humble, or famous, whether we are hungry or fed, we must do everything in the name of the Lord with patience and calmness of spirit, and then what is written will be fulfilled for us: but for those who love the Lord, all things work together for good. Even (ipsa) anger and lust and irritation seeking revenge - if I curb myself, if I remain silent for the sake of God, if during individual strong pricks and vicious movements I remember about God, who sees me from above - will become for me the reason for triumph. Showing generosity, let us not say: “This is a friend; but this I do not know. This one should receive; and this one should be despised.” Let us imitate our Father, who commands His sun to rise on the evil and the good and sends rain on the righteous and the unjust (Matthew 5:45). The source of good is open to everyone: slave and free, king and simple man, rich and poor equally draw from it. When a lamp is lit in a house, it shines equally on everyone. Therefore, if the bonds of freedom are untied indifferently for everyone, how much more so for those who are close to the faith and for Christians, who have the same Father and are called by the name of His Teacher [i.e. e. Christ]. But, in my opinion, this passage can also be connected with the above, precisely in the sense that by associates in the faith and teachers he means those about whom above he ordered their listeners to deliver everything considered good. The course of real life is short. And what I say, dictate, write, correct or re-read, depending on the time, can be fruitful or fruitless for me. Titus, the son of Vespasian, who, after the overthrow of Jerusalem in vengeance for the shedding of the blood of the Lord, returned to Rome victorious, was, they say, of such a good disposition that if on any night during dinner he remembered that he had done nothing good the previous day, he would say to his friends: “Today I have lost a day.” We think that no hour, day, moment, time or year is wasted when we speak an idle word, for which we have to answer on the day of judgment (Matthew 12:36). Therefore, if he naturally did and spoke so [living] outside the Law, without the Gospel, without the Savior and the teaching of the Apostles; what should we do, for whose condemnation is Juno with the same-husband wives and Vesta with the virgins, and other idols with abstinent people? Blessed Evangelist John, when he lived to a very old age in Ephesus and was barely carried into the church in the arms of his disciples, could no longer pronounce long speeches and usually in each separate meeting he said only the following: Children, love one another. Finally, the disciples and brothers, feeling bored because they always heard the same thing, said: “Teacher, why do you always say this?” He gave an answer worthy of John: “Because this is the commandment of the Lord and it is enough if there were only one.” This is what must be said about the present command of the Apostle Paul: Let us do good to everyone, and especially to our neighbors in the faith. Verse 11: You see with what writings I wrote to you with my own hand (Gal.6:11). - Those who wanted the Galatians to be circumcised spread rumors that Paul did one thing and preached another, and that he himself, while claiming that the Law was abolished, was living under the Law. Since the Apostle Paul himself could not refute this rumor in front of everyone (because he encountered an obstacle in the bonds that he endured for Christ), he introduces himself [or replaces himself] through the letter. and so that no suspicion arose of the forgery of the message, he, from this place to the end, rewrote it himself with his own hand, showing that what was previously written was inscribed by someone else. and that false teachers sent messages in his name, he also showed this in his letter to the Thessalonians: But we ask you, brethren, in the name of the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering to Him, that you do not quickly waver in your mind and not be afraid, either in spirit, or in word, or in a message, as if sent from us indicating that the day of the Lord is already coming, so that you are not deceived by anyone in any way ( 2 Thess. 2:1-3). and in order to save the entire epistle that he sent from suspicion of forgery, he at the end attributed with his own hand the following words: Greetings with my hand from Paul, which serves as a sign in every epistle, I write: The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all (2 Thess. 3:17-18). Also, the epistle to the Colossians, written by a scribe (quas dictaverat), he signed in the same way: Greeting with my hand Paul: remember my bonds (Col. 4:18). And wherever he learned that there were false teachers who were spreading new teachings in the name of the Apostle (per Apostoli auctoritatem), he signed the messages with his own hand. Finally, in the letter to the Corinthians, among which there were divisions and disagreements - for everyone said: I am Paul, and I am Apollos, and I am Cephas (1 Cor. 1:12), - he marked his message in this way: Greeting from my hand Paul: Whoever does not love the Lord Jesus shall be excommunicated (anathema) until the coming of the Lord (maranatha) (1 Cor. 16:21-22) and so on. So, for the same reason [i.e. e.], wanting to take away from the false teachers any reason [to falsify], for they and Galatians deviated from the truth of the Gospel, he added [the epistle] with his own handwriting, saying: You see with what scriptures I wrote to you. This does not mean that the letters were very large (for this is the meaning of the word πηλίκοις), but that traces of his hand were noticeable in them, so that when they see the features of the letters, they would think that they see the one who wrote. I am surprised how my husband, in our time of excellent learning, said something funny about this passage. Paul, he says, was a Jew and did not know the Greek letter, and when the need demanded that he sign a letter with his own hand, he barely depicted with large strokes - due to unfamiliarity - the crooked lines of the letters, and in this he showed proof of his love for the Galatians, since for their sake he tried to do what he could. Thus, Paul wrote the epistle in capital letters, because the meaning in the writing was great, and it was written by the Spirit of the living God, and not with ink and a reed. and in the addition: with my hand, under the hands, it is necessary to understand the deeds. For this reason, the prophets often write: the Word of God that was in the hand of Jeremiah or: Haggai, so that by comparing these places we must admit that the Word of God was in the hand of Paul. Paul wrote great letters not only then to the Galatians, but even now he writes to everyone; and even though the features that depict his messages were small, and yet the writings are great, because the writings contain great meaning. Verse 12: Those who want to do what is pleasing in the flesh force you to endure circumcision only so that you will not suffer persecution for the cross of Christ (Gal. 6:12). – Above, he showed where he made the postscript with his own hand, and now he repeats what he wrote. Caius Caesar, Octavian Augustus and Tiberius, the successor of Augustus, issued laws so that the Jews, scattered throughout the entire space of Roman rule, lived according to their rites and according to their native solemn statutes. So, the one who was circumcised, even if he was a Christian, was considered by the pagans as a Jew. And the one who, without circumcision of the foreskin, showed that he was not a Jew, was subjected to persecution both from the Jews and from the pagans. That is why those who corrupted the Galatians, wanting to reject these persecutions, urgently, for the sake of precaution, advised the disciples to circumcision, which Paul now calls trust in the flesh, precisely because during the persecution they opposed circumcision to both Jews and Gentiles, wanting to please the first, and fearing the second. Indeed, neither Jews nor pagans could persecute those whom they saw circumcising converts (proselytos), and even observing the precepts of the Law. Verse 13: For even those who are circumcised do not keep the Law, but they want you to be circumcised so that they may boast in your flesh (Gal. 6:13). “Because of weakness,” he says, the Law cannot be fulfilled. Therefore, the Jews also observe the regulations and teachings of men rather than the commandments of God, keeping neither the carnal Law, because this is impossible, nor the spiritual Law, since they do not understand it. Hence, all that they do, what they strive for, what they strive for, [is] to gain glory for themselves in the suffering of your flesh and to boast that the Gentiles are circumcised thanks to their efforts. and they do all this to please the Jews, and so that the hatred for the fight against the Law will subside. Verse 14: But let me have no other praise than [the praise of] the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world (Gal. 6:14). - He alone can boast in the cross of Christ, who took it and followed the Savior; who crucified his flesh with vices and desires; who contemplates not what is visible, but what is invisible: seeing the crucified world and its passing image. but for the righteous that world is crucified, about which the Savior says: I have overcome the world (John 16:33); and: Don't love the world! and: You have not received the spirit of the world. For him the world is dead, for whom he is crucified, and for him the end of the world has already come, and he has become worthy of a new heaven, a new earth and a New Testament, and sings a new song, and takes a new name written on a scroll, unknown to anyone except the one who accepted it. The question is: how does Paul now say: but let me have no other glory except [the glory] in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom the world was crucified to me and I to the world, when in another place he is glorified by others, as, for example, where he says: Through your glory, which I have in Christ Jesus (1 Cor. 15:31); and again: I will gladly glory in my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may dwell in me (2 Cor. 12:9). And in another place: But it is better for me to die if someone destroys my glory (1 Cor. 9:15) and other things that are written in this way. But one must know that all such glory is the glory of the cross, and everything that is worthy in relation to virtues becomes so due to the suffering of the Lord. Verse 15: For neither is circumcision, nor the foreskin, but a new creation (Gal.6:15). - How a believer and an unbeliever, being identical in essence, are divided into two categories according to their understanding, as the Apostle says: Putting off the old man with his works and putting on the new, which is renewed in knowledge in the image of Christ (Col. 3: 9-10); in the same way, the world, which is one and the same in its essence, according to its understanding, is now one way or another. For the sinner this is the old world, for the righteous it is the new. In fact, when the world is crucified for a saint, then for him circumcision and foreskin, Jew and Gentile, are nothing, but [for him it is] a new creation into which the body of our humility is transformed in accordance with the glorious body of Christ. For the old has passed away, and behold, everything has become new. (2 Cor. 5:17). And just as there is one glory of the sun, another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars, because star differs from star in glory, so is the resurrection of the dead (1 Cor. 15:41-42). Daniel speaks about this quite similarly: Very many of those who sleep will rise from the dust of the earth: some to eternal life, others to shame and eternal confusion (Dan.12:2). And the wise will shine like the brightness of the firmament; and regarding the righteous: Many are as stars forever (Dan.12:3). And, of course, in the sun, moon, firmament and stars, circumcision and foreskin mean nothing; but only a new creation without these bodily parts that can be cut off. So we too, in the same way, we who love God; and there is prepared for us that which no eye sees, nor ear hears, and which has not entered into the heart of man (1 Cor. 2:9), when we are transformed from the body of humiliation into the body of glory of the Lord Jesus Christ, we will have such a body that neither a Jew can circumcise, nor a Gentile can preserve with the foreskin. This does not mean that it will be different in essence, but that it will be different in glory, for this mortal must put on immortality, and this corruptible must put on incorruptibility (1 Cor. 15:53). Feeling something similar to this, the blessed evangelist John said: Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not yet been revealed what we are to be. We know that when it is revealed, we will be like Him, because we will see Him as He is (1 John 3:2). So, since this body of the glory of Christ had not yet been revealed, which had traces of nails and at the same time entered behind closed doors, but we have already now risen with Christ in baptism, reborn into a new man; then we will not serve either circumcision or the foreskin; but now let us believe what we will be. Verse 16: And on those who follow this rule [let there be] peace and mercy, and on the Israel of God (Gal. 6:16). – All [actions] are directed according to a certain rule and, as a result of the application of the rule, are assessed: whether they are correct or incorrect; and the teaching of God is, as it were, a certain rule of speech that judges between right and wrong. Whoever follows it will have peace within himself, which surpasses all meaning, and after peace, mercy, which is primarily revealed to the Israel of God. And he is called the Israel of God in contrast to the one who has ceased to be the Israel of God. Indeed, some say that they are Israel, but in reality they are not; they speak lies because they come from the synagoga of Satan. Do not be surprised if, in the likeness of the spiritual, there is carnal Israel, which has neither peace nor mercy, about which it is written in the Epistle to the Corinthians: You see Israel according to the flesh (1 Cor. 10:18); since, in imitation of God and the Lord, there are many gods and many lords, both in heaven and on earth. It is also excellent - to end the epistle in accordance with the proposed evidence in one word - he called the Israel of God; This is precisely what proves that everything said above was said not without a reason, namely regarding a controversial issue. Verse 17: However, let no one be a burden to me, for I bear the marks of the Lord Jesus on my body (Gal.6:17). - This does not mean that he seemed to have weakened in his teaching; but, like a farmer, he has such grief that it is as if the shoots he planted have dried up, or like a shepherd he has concern that it is as if the sheep he has gathered have been scattered and torn to pieces. Therefore, in Greek it reads better: However, let no one cause me sorrows (labores = κόπους = hardships), namely: so that I will not again have the need to work among you. A teacher cares about someone who lives and thinks differently from what his teacher taught and did. or perhaps he also prevents disputes among those who would again want to contradict [him]. This is the same as in the letter to the Corinthians, he concluded his lengthy words about the covering of the head by women and the nudity of men, saying this: and if anyone turns out to be inclined to argue, then we do not have such a practice, nor the Church of God (1 Cor. 11:16), i.e. we said what seems worthy and fair; and if anyone, not wanting to admit the truth, seeks means for answering and objecting, let him know that he who prefers to object rather than learn does not deserve an answer. I bear the marks of the Lord Jesus on my body. – Whoever is circumcised in the flesh after the coming of Christ does not bear the marks of the Lord Jesus, but has glory in his suffering. and whoever suffered blows beyond measure, was often in prison, was scourged three times, was stoned once, and other things included in the list of deeds worthy of glory, he truly bears on his body the signs of the Lord Jesus. In the same way, the one who torments his body and subjects it to work, so that while preaching to others he himself will not be condemned, [and he] bears the marks of the Lord on his body (1 Cor. 9:27). And the Apostles rejoiced when they were worthy to be mocked for the name of Jesus (Acts 5:41). Verse 18: The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit, brethren. Amen (Gal.6:18). - No discord, no slavery to the law, no quarrels; let not abuse, but the grace of the Lord Jesus be with your spirit, and not [speak] to the flesh or soul. [This is] because, having become spiritual, you ceased to be flesh and soul, or because the main contains less; for flesh and soul are subject to the spirit. Ecclesiastes also speaks about this: The Spirit will return to Him who gave it (Eccl. 12:7). And the Apostle Paul in another place: The spirit itself bears witness to our spirit (Rom. 8:16). But this grace of the Lord Jesus does not abide with everyone, but with those who have been awarded the names by the Apostle: faithful brothers, true brothers [relatives], which is what the Hebrew word Amen means. In fact, the Seventy translated it with the word: let it be, Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion: truly, or: truly. And as in the Old Testament, God confirms His words with some ordinary expression, saying: As I live, says the Lord [Num. 14:28], and through the saints he swears: As your soul lives; so our Savior in the Gospel with the word Amen shows the truth of His words. and that the word Amen signifies the agreement of the listener and serves as a sign of truth, this is also taught to us by the first letter to the Corinthians, in which the Apostle says: However, if you bless in spirit, then the one who takes the place of the simple will say “Amen” to your blessing, for he does not know what you are saying (1 Cor. 14:16). By this he shows that a simpleton cannot affirm the truth of what is said unless he understands what is taught (docetur) [or: what is said = dicitur]. In the indicated place there are no words: who speak, etc. look. (2 Cor. 11:13 according to Greek, Latin and Slavic texts (Translator's Note). Here, of course, is a collection of ten epistles of the Apostle Paul, which were used by the Marcionites (Translator's Note). Greek ἀρχή, Latin. principatus, translated in Slavic: superiors, in Russian: dignity, in the translation of this place into new languages, some disagreement is noticeable: English and Polish translate: initial state (first estate, pierwszego stanu); French and Italian: one’s origin, beginning, kind (leur origine, loro origine, i.e. state by kind, origin); German and Czech: one's principality (ihr Fürstenthum, sveho knı́žetstvı́). We have retained the translation of the majority, which is quite consistent with the Greek ἀρχή and the Latin principatus; in our opinion, the Greek ἀρχή is more consistent with the Latin principium rather than principatus. (Translator's note). The Greek πείθω and the Latin: suadeo mean: to persuade, convince, and thus win over to one’s side, and not: prepirati (Slavic) or: seek favor (Russian), with which this place is translated. Slavic prepirati is closer to the meaning. (Translator's note). So in the original instead of ἀποκάλυψις. – Editorial of the ABC of Faith. Greek text: τοῖς δώδεκα (Russian: twelve); Following the example of Greek, they are translated into new languages: twelve. But Latin and Slavic hold: undecim, one in ten. (Translator's note). Greek and glory. have: δόξα Χριστοῦ = the glory of Christ. (Translator's note). Greek, Latin (Vulgate), Slavic and Russian texts convey this passage in a negative form: We did not even agree to submit to them (i.e., the intruding false brethren); and the reading given in the cited bl. Jerome's codex, suggests a temporary desire of St. The Apostle to obey the decision of the Apostles. (Translator's note). The LXX text calls this king Ἀγχοῦς (Ankhus), and the Vulgate: Achis. (Translator's note). This text comes closer to (Matthew 18:15). (Translator's note). In the Vulgate in all places except the intercalary 8th verse of the 2nd chapter, instead of: Peter, Peter, it is translated: Cephas (Cephae). (Translator's note). Instead of Jesus Vulgate, in Greek, Slavic and Russian it stands: Κύριος, Lord. (Translator's note). So in the original instead of felicitate. – Editorial of the ABC of Faith. So in the original instead of fascinante. – Editorial of the ABC of Faith. Greek, Vulgate, Slavic and Russian have ἐν φαράγγι υἱοῦ Ἐννόμ, – in convalle filii Ennom, – in the wilds of the sons of Hinnom, – in the valley of the sons of Hinnom. (Translator's note). Greek σειρήνων, slav. Sirin, translated in Latin: draconum, in Russian. jackals. (Translator's note). In Russian this place is used: animals with wild cats. (Translator's note). The Russian text has As, Kesil and Hima (Hebrew words). (Translator's note). Greek: ε ἰ κῃ ͂, Vulgate: sine causa, Slavic: tune Russian: in vain. (Translator's note). (2 Cor. 5:14) in Greek reads like this. Ἡ γὰρ ἀγάπη τοῦ Χριστοῦ συνέχει ἡμᾶς; Slavic: For the love of God will support us... The words Christ died for all... (2 Cor. 5:15) (beginning of verse 15) are not in Greek (See: Τὰ βιβλία. Ἐν Μοσχᾳ. 1821). This is the spelling in the publication instead of σύγχυσις. – Editorial of the ABC of Faith. According to the following words of Bl. Jerome would have to translate these passages as follows: O sat down, those who disturb you would be beheaded, or castrated. But the verb abscind e re in the bl. Jerome below is not used with this meaning, but is replaced by the word cast rare, although its derivative abscisio has the meaning: emasculation. (Translator's note). So in the original instead of probable putatur. – Editorial of the ABC of Faith. The nuance of thought in these words is difficult to convey in Russian. (Translator's note).