Christ has freed us from the servitude of the law. We are the freeborn sons of Abraham.
That the Lavv vvas fit for the time of nonnage: but being novv come to ful age, to desire such seruitude is absurd, specially for Gentils. 12 And that he vvriteth this not of any displeasure, but to tel them the truth, remembring hovv passingly they honoured him vvhom he vvas present, and exhorting them therfore not to harken to the false Apostles in his absence. 21 By the allegorie also of Abrahams tvvo sonnes, shevving. that the children of the Ievves Synagogue shal not inherite, but vve vvho are the children of the free vvoman: that is, of the Cath. Church of Christ.
1Now I say, as long as the heir is a child, he differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all,Or io dico: fino a tanto, che l'erede è fanciullo, ei non è differente in cosa alcuna da un servo, essendo padrone di tutto.AND I say, as long as the heire is a litle one, he differeth nothing from a seruant, although he be lord of al,Dico autem: quanto tempore hæres parvulus est, nihil differt a servo, cum sit dominus omnium: 2But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed by the father.Ma è sotto i tutori, ed economi sino al tempo stabilito dal padre:but is vnder tutors and gouernours vntil the time limited of the father:sed sub tutoribus et actoribus est usque ad præfinitum tempus a patre: 3So we also, when we were children, were serving under the elements of the world.Così anche noi quand'eravamo fanciulli, eravamo servi dei rudimenti dati al mondo.so vve also, vvhen vve vvere litle ones, vvere seruing vnder the elemētes of the vvorld.ita et nos cum essemus parvuli, sub elementis mundi eramus servientes. 4But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent his Son, made of a woman, made under the law:Ma venuta la pienezza del tempo, ha mandato Dio il Figliuol suo fatto di donna, fatto sotto la legge,But vvhen the fulnes of time came, God sent his sonne made of a vvoman, made vnder the Lavv:At ubi venit plenitudo temporis, misit Deus Filium suum factum ex muliere, factum sub lege, 5That he might redeem them who were under the law: that we might receive the adoption of sons.Affinchè redimesse quegli, che eran sotto la legge, affinchè ricevessimo l'adozione in figliuoli.that he might redeeme them that vvere vnder the Lavv, that vve might receiue the adoption of sonnes.ut eos, qui sub lege erant, redimeret, ut adoptionem filiorum reciperemus. 6And because you are sons, God hath sent the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying: Abba, Father.Or siccome voi siete figliuoli, ha mandato Dio lo Spirito del Figliuol suo ne' vostri cuori, il quale grida: Abba, Padre.And because you are sonnes, God hath sent the Spirit of his sonne into your hartes crying: Abba, Father.Quoniam autem estis filii, misit Deus Spiritum Filii sui in corda vestra, clamantem: Abba, Pater. 7Therefore, now he is not a servant, but a son. And if a son, an heir also through God.Dunque non se' più servo, ma figliuolo. E se figliuolo, anche erede per Dio.Therfore novv he is not a seruant, but a sonne. And if a sonne, an heire also by God.Itaque jam non est servus, sed filius: quod si filius, et hæres per Deum. 8But then indeed, not knowing God, you served them who, by nature, are not gods.Ma allora non conoscendo Dio, eravate servi di quegli, i quali realmente non sono Dii.But then in deede not knowing God, you serued them that by nature are not Gods.Sed tunc quidem ignorantes Deum, iis, qui natura non sunt dii, serviebatis.
9But now, after that you have known God, or rather are known by God: how turn you again to the weak and needy elements which you desire to serve again?Ma adesso avendo conosciuto Dio, anzi essendo da Dio conosciuti, come vi rivolgete indietro ai deboli, e poveri rudimenti, ai quali volete da capo tornare a servire?But novv vvhen you haue knovven God, or rather are knovven of God: hovv turne you againe to the vveake & poore elements, vvhich you vvil serue againe?Nunc autem cum cognoveritis Deum, immo cogniti sitis a Deo: quomodo convertimini iterum ad infirma et egena elementa, quibus denuo servire vultis ? 10You observe days and months and times, and years.Voi tenete conto de' giorni, de'mesi, de' tempi, degli anni.You obserue daies, and moneths, and times, and yeres.Dies observatis, et menses, et tempora, et annos. 11I am afraid of you, lest perhaps I have laboured in vain among you.Temo per voi, ch'io in non mi sia forse inutilmente affaticato tra voi.I feare you, lest perhaps I haue laboured in vaine among you.Timeo vos, ne forte sine causa laboraverim in vobis. 12Be ye as I, because I also am as you brethren, I beseech you. You have not injured me at all.Siate come me, dappoiché io pur son come voi; ve ne scongiuro, o fratelli: voi non mi avete offeso in nulla.Be ye as I, because I also am as you: brethren, I beseeche you, you haue hurt me nothing.Estote sicut ego, quia et ego sicut vos: fratres, obsecro vos. Nihil me læsistis. 13And you know how, through infirmity of the flesh, I preached the gospel to you heretofore: and your temptation in my flesh.E sapete, come tempo fa tralle afflizioni della carne vi annunziai il vangelo: e la tentazione vostra ne' patimenti della mia carne,And you knovv that by infirmitie of the flesh I euangelized to you heretofore:Scitis autem quia per infirmitatem carnis evangelizavi vobis jampridem: et tentationem vestram in carne mea 14You despised not, nor rejected: but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus.Non la dispregiaste, né l'aveste in obbrobrio: ma mi riceveste come un Angelo di Dio, come Cristo Gesù.and your tentation in my flesh you despised not, neither reiected, but as an Angel of God you receiued me, as Christ IESVS.non sprevistis, neque respuistis: sed sicut angelum Dei excepistis me, sicut Christum Jesum. 15Where is then your blessedness? For I bear you witness that, if it could be done, you would have plucked out your own eyes and would have given them to me.Dov' è dunque quella vostra felicità? Imperocché vi fo fede, che se fosse stato possibile, vi sareste cavati i vostri occhi per darli a me.Vvhere is then your blessednes? for I giue you testimonie that if it could be done, you vvould haue plucked out your eies and haue giuen them to me.Ubi est ergo beatitudo vestra ? testimonium enim perhibeo vobis, quia, si fieri posset, oculos vestros eruissetis, et dedissetis mihi.
16Am I then become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?Son io dunque diventato vostro nemico a dirvi la verità?Am I then become your enemie, telling you the truth?Ergo inimicus vobis factus sum, verum dicens vobis ? 17They are zealous in your regard not well: but they would exclude you, that you might be zealous for them.Sono gelosi di voi non rettamente: ma voglion mettervi fuora, affinchè amiate loro.They emulate you not vvel: but they vvould exclude you, that you might emulate them.Æmulantur vos non bene: sed excludere vos volunt, ut illos æmulemini. 18But be zealous for that which is good in a good thing always: and not only when I am present with you.Siate amanti del bene per buon fine sempre, e non solamente, quand'io son presente tra voi.But do you emulate the good in good alvvaies: and not only vvhen I am present vvith you.Bonum autem æmulamini in bono semper: et non tantum cum præsens sum apud vos. 19My little children, of whom I am in labour again, until Christ be formed in you.Figliuolini miei, i quali io porto nuovamente nel mio seno sino a tanto, che sia formato in voi Cristo.My litle children, vvhom I trauail vvithal againe, vntil Christ be formed in you.Filioli mei, quos iterum parturio, donec formetur Christus in vobis: 20And I would willingly be present with you now and change my voice: because I am ashamed for you.Ma vorrei essere ora presso di voi, e cambiar la mia voce: conciossiachè sono perplesso riguardo a voi.And I vvould be vvith you now and chaunge my voice: because I am confounded in you.vellem autem esse apud vos modo, et mutare vocem meam: quoniam confundor in vobis. 21Tell me, you that desire to be under the law, have you not read the law?Ditemi voi, che volete essere sotto la legge, non avete letta la legge?Tel me you that vvil be vnder the Lavv, haue you not read the Lavv?Dicite mihi qui sub lege vultis esse: legem non legistis ? 22For it is written that Abraham had two sons: the one by a bondwoman and the other by a free woman.Imperocché sta scritto, che Abramo ebbe due figliuoli, uno della schiava, e uno della libera.For it is vvritten that Abraham had tvvo sonnes: one of the bond-vvoman, and one of the free-vvoman.Scriptum est enim: Quoniam Abraham duos filios habuit: unum de ancilla, et unum de libera. 23But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh: but he of the free woman was by promise.Ma quello della schiava nacque secondo la carne: quello poi della libera in virtù della promessa:But he that of the bond-vvoman, vvas borne according to the flesh: and he that of the free-vvoman, by the promisse.Sed qui de ancilla, secundum carnem natus est: qui autem de libera, per repromissionem:
24Which things are said by an allegory. For these are the two testaments. The one from Mount Sina, engendering unto bondage, which is Agar.Le quali cose sono state dette per allegoria. Imperocché questi sono i due testamenti, uno del monte Sinai che genera schiavi: questo è Agar:vvhich things are said by an allegorie. For these are the tvvo testaments. The one from mount Sina, gendring vnto bondage: vvhich is Agar, (quæ sunt per allegoriam dicta. Hæc enim sunt duo testamenta. Unum quidem in monte Sina, in servitutem generans, quæ est Agar: 25For Sina is a mountain in Arabia, which hath affinity to that Jerusalem which now is: and is in bondage with her children.Imperocché il Sina è un monte dell'Arabia, che corrisponde alla Gerusalemme, che è adesso, la quale è serva insieme co' suoi figliuoli.for Sina is a mountaine in Arabia, vvhich hath affinitie to that vvhich novv is Hierusalem) and serueth vvith her children.Sina enim mons est in Arabia, qui conjunctus est ei quæ nunc est Jerusalem, et servit cum filiis suis. 26But that Jerusalem which is above is free: which is our mother.Ma quella, che è lassuso Gerusalemme, ella è libera; e dessa è la madre nostra.But that Hierusalem vvhich is aboue, is free: vvhich is our mother.Illa autem, quæ sursum est Jerusalem, libera est, quæ est mater nostra. 27For it is written: Rejoice, thou barren, that bearest not: break forth and cry thou that travailest not: for many are the children of the desolate, more than of her that hath a husband.Imperocché sta scritto: rallegrati, o sterile, che non partorisci: prorompi in laudi, e grida tu, che non se' feconda: imperocché molti più sono i figliuoli della abbandonata, che di colei, che ha marito.For it is vvritten: Reioyce thou barren, that bearest not: breake forth and crie, that trauailest not: because many are the children of the desolate, more then of her that hath a husband.Scriptum est enim: Lætare sterilis, quæ non paris; / erumpe et clama, quæ non parturis: / quia multi filii desertæ, / magis quam ejus quæ habet virum. 28Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.Noi perciò, o fratelli, siamo come Isacco figliuoli della promessa.But we brethren, according to Isaac, are the children of promis.Nos autem, fratres, secundum Isaac promissionis filii sumus. 29But as then he that was born according to the flesh persecuted him that was after the spirit: so also it is now.Ma siccome allora quegli, che era nato secondo la carne, perseguitava colui, che era secondo lo spirito: così anche di presente.But as then he that vvas borne according to the flesh, persecuted him that vvas after the spirit: so novv also.Sed quomodo tunc is, qui secundum carnem natus fuerat, persequebatur eum qui secundum spiritum: ita et nunc.
30But what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the free woman.Ma che dice la scrittura? Metti fuori la schiava, e il figliuolo di lei: imperocché non sarà erede il figliuol della schiava col figliuolo della libera.But vvhat saith the Scripture? Cast out the bond-vvoman and her sonne. for the sonne of the bond-vvoman shal not be heire vvith the sonne of the free-vvoman.Sed quid dicit Scriptura ? Ejice ancillam, et filium ejus: non enim hæres erit filius ancillæ cum filio liberæ. 31So then, brethren, we are not the children of the bondwoman but of the free: by the freedom wherewith Christ has made us free.Per la qual cosa, o fratelli, noi non siamo figliuoli della schiava, ma della libera, e di quella libertà, a cui Cristo ci ha affrancati.Therfore brethren vve are not the children of the bond-vvoman, but of the free: by the freedom vvhere vvith Christ hath made vs free.Itaque, fratres, non sumus ancillæ filii, sed liberæ: qua libertate Christus nos liberavit.
4:1
Calmet
By the child, in this place, the apostle understands all the Jewish people, who, as long as they were under the childhood of the law, were subject to numerous restrictions, although they were the favorite children of God. But when the fulness of time came, they received the adoption of children, and were in possession of the liberty of the law of grace. They were no longer obliged to observe the legal rites. Whence the apostle wishes the conclusion to be drawn, that if persons once subject to the law were now exempt from it, how much more will those be excused from its yoke, who were never under its control. (Calmet)
4:3
Witham
Under the elements of the world. St. Chrysostom understands the exterior ceremonies and precepts of the law of Moses, with an allusion to the first elements or rudiments which children are taught. (Witham)
4:4
The fulness of the time. That is, the time decreed by Divine Providence.
God sent his Son made of a woman, who took a true human body of his virgin Mother.
Witham
Under the law, as he was man, because he was pleased to make himself so. (Witham)
4:6
Witham
Crying, Abba. That is, Father; Christ taught us in prayer to call God our Father, he having made us his adoptive sons by his grace, and heirs of heaven. (Witham)
4:8
You served them, who by nature are no gods. These words are to be understood of the converts, who had been Gentiles.
Witham
Known of God. That is, approved and loved by him. (Witham)
Calmet
The language of the apostle in this verse is not perhaps strictly precise. The Galatians, whom he addresses, had been converted from paganism, and of course were never subject to the law of Moses. But the apostle, by these words, entreats them not to begin now to serve these weak and useless elements, (as he calls the Jewish rites) or by this expression he may mean (as St. Chrysostom and Theophylactus explain it) the tyranny of error and wickedness. (Calmet)
4:10
Witham
You observe [Ver. 10. St. Jerome on this verse, p. 271, dicat aliquis, nos simile crimen in[]urrimus....observantes diem dominicam....Pascha festivitatem, et Pentecostes []aetitiam, et pro varietate regionum, diversa in honore martyrum tempora consti[]uta, etc.] days, etc. These false teachers were for obliging all Christians to observe all the Jewish feasts, fasts, ceremonies, etc. Some of the later reformers find here an occasion to blame the fasts and holydays kept by Catholics. St. Jerome, in his commentary on these words, tells us that some had made the like objection in his time: his answer might reasonably stop their rashness; to wit, that Christians keep indeed the sabbath on the Sunday, (not the Jewish sabbath on Saturdays) that they keep also divers holydays, and days on which great saints suffered martyrdom, (let our adversaries take notice of this) but that both the days are different, and the motives of keeping them. See St. Jerome, tom. 4:p. 271. (Witham)
This text cannot mean to condemn the feasts appointed to be kept holy in the Catholic Church. For on the festivals dedicated to our Lord, St. Augustine writeth thus: "We dedicate and consecrate the memory of God's benefits with solemnities on solemn appointed days, lest in process of time they might creep into ungrateful and unkind oblivion." And of the martyrs thus: "Christian people celebrate the memories of martyrs with religious solemnity, both to move themselves to an imitation of their virtues, and that they may be partakers of their merits, and helped by their prayers." (Conta Faust. lib. xx. Galatians 21.) And of other saints thus: "keep ye and celebrate with sobriety the nativity of saints, that we may imitate them that are gone before us, and that they may rejoice in us, who pray for us." (In Ps. lxxxviii. Conc. 2. in fine.)
4:12
Witham
Be ye as I, for I also am as you. I add no word in the translation, because it is uncertain what is to be understood: some give this construction, be you as I am, because I also was, as you now are; and they expound them thus: lay aside your zeal for the Jewish ceremonies as I have done, who was once as zealous for them as you seem now to be. Others would have the construction and sense to be: be you as I am, because I am as you; that is, be affected to me, and love me, as I have still a true affection and love for you, which is agreeable to what follows, you have not offended me at all. (Witham)
4:13
Witham
Through infirmity of the flesh....and your temptation in my flesh. St. Jerome thinks the apostle had some bodily infirmity upon him. St. Chrysostom understands his poverty, and want, and persecutions, and that some were inclined to contemn him and his preaching on these accounts. Yet others among them did not esteem him less: they received him, respected him as an Angel of God, as Christ Jesus; they would have given him their eyes, as one may say, and all that was dear to them. He puts them in mind how happy then they thought themselves, and asketh why they are now so much changed? (Witham)
4:17
He tells them this change comes from the false teachers among them, who with a false zeal would exclude them from a friendship and a submission to St. Paul, and deprive them again of that Christian liberty by which Christ, and the faith of Christ, had freed them from the yoke of the Mosaical law. On this account I must labor and travail, as it were to bring you forth a second time. How do I now wish to be with you, to change my voice, to exhort you, to reprehend you, to use all ways and means to regain you to Christ?
Witham
I am in confusion about you,[Ver. 20. Confundor in vobis, aporoumai. See 2 Corinthians 4:8. etc.] I am perplexed, as the Greek signifies, as not knowing what to say or do. (Witham)
4:22
Witham
It is written in the law, that is, in Genesis, (Genesis 16.; Genesis 21.) that Abraham had two sons, etc. that his two sons, Ismael, born of his servant, Agar, and Isaac of his wife, Sara, in an allegorical sense, represent the two testaments or covenants, which God made with his people: that by Ismael was represented that covenant of the former law delivered to Moses on Mount Sina, by which the Jews were made his elect people, yet as it were his servants, to be kept to their duty by fear of punishments; but by Isaac is represented the new covenant or testament of Christ, given at Jerusalem, where he suffered, where the new law was first published; by which law, they who believe in Christ were made the spiritual children of Abraham, the sons of God, and heirs of the blessings promised to Abraham: that Sina, the mountain in Arabia, hath[Ver. 25. Qui conjunctus est ei, quae nunc est Jerusalem, sustoichei te nun Ierousalem. See Budaeus, Estius, Mr. Legh, etc.] an affinity with Jerusalem, and with her children, who remain under the servitude of the law of Moses: we cannot understand a conjunction, or an affinity, as to place and situation, Sina and Jerusalem being near twenty days' journey distant from each other; therefore it can only be an affinity in a mystical signification, inasmuch as Jerusalem was the capital of the Jews, where the children of those who received the law on Mount Sina lived still under the servitude of the same law: but Christians, who believe in Christ, must look upon themselves as belonging to Jerusalem, and not to the city of Jerusalem upon earth, but to the celestial Jerusalem in heaven, which is our mother, now no longer servants and slaves to the former law, but free, being made the sons of God by the grace of Christ, and heirs of heaven. And these blessings were promised to all nations, not only to the Jews, of which the much greater part remained obstinate, and refused to believe in Christ, but also particularly to the Gentiles, according to the prophecy of Isaias, (Isaias 54.) rejoice thou that hast been barren, like Sara, for a long time; that is rejoice, you Gentiles, hitherto left in idolatry, without the knowledge or worship of the true God, now you shall have more children among you than among the Jews, who were his chosen people. (Witham)
4:29
Witham
St. Paul makes another observation upon this example of Ismael and Isaac: that as Ismael was troublesome to Isaac, for which he and his mother were turned out of the family, so also now the Jews insulted and persecuted the Christians, who had been Gentiles; but God will protect them as heirs of the blessings promised: they shall be accounted the spiritual children of Abraham, while the Jews, with their carnal ceremonies, shall be cast off. (Witham)
This, says St. Augustine, is a figure of heretics, (who are the children of the bond-woman) unjustly persecuting the Catholic Church. (Ep. 48.)
4:3
Under the elements, etc.... That is, under the first rudiments of religion, in which the carnal Jews were trained up; or under those corporeal creatures, used in their manifold rites, sacrifices, and sacraments.
4:10
You observe days, etc.... He speaks not of the observation of the Lord’s day, or other Christian festivals; but either of the superstitious observation of days lucky and unlucky; or else of the Jewish festivals, to the observance of which, certain Jewish teachers sought to induce the Galatians.
4:1
•. Seruing.] External vvorship of God by vse of creatures, necessarie: & hovv the Heathen, Ievves, & Christians differ in the same. There can be no external vvorship of God nor association of men in religion, either true or false, vvithout the vse of corporal things or elements. The Heathen so vsed the creatures of elements that they serued them as their goddes. The Ievves, of vvhom the Apostle here speaketh, serued not the creatures them selues vvhich they occupied in their ceremonies; but they serued the only true God vnder the elements: that is to say, being serullely clogged, yoked, kept occupied and in avve, vvith innumerable fleshly, grosse, and combersom offices about creatures. The Christians neither serue elements, as the one, nor be kep• in seruile thraldom thereby, as the other: but occupie only a fevv exceding easie, svvete, seemely, and significant for an agreable exercise both of body and minde. The vse of external elemēts in the Sacraments. Vvhereof S. Augustine saith thus, li. 3. c. 9. de doct. Christ. Some fevv for many, most easie to be done, most honorable for signification, and most cleare and pure for to be obserued and kept, hath our Lord, him self and the Apostolical discipline deliuered. And li. de ver. relig. c. 17. Of the vvisedom of God it self mani nature being taken, vvhereby vve vvere called into libertie, a fevv Sacraments most holsom vvere appointed and instituted, vvhich might conteine the societie of Christian people, that is, of the free multitude vnder one God. And againe, cont. Faust. li. 19. c. 13. The Sacraments are changed, they are made caesier, fevver, holsommer, happier, the same he hath in the 118 epistle c. 1. and many other places besides. By vvhich you may see, it is not al one to vse elements, visible Sacraments or ceremonies, and to serue them as the Pagans do, or to serue vnder them as the Ievves did, vvherevvith the Heretikes calumniously charge the Christians. Our Sacraments fevv & easie in respect of the Ievves. And as touching the small number, facilitie, efficacie, and signification, vvherein the said holy father putteth the special difference: vvho seeth not that for so many busie sacrifices, vve haue but one: for Sacraments vvel nere infinite, but seuen: al so easie, so ful of grace, so significant, as can be possible, as of euery one in their seueral places is proued?
Here, S. Augustine falsely alleaged of the Heretikes for tvvo Sacraments only. let the good Readers take heede of a double deceite vsed by the Aduersaries about S. Augustines places alleaged. first, in that they say he made but tvvo Sacraments, vvhich is vntrue, for, although treating of the difference betvvene the Ievvish Sacraments and ours, he namely giueth example in Baptisme and the Eucharist (as sometimes also for example he nameth but one) yet he hath no vvord nor signe at al that there should be no moe. but contrarievvise in the foresaid epistle 118 he insinuateth, ep. 118. c. 1. & in ps. 103. cōc. 1 that besides those tvvo, there be other of the same sort in the Scriptures. Yea, vvith water and bread, which be the elements of the tvvo foresaid Sacraments, he expresly nameth oile also (li. 2. cont. lit. Petil. c. 104.) the element or matter of the Sacrament of Confirmation: The other Sacraments proued out of S. Augustine. which in the same place he maketh to be a Sacrament as Baptisme is. So doth he affirme of the Sacrament of Orders li. 1 de bapt. c. 1. and also of Matrimonie li. de bono coniug. c. 24. of Penance likevvise, he speaketh as of Baptisme, which he calleth Reconciliation, li. 1. de adult. conjug. c. 28. Lastly, by the booke de visitatione infirmorum in S. Augustine, li. 2 c. 4. by Prosper de pradictionibus p. 2. c. 29. S. Innocentius ad Eugubinum Io. 1. Cont. ep. ad Eugub. c. 8. S. Cyril li. 2. in Leuiticum, and S. Chrysostom li. 3 de Saterdotio, Aug. ser. 215 de •ēp. & de rectitud. Cath. conuersat. Extreme vnction is proued to be a Sacrament. It is false then that the Heretikes affirme of S. Augustine, by vvhose doctrine it is plaine, that though the elements or Sacraments of the new lavv be but few and very fevv in comparison of those in the old lavv, yet there be no fevver then seuen specified by him. Vvhich number of seuen the holy Councels of Florence and Trent do expresly define to haue been instituted by Christ, against these late Heretikes. See more of these Sacraments in their places. Act. 8. 1 Tim 4. Io. 20. Ia. 5. Ephes. 5.
The other forgerie of the Aduersaires concerning the elements or ceremonies, is, that S. Augustine (ep. 119. c. 19.) should affirme, that the Church and Christian people in his daies (vvherevpon they inferre that it is so much more novv) vvere so loden vvith obseruation of vnprofitable ceremonies, S. Augustine falsely alleaged against the ceremonies of the Church. that they vvere in as great seruilitie and subiection to such things as the Ievves. He saith so in deede of some particular presumptions, inuentions, and vsages of certaine persons, as that some made it a heinous matter to touch the groūd vvith their bare feete vvithin their ovvne octaues, and such like vanities, whereby some simple folkes might be infected, vvhich this holy Doctor specially misliked, and vvisheth such things (as they may, vvithout scandal) to be taken avvay. But that he vvrote or meant so of any ceremonie that the Church vseth, either appointed by Scripture, or Councel, or custom of the Catholike Church, him self denieth it in expresse termes in the same place, and in sundrie other: vvhere he allovveth al the holy ceremonies done in the ministration of the Sacraments and els vvhere. Vvhereby it is cleere, that the Churches most comely orders and significant 〈◊〉 pertaine not to the yoke of the old lavv, much lesse to the superstition of Gentilitie, as Heretikes affirme: but to the svveete yoke of Christ and light burden of his lavv, to order, decencie, and instruction of the faithful, in al libertie, loue, faith, grace, and spirit.
In the liturgy The Epistle vpon Twelfth eue.
4:3
That is, the rudiments of religiō, wherin the carnal Iewes vvere trained vp: or the corporal creatures, wherein their manifold sacrifices, sacraments, and rites did consist.
4:5
Concordance Ro. 8, 15.
4:9
9. Vveake and poore.] Vvhether he meane of the creatures vvhich the Gentils serued (as it may seeme by the vvordes before of seruing strange gods) so the elements vvere most base and beggerly: or of the Iuaical ceremonies and sacraments (as most expound it) euen so also their elements vvere vveake and poore in them selues, not giuing life, saluation, and remission of sinnes, nor being instruments or vessels of grace, as the 7 Sacraments of the nevv lavv be.
4:10
10. You obserue daies.] The Heathenish and Iudaical obseruatiō of daies heretically cō pared vvith the Christian obseruation of festiuities and holy daies &c. That vvhich S. Paul speaketh against the Idolotrical obseruation of daies, moneths, and times, dedicated by the Heathen to their false goddes, and to vvicked men or spirites, as to Iupiter, Mercurie, Ianus, Iuno, Diana, and such like, or against the superstitious differences of daies, fatall, fortunate, or dis•nol, and other obseruations of times for good lucke or il lucke in mans actions, gathered, either by particular fansie, or popular obseruation, or curious and vnlavvful artes, or (lastly) of the Iudaical festiuities that vvere then ended and abrogated, vnto vvhich notvvithstanding certaine Christian Ievves vvould haue reduced the Galatians against the Apostles doctrine: al that (I say) do the Heretikes of our time falsely and deceitfully interprete against the Christian holidaies, and the sanctification and necessarie keeping of the same. Vvhich is not only contrarie to the Fathers exposition, but against the very Scriptures, and the practise of the Apostles & the vvhole Church. Aug. cont. Adim• ̄s. c. 16. Ep. 118. c. 7. Hiero. in hunc locum. In the Apocalypse c. 1. there is plaine mention of the Sunday, Sūday, Easter, vvhitsontide. that is, our Lordes day (Dominicus dies) vnto vvhich the Ievves Sabboth vvas altered, their Pasche into our Easter, their Pētecost into our Vvhitsontide: vvhich vvere ordained & obserued of the Apostles them selues. And the antiquitie of the feastes of Christes Natiuitie, The festiuities of Christ. Epiphanle, & Ascēsion is such, that they cā be referred to no other origine but the Apostles institution: Orig. ho. 3. in diuers. vvho (as S. Clement testifieth li. •. const. Apost. c. •9.) gaue order for celebrating their follovv Apostles, S. Steuens, and other Martyrs daies after their death: and much more no doubt did they giue order for Christes festiuities. Aug. ep. 28. et. Ser. de Sāctis. According to vvhich, Other holidaies of Saincts. the Church hath kept not only his, but S. Steuens and the B. Innocents, euen on the same dales they be novv solemnely kept, & his B. mothers, and other Saincts, (as the Aduersaries them selues confesse) aboue 1300 yeres, Fulgent. as appeareth in the barbarous combattes betvvene Vvestphalus the Lutheran, & Caluin, and by the vvritings betvvixt, the Puritans and Protestants. Leo.
For vvhich purpose, see also hovv old the holiday of S. Polycarpe is in Eusebius li. 4. c. 14: of the See the Annotation, Act. 1. v, 14. Assumptiō of our Ladie or her dormition in S. Athanasius, Festiuities of our B. Ladie. S. Augustine, S. Hierom. S. Damase. & both of that feast and of her Natiuitie in S. Bernard, vvho professeth he receiued them of the Church, & that they ought to be most solemnel; kept. ep. 174. Vvherein vve can not but vvonder at the nevv Church of England, that (though against the pure Caluinistes vvil and doctrine) keepe other Saincts and Apostles daies of their death, and yet haue abolished this special feast of our Ladies departure, vvhich they might keepe, ep. ad Timotheū. though they beleeued not her Assumption in body (vvhereof yet S. Denys giueth so great testimonie) being assured she is departed at the least: except they either •are her, or thinke her vvorthy of lesse remembrance then any other Sainct, her self prophecying the contrarie of al Catholike generations, Luc. 1. v. 48. that they should blesse her. And in deede the Assumption is her proper day, as also the feast of her Natiuitle: See. S. Grego. li. 7. ep. 29. of Martyrs feasts al the yere, and Masses in the same. the other of the Purification and the Annune•ation, vvhich they keepe in England, being not so peculiar to her, but belonging rather to Christes Presentation in the Temple, and his Conception. To conclude, vve may see in S. Cyprian ep. 34. Origen ho. 3. in diuers. Cōc. Gāgr. c. 20 Tertulliau de cor. •il. S. Gregorie Nazianzene de amore pauperum. the Councel of Gangres, yea and in the councel of Nice it self giuing order for Easter and the certaine celebrating thereof, that Christian Festiuities be holy, aūcient, and to be obserued on prescript daies and times, and that this is not Iudaical obseruation of daies, Epiphan. as Aërius taught, for vvhich he vvas condemned of Heresie, Har. 75. as S. Epīphanius witnesseth. But of holidaies S. Augustine sheweth both the reason and his liking, S. Augustines vvordes of Festiuities and holy daies. in these memorable vvordes, 〈◊〉 for the feastes belonging to our Lord, Aug. de Ciuit. Dei li. 10. c. 16. thus: We dedicate and consecrate the memorie of Gods benefites vvith solemnities, feastes, and certaine appointed daies, left by tract of times there might creept in ingrateful and vnkinde obliuion. Of the festiuities of Martyrs thus: Christian people celebrate the memories of Martyrs vvith religious solemnitie, both to moue them selues to imitation of them, and that they may be partakers of their merites, and be holpen vvith their praiers. Cont. Faust. li. 20. c. 21. And of al Saincts daies, thus Keepe ye and celibrate vvith sobrietie the Natiuities of Saincts, that vve may imitate them vvhich haue gone before Vs, and they may reioyce of vs vvhich pray for vs. In ps. 88. Conc. 2. in fine.
And as is said of prescript daies of feastes, Prescript fasting daies. so the like is to be said Hilar. prolog. in psal. explan. Epip. haer. 75. & in fine. li. 3. cont. har. of fastes, vvhich els vvhere vve haue shewed to be of the Apostles ordinance. And so also of the Ecclesiastical diuision of the yere into Aduent, Canonical houres. Septuagesme, &c. the vveeke into so many I eries, the day into Houres of praiers, as the Prime, the Third, the Sixth, the None &c. Vvhereof see Cypri. de erat. Do. nu. 15. S. Cyprian, vvho deriueth these things by the Scriptures from the Apostles also, and counteth these things vvhich the vvicked Heretikes reproue, to be ful of mysterie. Like vnto this also is it, Reading of the Scriptures according to the time of the yere. that the holy Scriptures were so disposed of, and deuided, that certaine peeces (as is alvvaies obserued and practised vntil this day) should be read at one time, and others at other times and seasons, through out the yere, according to the diuersitie of our Lordes actions and benefites, or the Saincts stories then recorded. Vvhich the Puritane Caluinists also condemne of superstition, desiring to bring in hellish horrour and al disorder. See conc. Carthag. 3. c. 47. & pag. 288 of this booke.
4:14
So ought al Catholike people receiue their teachers in religion, vvith al duetie, loue, & reuerence.
4:21
In the liturgy The Epistle vpon the 4 Sūday in Lent.
4:22
Concordance Gen. 16, 15. 21, 2.
4:24
24. By an allegorie.] The Scriptures haue an allegorical sense beside the litteral. Here vve learne that the holy Scriptures haue beside the litteral sense, a deeper spiritual and more principal meaning: which is not only to be taken of the holy vvordes, but of the very factes and persons reported: both the speaches and the actions being significatiue ouer and aboue the letter. Vvhich pregnancie of manifold senses if S. Paul had not signified him self in certaine places, the Heretikes had bene lesse vvicked and presumptuous in condemning the holy fathers allegorical expositions almost vvholy: who now shew them selues to be mere brutish and carnal men, hauing no sense nor feeling of the profunditie of the Scriptures, vvhich our holy fathers the Doctors of Gods Church savv.
•1. Freedom.] True Christiā libertie. He meaneth the libertie and discharge from the old ceremonies, sacraments, and the vvhole bondage of the Lavv, and from the seruitude of sinne, and the Diuel, to such as obey him: but not libertie to do vvhat euery man list, or to be vnder no obedience of spiritual or temporal lavves and gonerners: not a licence neuer to pray, fast, keepe holyday, or vvorkday, but vvhen and hovv it seemeth best to euery mans phantasie. Such a dissolute licentious state is farre from the true libertie vvhich Christ purchased for vs.
4:25
〈Greek〉
4:27
Concordance Es. 54, 1.
Concordance Ro. 9, 8.
4:29
This mutual persecution is a figure also of the Church iustly persecuting Heretikes, & contrarivvise of Heretikes (vvhich be the childrē of the bondvvoman) vniustly persecuting the Catholike Church. Aug. ep. 48.
Concordance Gen. 21, 10.
4:1
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on Matthew 10.9
… Every soul, therefore, which comes to childhood, and is on the way to full growth, until the fulness of time is at hand, needs a tutor and stewards and guardians, in order that, after all these things, he who formerly differed nothing from a bond-servant, though he is lord of all,
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on Matthew 13.26
… I think that Moses, who believed that he had been already assigned a place among the ranks of the great, said, with regard to the promise, “My angel shall go before you,” “If thou thyself do not go along with me, carry me not up hence.” For though the little one even be an heir, yet as being a child he differs nothing from a servant when he is a child,
4:2
St Basil the Great † AD 379 The Letters 8.6
… Yet nothing is beyond the ken of the real Wisdom, for “all things were made by Him;” and even among men no one is ignorant of what he has made. But this is His dispensation because of thine own infirmity, that sinners be not plunged into despair by the narrow limits of the appointed period,
St Cyril of Jerusalem † AD 386 The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril procatechesis-or-prologue-to-t.4
If the fashion of thy soul is avarice, put on another fashion and come in. Put off thy former fashion, cloke it not up. Put off, I pray thee, fornication and uncleanness, and put on the brightest robe of chastity. This charge I give thee, before Jesus the Bridegroom of souls come in and see their fashions. A long notice
4:3
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 5.4
… With regard, however, to the former clause, there was a figure (as the apostle wrote it); because after he had said, “I speak after the manner of men,” he adds), “Though it be but a man’s covenant, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.”
Archelaus † fl. AD 278 The Acts of the Disputation with the Heresiarch Manes 13
… And Paul, too, who is held to be the most approved apostle with us, expresses himself to the same effect in one of his epistles, when he says: “For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a prevaricator.” And in saying this he pronounces on them as Gentiles, because they were under the elements of the world,
St John of Damascus † AD 749 An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 4.23
As I said , therefore, for the purpose of securing leisure to worship God in order that they might, both servant and beast of burden, devote a very small share to Him and be at rest, the observance of the Sabbath was devised for the carnal that were still childish and in the bonds of the elements of the world
4:4
Mathetes † fl. AD 130 Epistle to Diognetus 9
… now revealed the Saviour who is able to save even those things which it was [formerly] impossible to save, by both these facts He desired to lead us to trust in His kindness, to esteem Him our Nourisher, Father, Teacher, Counsellor, Healer, our Wisdom, Light, Honour, Glory, Power, and Life, so that we should not be anxious concerning clothing and food.
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 3.16.3
… “Whose are the fathers, and from whom is Christ according to the flesh, who is God over all, blessed for ever.” And again, in his Epistle to the Galatians, he says: “But when the fulness of time had come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption;”
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 3.16.7
… as also says the prophet Habakkuk, “By this Thou shalt be known when the years have drawn nigh; Thou shalt be set forth when the time comes; because my soul is disturbed by anger, Thou shalt remember Thy mercy.” Paul also says: “But when the fulness of time came, God sent forth His Son.”
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 3.22.1
… This, therefore, the Word of God was made, recapitulating in Himself His own handiwork; and on this account does He confess Himself the Son of man, and blesses “the meek, because they shall inherit the earth.” The Apostle Paul, moreover, in the Epistle to the Galatians, declares plainly, “God sent His Son, made of a woman.”
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 5.21.1
… This is the seed of which the apostle says in the Epistle to the Galatians, “that the law of works was established until the seed should come to whom the promise was made.” This fact is exhibited in a still clearer light in the same Epistle, where he thus speaks: “But when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman.”
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 5.4
… He said not ‘to seeds,’ as of many; but as of one, ‘to thy seed,’ which is Christ.” Fie on Marcion’s sponge! But indeed it is superfluous to dwell on what he has erased, when he may be more effectually confuted from that which he has retained. “But when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth His Son”
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 5.8
… and upon my servants and upon my handmaids will I pour out of my Spirit.” Since, then, the Creator promised the gift of His Spirit in the latter days; and since Christ has in these last days appeared as the dispenser of spiritual gifts (as the apostle says, “When the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son;”
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Flesh of Christ 20
… “in her,” has precisely the same meaning as the phrase “of her.” It is, however, a fortunate circumstance that Matthew also, when tracing down the Lord’s descent from Abraham to Mary, says, “Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Christ.” But Paul, too, silences these critics when he says, “God sent forth His Son, made of a woman.”
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Veiling of Virgins 6
Let us now see whether the apostle withal observes the norm of this name in accordance with Genesis, attributing it to the sex ; calling the virgin Mary a woman , just as Genesis (does) Eve. For, writing to the Galatians, “God,” he says, “sent His own Son, made of a woman ,”
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on Matthew 13.26
… and, so long as we are imperfect, and need one to assist us that we may be delivered from evils, we stand in need of an angel of whom Jacob said, “The angel who delivered me from all the evils;” but, when we have become perfected, and have passed through the stage of being subject to nursing-fathers and nursing-mothers and guardians and stewards,
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews 2.9
… and she was filled with the Holy Ghost, and she cried out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. And whence does this happen to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” Also Paul to the Galatians: “But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent His Son, born of a woman.”
Novatian † AD 258 A Treatise of Novatian Concerning the Trinity 11
… For in the manner that as man He is of Abraham, so also as God He is before Abraham himself. And in the same manner as He is as man the “Son of David,” so as God He is proclaimed David’s Lord. And in the same manner as He was made as man “under the law,”
Archelaus † fl. AD 278 The Acts of the Disputation with the Heresiarch Manes 49
… Give me therefore an answer to these several questions which I shall address to you. How shall we get rid of these many words of the apostle, so important and so precise, which are expressed in terms like the following: “But when the good pleasure of God was with us, He sent His Son, made of a woman;”
St Methodius † AD 311 Oration Concerning Simeon and Anna On the Day that They Met in the Temple 1
… as somewhere Paul, that great interpreter of sacred mysteries, says: “But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.”
St Hilary of Poitiers † AD 367 De Trinitate or On the Trinity 12.48
… And without doubt in his view this name belongs to Christ’s true birth as a man, since he says, But when the fulness of the time came, God sent His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, in order that He might redeem those who are under the law, that we might obtain the adoption of sons
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Against the Arians. (Orationes contra Arianos IV.) 2.21
… but it profited to do it through Moses. And God was able without the judges to save His people; but it was profitable for the people that for a season judges should be raised up to them. The Saviour too might have come among us from the beginning, or on His coming might not have been delivered to Pilate; but He came ‘at the fulness of the ages
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Against the Arians. (Orationes contra Arianos IV.) 3.26
… But when He came among us from Mary once at the end of the ages for the abolition of sin (for so it was pleasing to the Father, to send His own Son ‘made of a woman, made under the Law’), then it is said, that He took flesh and became man, and in that flesh He suffered for us (as Peter says, ‘Christ therefore having suffered for us in the flesh
St Basil the Great † AD 379 De Spiritu Sancto 5
… commanded…Israel through the word of the Lord,” and, again, “Is not the interpretation through God?” Joseph, discoursing about dreams to the prisoners, instead of saying “ from God” says plainly “ through God.” Inversely Paul uses the term “ from whom” instead of “ through whom,” when he says “made from a woman” (A.V., “of” instead of “ through a woman”).
St Basil the Great † AD 379 The Letters 261
… then the prophets, foretelling the salvation to come; judges, kings, and righteous men, doing great works, with a mighty hand. After all these in the last days He was Himself manifested ill the flesh, “made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.”
St Cyril of Jerusalem † AD 386 The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 12.31
… And Joseph also went up from Galilee, to enrol himself with Mary who was espoused to him, being great with child . For though she was with child, yet it said not “with his wife,” but with her who was espoused to him . For God sent forth His Son , says Paul, not made of a man and a woman, but made of a woman
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 On the Holy Spirit 2.6
… For as we read that the Father created the mystery of the Lord’s Incarnation, the Spirit too created it; and so too we read that Christ Himself created His own Body. For the Father created it, as it is written: “The Lord created Me,” and in another place, “God sent His Son, made of a woman, made under the law.”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Exposition of the Christian Faith 1.14
94. “But when the fulness of time was come, God sent His Son, made of a woman, made under the Law.”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Exposition of the Christian Faith 1.19
… Now a son is so called either by means of adoption or by nature, as we are called sons by means of adoption.
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Exposition of the Christian Faith 2.9
79. This is the same One Whom the Father sent, but “born of a woman, born under the law,”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Exposition of the Christian Faith 3.9
62. Before all created things, then, is the Son begotten; within all and for the good of all is He made; begotten of the Father, above the Law, brought forth of Mary, under the Law.
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Exposition of the Christian Faith 5.14
… He was before the judge, yet claimed for Himself a throne at the right hand of God, as Judge forever. For thus it is written: “Hereafter ye shall see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of the power of God, and coming in the clouds of heaven.” He was scourged by the Jews, and commanded the angels; He was born of Mary under the law;
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Selections from the Letters of St. Ambrose sermon-against-auxentius-on-th.25
25. Shall any one, then, follow this law, whereby the Council of Ariminum is confirmed, wherein Christ was said to be a creature. But say they: “God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 4
… how the Virgin bears, and continues a virgin. How, I pray thee, did the Spirit frame that Temple? how did He take not all the flesh from the womb, but a part thereof, and increased it, and fashioned it? For that He did come forth of the Virgin’s flesh, He hath declared by speaking of “that which was conceived in her;”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
Ver. 4, 5 . “But when the fulness of the time came God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, under the Law that he might redeem them which were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Ephesians 1
… when all were absolutely perishing, more fearfully than in the deluge, He devised this dispensation, that is by grace; that it might not be in vain, might not be to no purpose that man was created. This he calls “the fulness of the times,” and “wisdom.” And why so? Because at that time when they were on the very point of perishing, then they were rescued.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Titus 5
Thus also he does in his Epistle to the Galatians, where he says, “Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 26
… never can the Spirit appear to those eyes, think not that the Spirit bringeth forth the flesh.” “How then,” perhaps one may ask, “was the Flesh of the Lord brought forth?” Not of the Spirit only, but of flesh; as Paul de clares, when he says, “Made of a woman, made under the Law” (
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Confessions 3.7
… Is justice, then, various and changeable? Nay, but the times over which she presides are not all alike, because they are times.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 75.14
… but because when “faith came,” and the fulness of times, “God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 1.7
… but in the form of God, in which also He was before He took the form of a servant, He is equal to the Father. In the form of God He is the Word, “by whom all things are made;” but in the form of a servant He was “made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 1.11
… for the doing of which things He therefore declares Himself to be “sent,” because the Spirit of God is upon Him. According to the form of God, all things were made by Him; according to the form of a servant, He was Himself made of a woman, made under the law.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 2.5
… for of the Father alone, we nowhere read that He is sent. Now, of the Son, the apostle writes thus: “But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 2.7
… But if the Son was manifested by them, why is He said to be sent so long after, when He was made of a woman, as the apostle says, “But when the fullness of time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 3.pref.3
… Our next inquiry was, Why the Father also is not sometimes said to be sent, if He Himself was manifested through those corporeal forms which appeared to the eyes of the ancients. But if the Son was manifested at these times, why should He be said to be “sent” so long after, when the fullness of time was come that He should be born of a woman;
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 4.19
26. “When, therefore, the fullness of time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the Law;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 4.20
… But she is sent in one way that she may be with man; she has been sent in another way that she herself may be man. For, “entering into holy souls, she maketh them friends of God and prophets;” so she also fills the holy angels, and works all things fitting for such ministries by them. But when the fullness of time was come, she was sent,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 13.20
… All which I have also argued, so far as space permitted, in this book, while I have already said much on the subject in the fourth book of this work as well; but in that place for one purpose, here for another,—namely, there, that I might show why and how Christ was sent in the fullness of time by the Father,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Marriage 27
27. Therefore at that time, when the Law also, following upon the days of the Patriarchs, pronounced accursed, whoso raised not up seed in Israel, even he, who could, put it not forth, but yet possessed it. But from the period that the fullness of time hath come,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 11.3
… Nor does Faustus get from Paul his Second Man, of whom Paul says that He is from heaven, and that He is the last Adam, and a quickening spirit; and also that He was born of the seed of David after the flesh, that He was made of a woman, made under the law, that He might redeem them that were under the law.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 12.3
… The adoption here spoken of is evidently through the Son of God; as the apostle says to the Galatians: "In the fullness of time, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, that He might redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons."
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 23.7
… for He who from the Virgin’s womb took the form of a servant "was in the form of God, and thought it no robbery to be equal with God." And the same Apostle Paul himself says distinctly elsewhere, "But in the fullness of time, God sent His Son, made of a woman, made under the law;"
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Harmony of the Gospels 2.3
… For the apostle speaks thus: “But when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 1.18
… for Mary herself also is called a woman, not from the loss of virginity, but by a form of expression peculiar to her country; for of the Lord Jesus the Apostle also said, “made of a woman,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 1.28
… “When,” saith he, “the fulness of time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 2.9
… Let the holy Apostle show us then how the birth of the Son was the work of the Father. “But,” saith he, “when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the Law, to redeem them that were under the Law.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 2.11
… Now hear how that this was the work of the Son also. “Who when He was in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God, but emptied Himself, taking upon Him the form of a servant.” “When the fulness of time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 3
… “The law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.” We ask the apostle, and he says to us, since we are not under the law but under grace. “He sent therefore His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, that He might redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 28.5
5. What did the Lord answer to these things? Then saith Jesus to them: “My time is not yet come; but your time is always ready.” What is this? Had not Christ’s time yet come? Why then was Christ come, if His time had not yet come? Have we not heard the apostle say, “But when the fullness of time came, God sent His Son”?
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 31.5
… He meant not therefore an hour in which He should be forced to die, but that in which He would deign to be put to death. But He was awaiting the time in which He should die, for He awaited also the time in which He should be born. The apostle, speaking of this time, says, “But when the fullness of time came, God sent His Son.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 104.2
… who also fixed the time, when He was born of the Virgin, with the Father, of whom He was born independently of time. And in accordance with this true and salutary doctrine, the Apostle Paul also says, “But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 124.5
… In this anger of His, God restraineth not, as it is written, His tender mercies; but, besides other consolations to the miserable, which He ceaseth not to bestow on mankind, in the fullness of time, when He knew that such had to be done, He sent His only-begotten Son,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 68.30
… Whence hath been said, “How beautiful are the feet of them that proclaim peace, that proclaim good things!” For this grace and those steps were lying hid in the Old Testament: but when there came the fulness of time, and it pleased God to reveal His Son,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 73.13
… 10 ). Now Asaph himself is returning hither. For he saw these things abound to unrighteous men, he saw them abound to proud men: he is returning to God, and is beginning to inquire and discuss. But when? “When full days shall be found in them.” What is “full days”? “But when there came the fulness of time, God sent His Son.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 102.14
14. “Thou shalt arise, and have mercy upon Sion: for it is time that Thou have mercy upon her” ( ver. 13 ). What time? “But when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the Law.” And where is Sion? “To redeem them that were under the Law.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 116.3
3. And what are thy days, since thou hast said, “In my days I have called upon Him”? Are they those perchance, in which “the fulness of time came,” and “God sent His Son,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 119.16
125. “It is time,” he saith, “for the Lord to lay to His hand” ( ver. 126 ). For this is the reading of most copies: not as some have, “O Lord.” Now what is this, save the grace which was revealed in Christ at its own time? Of which season the Apostle saith, “But when the fullness of time was come, God sent His Son.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 119.19
… we indeed cry unto God at midnight, and prevent the fulness of time in which He will restore us what He hath promised, as is elsewhere read, “Let us prevent His presence with confession.” Although if we choose to understand the unripe season of this night, before the fulness of time had come,
John Cassian † AD 435 The Seven Books of John Cassian on the Incarnation of the Lord, Against Nestorius 4.1
… Learn then first of all from the Apostle the teacher of the whole world, that He who is without beginning, God, the Son of God, became the Son of man at the end of the world, i.e., in the fulness of the times. For he says: “But when the fulness of the times was come, God sent His Son, made of a woman, made under the law.”
John Cassian † AD 435 The Seven Books of John Cassian on the Incarnation of the Lord, Against Nestorius 6.8
… “Who for us came and was born of the Virgin Mary.” He then, who is Very God, who is of one substance with the Father, who is the Maker of all things, He, I repeat, came into the world and was born of the Virgin Mary; as the Apostle Paul says: “But when the fulness of the times was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law.”
Socrates Scholasticus † AD 440 The Ecclesiastical History of Socrates Scholasticus 5.22
… I shall therefore merely add, that those who affect so much to imitate the Jews, and are so very anxious about an accurate observance of types, ought to depart from them in no particular. For if they have chosen to be so correct, they must not only observe days and months, but all other things also, which Christ (who was ‘made under the law’)
Theodoret of Cyrus † AD 458 Dialogues. The “Eranistes” or “Polymorphus” of the Blessed Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus 1
“He uses the phrase ‘of whom’ instead of ‘through whom;’ as when Paul says ‘made of a woman.’
Theodoret of Cyrus † AD 458 Dialogues. The “Eranistes” or “Polymorphus” of the Blessed Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus 2
“But as being born of the Virgin He is said to have been made man of the woman,
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Letters 16
… whom it is said, “which were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God .” For the Lord who needed no remission of sin and sought not the remedy of being born again, desired to be baptized just as He desired to be circumcised, and to have a victim offered for His purification: that He, who had been “made of a woman
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Sermons 23
… but in the form of God , in which He was before the ages, He is equal to the Father. In His human humiliation He was “made of a woman, made under the Law
St John of Damascus † AD 749 An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 3.12
And again the Apostle says: God sent forth His only-begotten Son, made of a woman
St John of Damascus † AD 749 An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 4.23
… But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth His Only-begotten Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law that we might receive the adoption of sons
4:5
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 5.4
… If nothing, what an impotent state to have to wait for the Creator’s time, in servility to the Creator! But for what end did He send His Son? “To redeem them that were under the law,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 15.28
… Nor would the divine voice have said, Hear, O Israel, the Lord thy God is one God, unless Thou wert so a Trinity as to be one Lord God. And if Thou, O God, wert Thyself the Father, and wert Thyself the Son, Thy Word Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit your gift, we should not read in the book of truth, “God sent His Son;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Faith and the Creed 4
… but in so far as He is the First-begotten, He has deemed it worthy of Him to give the name of brethren to all those who, subsequently to and by means of His pre-eminence, are born again into the grace of God through the adoption of sons, according to the truth commended to us by apostolic teaching.
4:6
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 5.4
… For He is to be “the light of the Gentiles,” and “in His name shall the Gentiles trust.” That we may have, therefore the assurance that we are the children of God, “He hath sent forth His Spirit into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father.”
St Hilary of Poitiers † AD 367 De Trinitate or On the Trinity 2.29
… take away a part, and the whole faith is marred. If any man demand what meaning we attach to this conclusion, he, as well as we, has read the words of the Apostle, Because ye are sons of God, God hath sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 De Decretis. (Defence of the Nicene Definition.) 7
… for since the Word bore our body and came to be in us, therefore by reason of the Word in us, is God called our Father. For the Spirit of the Word in us names through us His own Father as ours, which is the Apostle’s meaning when he says, ‘God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Against the Arians. (Orationes contra Arianos IV.) 2.21
… Therefore ‘Father’ is proper to the Son; and not ‘creature,’ but ‘Son’ is proper to the Father. Accordingly this passage also proves, that we are not sons by nature, but the Son who is in us ; and again, that God is not our Father by nature, but of that Word in us, in whom and because of whom we ‘cry, Abba, Father
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Against the Arians. (Orationes contra Arianos IV.) 4.15
… For on this account the Word has become flesh, that, since the Word is Son, therefore, because of the Son dwelling in us , He may be called our Father also; for ‘He sent forth,’ says Scripture, ‘the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father
St Basil the Great † AD 379 De Spiritu Sancto 19
… Remission of sins was by the gift of the Spirit, for “ye were washed, ye were sanctified,…in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the holy Spirit of our God.” There is close relationship with God through the Spirit, for “God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying Abba, Father.”
St Basil the Great † AD 379 De Spiritu Sancto 24
… It follows then that the maintainers of such arguments, in making the greatness of God’s loving kindness an occasion of blasphemy, have really surpassed the ingratitude of the Jews. They find fault with the Spirit because He gives us freedom to call God our Father. “For God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into” our “hearts crying Abba, Father,”
St Cyril of Jerusalem † AD 386 The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 17.4
… He is called also the Spirit of God and Christ, as Paul writes, But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. But if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His . He is called also the Spirit of the Son of God, as it is said, And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 On the Holy Spirit 1.5
… Whether you speak of Angels, or Dominions, or Powers, every creature waits for the grace of the Holy Spirit. For as we are children through the Spirit, because “God sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts crying, Abba, Father; so that thou art now not a servant but a son;”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 14
For it is not from the language merely, he says, that I make my assertion, but from the cause out of which the language has its birth; since it is from the Spirit suggesting it that we so speak. And this in another passage he has put into plainer words, thus: “God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, Abba Father.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 29
… Again, when thou seest another speaking all things with His Name, understand that he is spiritual.” “What then,” say you, “must we say concerning the Catechumens? For if, no man can say that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost, what must we say of them who name indeed His Name, but are destitute of His Spirit
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
Ver. 6, 7. “And because ye are sons, God sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. So that thou art no longer a bond-servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir through God.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Ephesians 1
… and he calls God, “Father,” since this name is a sure token of that gift of grace. And how so? Hear what he saith elsewhere; “Because ye are sons, God sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father.” (
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 15.26
… since Holy Scripture calls Him the Spirit of both. For it is He of whom the apostle says, “But because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts:”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Soul and its Origin 4.13
… And He that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because He maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God” —that is to say, He makes the saints offer intercessions. He, of course, is that Spirit “whom God hath sent into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Rebuke and Grace 47
… just as “He sent the Spirit of His Son, crying, Abba, Father;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Predestination of the Saints 2.64
… For He it is of whom the apostle says in another place, “God hath sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, “crying, Abba, Father!”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Harmony of the Gospels 3.4
… The Apostle Paul also makes use of the same significant expression. For he says, “In whom we cry, Abba, Father;” and, in another passage, “God sent His Spirit into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 21.29
29. Now that He is the Spirit of the Father, the Son Himself saith, “He proceedeth from the Father.” And in another place, “For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.” And that He is the Spirit of the Son also the Apostle saith, “God hath sent the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba Father;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 99.6
… For the Son is Son of the Father alone, and the Father is Father of the Son alone; but the Holy Spirit is not the Spirit of one of them, but of both. You have the Lord Himself saying, “For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father that speaketh in you;” and you have the apostle, “God hath sent forth the spirit of His Son into your hearts.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 51.17
… the dispensation of Flesh being excepted therefrom: since it is written, “God is a Spirit.” For that which is not body, and yet is, seemeth to exist in such sort as that it is spirit. Therefore some understand here the Trinity spoken of: “In upright Spirit,” the Son; in “Holy Spirit,” Holy Ghost; in “Principal Spirit,” Father.
Theodoret of Cyrus † AD 458 Letters of the Blessed Theodoret, Bishop of Cyprus 147
… heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ: if so be that we suffer with Him that we may be also glorified together;” and to the Galatians he writes “And because ye are sons God hath sent forth the spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Wherefore thou art no more a servant but a son; and if a son then an heir of God through Jesus Christ.”
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Sermons 77
… For it was necessary that those who are to be saved should also do something on their part, and by the turning of their hearts to the Redeemer should quit the dominion of the enemy, even as the Apostle says, “ God sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying Abba, Father
4:7
St Basil the Great † AD 379 De Spiritu Sancto 5
… We now show that “through whom” is used also in the case of the Father. “God is faithful,” it is said, “by whom ( δι᾽ οὖ ) ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son,” and “Paul an apostle of Jesus Christ by ( διά ) the will of God;” and again, “Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir through God.”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 On the Holy Spirit 2.9
97. Now let us consider whether we can teach that anything is through the Father. But it is written: “Paul the servant of Christ through the will of God;” and elsewhere: “Wherefore thou art now not a servant but a son, and if a son an heir also through God;”
Theodoret of Cyrus † AD 458 Counter-statements of Theodoret 1
… For seeing that the Apostle when writing to them that believed in Him said, “So thou art not a servant but a son”
St John of Damascus † AD 749 An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 3.21
… For these are not simple predications but relative. Whose servant, then could He be? His Father’s? The Son, then, would not have all the Father’s attributes, if He is the Father’s servant and yet in no respect His own. Besides, how could the apostle say concerning us who were adopted by Him, So that you are no longer a servant but a son
St John of Damascus † AD 749 An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 4.15
To the saints honour must be paid as friends of Christ, as sons and heirs of God: in the words of John the theologian and evangelist, As many as received Him, to them gave He power to became sons of God . So that they are no longer servants, but sons: and if sons, also heirs, heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ
St John of Damascus † AD 749 An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 4.23
… But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth His Only-begotten Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law that we might receive the adoption of sons . For to as many of us as received Him, He gave power to become sons of God, even to them that believe on Him . So that we are no longer servants but sons
4:8
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 2.9
… These [heretics now referred to], being the disciples of those mentioned, render such as assent to them worse than the heathen. For the former “serve the creature rather than the Creator,” and “those which are not gods,”
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 3.6.5
5. And the Apostle Paul also, saying, “For though ye have served them which are no gods; ye now know God, or rather, are known of God,”
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 5.4
… He did not therefore seek, by any depreciation of the mundane elements, to turn them away from their god, although, when he said just before, “Howbeit, then, ye serve them which by nature are no gods,”
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Against the Arians. (Orationes contra Arianos IV.) 2.15
14. For the Son of God indeed, being Himself the Word, is Lord of all; but we once were subject from the first to the slavery of corruption and the curse of the Law, then by degrees fashioning for ourselves things that were not, we served, as says the blessed Apostle, ‘them which by nature are no Gods
St Gregory of Nyssa † AD 395 Against Eunomius 2.4
… Then he says that God is “one in nature and in glory.” Whether God exists without being by nature God, he who uses these words may perhaps know: but if it be true that he who is not by nature God is not God at all, let them learn from the great Paul that they who serve those who are not Gods do not serve God
St Gregory of Nyssa † AD 395 Against Eunomius 2.8
… This first-born, then, hath also brethren, concerning whom He speaks to Mary, saying, “Go and tell My brethren, I go to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God .” In these words He sums up the whole aim of His dispensation as Man. For men revolted from God, and “served them which by nature were no gods
St Gregory of Nyssa † AD 395 Against Eunomius 12.1
… so that the good and true God and Father was no longer the God and Father of him who had been thus outlawed by his own depravity, but instead of Him Who was by Nature God, those were honoured who, as the Apostle says, “by nature were no Gods
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Exposition of the Christian Faith 5.1
… For the Apostle called Him indeed true God, Who according to His nature was God, as it is written: “Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them, who by nature were not gods;”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
Ver. 8, 9 . “Howbeit at that time not knowing God, ye were bondage to them which by nature are no gods. But now, that ye have come to know God, or rather to be known of God, how turn ye back again to the weak and beggarly rudiments whereunto ye desire to be in bondage over again.”
4:9
St Ignatius of Antioch † AD 108 Epistle to the Magnesians: Shorter and Longer Versions 1
… by whom ye have known God, or rather have been known by Him;
Tertullian † AD 220 The Prescription Against Heretics 33
… From these primary eight ten other Æons after them spring, and then the twelve others arise with their wonderful names, to complete the mere story of the thirty Æons. The same apostle, when disapproving of those who are “in bondage to elements,”
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 5.4
Now, from whom comes this grace, but from Him who proclaimed the promise thereof? Who is (our) Father, but He who is also our Maker? Therefore, after such affluence (of grace), they should not have returned “to weak and beggarly elements.”
St Basil the Great † AD 379 The Letters 235.3
… Is it not because they knew God and did not honour Him as God? Why are the “foolish Galatians” reproached by Paul in the words, “After that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements?”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Colossians 6
… for Jacob also deceived his father, but that was not a deceit, but an economy. “Through his philosophy,” he saith, “and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.” Now he sets about to reprove their observance of particular days, meaning by elements of the world the sun and moon;
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 22.2
… as He is said to know what He has caused those to know who were ignorant of it. For when the apostle says, “But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 9.1
… But if any man love God, the same is known of Him.” He has not said, has known Him, which is dangerous presumption, but “is known of Him.” So also in another place, when he had said, “But now after that ye have known God:” immediately correcting himself, he says, “or rather are known of God.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 8
… This is what Paul blames the Galatians for; because, going back to circumcision, they turned again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto they desired again to be in bondage.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 98.2
… But “let him be ignorant,” he says, who “is ignorant;” because it was not yet revealed to him to know that which he believes. When this takes place in a man’s mind, he is said to be known of God; for it is God who endows him with this power of understanding, as it is elsewhere said, “But now, knowing God, or rather, being known of God.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 63.7
… and for this reason Thou hast seen me, in order that I might see Thee. “I have appeared to Thee, that I might see.” He hath not said, “I have appeared to Thee, that Thou mightest see:” but, “I have appeared to Thee, that I might see Thy power and Thy glory.” Whence also the Apostle, “But now,” he saith, “knowing God, nay, having been known of God.”
4:10
Mathetes † fl. AD 130 Epistle to Diognetus 4
… And to speak falsely of God, as if He forbade us to do what is good on the Sabbath-days,—how is not this impious? And to glory in the circumcision of the flesh as a proof of election, and as if, on account of it, they were specially beloved by God,—how is it not a subject of ridicule? And as to their observing months and days,
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 5.4
… but at the God of those elements he aimed not in this censure. He tells us himself clearly enough what he means by “ elements ,” even the rudiments of the law: “Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years”
Tertullian † AD 220 On Fasting 2
… The fires, I ween, which lead us to repeated contracting of nuptials and daily cooking of dinners! Thus, too, they affirm that we share with the Galatians the piercing rebuke (of the apostle), as “observers of days, and of months, and of years.”
Tertullian † AD 220 On Fasting 14
Being, therefore, observers of “seasons” for these things, and of “days, and months, and years,”
Origen † AD 254 Origen Against Celsus 8.21
… That therefore seems to me a most noble saying of Paul, “Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain.”
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Festal and Personal Letters of Athanasius 3
… And we do not keep the festival as observers of days, knowing that the Apostle reproves those who do so, in those words which he spake; ‘Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Festal and Personal Letters of Athanasius 6
… Let him by all means hear, though fancying that he keeps the feast, the Apostolic voice reproving him; ‘Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years: I fear lest I have laboured among you in vain
St Cyril of Jerusalem † AD 386 The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 4.37
… Neither venture thyself at heathen assemblies for public spectacles, nor ever use amulets in sicknesses; shun also all the vulgarity of tavern-haunting. Fall not away either into the sect of the Samaritans, or into Judaism: for Jesus Christ henceforth hath ransomed thee. Stand aloof from all observance of Sabbaths
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
The word “child” in this place denotes not age but understanding; meaning that God had from the beginning designed for us these gifts, but, as we yet continued childish, He let us be under the elements of the world, that is, new moons and sabbaths, for these days are regulated by the course of sun and moon.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 33
For ( ver. 10 ) “we have an altar whereof they have no right to eat which serve the Tabernacle.” Not as the Jewish [ordinances], are those among us, as it is not lawful even for the High Priest to partake of them. So that since he had said, “Do not observe,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Christian Doctrine 4.20
… yea, they would exclude you, that ye might affect them. But it is good to be zealously affected always in a good thing, and not only when I am present with you. My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you, I desire to be present with you now, and to change my voice; for I stand in doubt of you.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Enchiridion 79
… anxious or unwilling to begin anything on certain days, or in certain months or years, because the vain doctrines of men lead them to think such times lucky or unlucky, had we not the means of estimating the greatness of the evil from the fear expressed by the apostle, who says to such men, “I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labor in vain”?
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 127.1
… All who preach the word of God in the Church, the ministers of God’s mysteries. We are all running, we are all toiling, we are all building now; and before us others have run, toiled, and built: but “except the Lord build, their labour is but lost.” Thus the Apostles seeing some fall bewailed these men, in that they had laboured in vain for them.
John Cassian † AD 435 The Conferences of John Cassian 14.11
… of which the Apostle says: “Ye observe days and months and times and years;” and again: Touch not, taste not, handle not.”
Socrates Scholasticus † AD 440 The Ecclesiastical History of Socrates Scholasticus 5.22
… epistle to the Galatians he writes, ‘Tell me ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?’ And continuing his train of argument, he demonstrates that the Jews were in bondage as servants, but that those who have come to Christ are ‘called into the liberty of sons.’ Moreover he exhorts them in no way to regard ‘days, and months, and years.’
Pseudo-Clement The Clementine Homilies 19.22
… For they ought to reflect, that as a season has been fixed suitable for planting and sowing, so days have been appointed as appropriate for cohabitation, which are carefully to be observed. Accordingly some one well instructed in the doctrines taught by Moses, finding fault with the people for their sins, called them sons of the new moons and the sabbaths.
4:11
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 32
… ii. 20 ) so Paul’s heart was His heart, and a tablet of the Holy Spirit, and a book of grace); which trembled for the sins of others, (for I fear, he says, lest by any means “I have bestowed labor upon you in vain; (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 2
… As Paul himself says to the Galatians, “I am afraid of you, lest by any means I have bestowed labor upon you in vain:” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
Ver. 11 . “I am afraid of you, lest by any means I have bestowed labor upon you in vain.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 55.13
… Under the bondage, however, of the ancient dispensation many rites were prescribed, which are made known to us only for our instruction as to their meaning. We do not now observe years, and months, and seasons, lest the words of the apostle apply to us, “I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 18.12
… and if we were weak, ye might have visited us? Behold, we do care for you; behold, we do visit you; but let it not be with us as you have heard from the apostle, “I fear lest I have bestowed labor upon you in vain.”
4:12
St Justin Martyr † AD 165 The Discourse to the Greeks 5
… O instruction that quenches the innate fire of the soul! The Word exercises an influence which does not make poets: it does not equip philosophers nor skilled orators, but by its instruction it makes mortals immortal, mortals gods; and from the earth transports them to the realms above Olympus. Come, be taught; become as I am, for I, too, was as ye are.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
… He says not “I have labored in vain,” but “lest,” which is as much as to say, the wreck has not happened, but I see the storm big with it; so I am in fear, yet not in despair; ye have the power to set all right, and to return into your former calm. Then, as it were stretching out a hand to them thus tempest-tost,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Confessions 13.21
… For this is after his kind; because a man is stimulated to emulation by his friend. “Be ye,” saith he, “as I am, for I am as you are.”
4:13
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 6
… (for the cross and death were the message brought;) but together with these there were also other hindrances, the dangers, and the plots, and the daily fear, and the being hunted about. For the word “weakness,” with him in many places stands for the persecutions: as also elsewhere. “My weakness which I had in my flesh ye did not set at nought:” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
Ver. 13, 14 . “But ye know that because of an infirmity of the flesh I preached the Gospel unto you the first time. And that which was a temptation in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount 2.9
… But it is one thing to be led into temptation, another to be tempted. For without temptation no one can be proved, whether to himself, as it is written, “He that hath not been tempted, what manner of things doth he know?” or to another, as the apostle says, “And your temptation in my flesh ye despised not:”
4:14
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 To Olympias 1
… For although he was not subjected to bodily infirmity, yet he was buffeted by trials not less severe, which inflicted much physical pain. “For there was given unto me” he says “a thorn in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to buffet me”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 31
… 2 .) And again, “I could wish that myself were accursed.” ( Rom. ix. 3 .) And to Philemon he wrote and said, “as Paul the aged, and a prisoner of Jesus Christ.” ( Phil. 9 .) And to the Galatians, “Behold, I Paul say unto you.” ( Gal. v. 2 .) And, “Ye received me even as Jesus Christ.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Second Corinthians 12
… What then were the “all things” which Paul possessed, when he said, “As having nothing, and yet possessing all things?” Things temporal , things spiritual. For he whom the cities received as an angel, for whom they would have plucked out their own eyes and have given them to him, (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
Ver. 14 . “But ye received me as an Angel of God.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 50.11
… He will come with all His Angels, when before Him shall be gathered all nations, and among all the Angels are to be reckoned those that have been made so perfect, that sitting upon twelve thrones they judge the twelve tribes of Israel. For men are called Angels: the Apostle saith of himself, “As an angel of God ye received me.”
4:15
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 44
… It is a ground for greater sorrow, an occasion of worse mischief ( λύμης , al. λύπης ). I have nothing to lay to your charge: “for I bear you record, that, if it had been possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them to me.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 29
… xii. 23 .) In like way Paul also, or rather not in like way, but even in a far greater degree, burned towards all his subjects ( τὥν ἀρχομένων ). Wherefore he made his disciples of such affection towards himself, that he said, “If were possible, ye would have pulled out your eyes and given them to me.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Second Corinthians 12
… But if thou marvellest how it is possible for one that hath nothing to have all things, let us bring forth this man himself into the midst, who commanded the world and was lord not only of their substance, but of their very eyes even. “If possible,” he says, “ye would have plucked out your eyes, and have given them to me.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Second Corinthians 13
… And indeed testifying to this in them, he says, Titus came and “told us your longing, your mourning, your zeal.” ( 2 Cor. vii. 7 .) And to the Galatians, “If possible, ye would have plucked out your eyes and given them to me,” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
Ver. 15, 16 . “Where then is that gratulation of yourselves? for I bear you witness, that, if possible, ye would have plucked out your eyes, and given them to me. So then am I become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?”
4:16
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 The Epistles of Cyprian 61.5
… And if, for the present, certain of our brethren seem to be made sorry by us, let us nevertheless remain in our wholesome persuasion, knowing that an apostle also has said, “Am I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth?”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 40.1
… He has to see his wife die without shedding a tear. Amos is driven from Samaria. Why is he driven from it? Surely in this case as in the others, because he was a spiritual surgeon, who cut away the parts diseased by sin and urged men to repentance. The apostle Paul says: “Am I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth?”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 147.8
… You however showed yourself a pillar of confidence, and excited as you were by the viper’s sting you became to me a deceitful bow; you shot at me arrows of reviling. I am become your enemy because I tell you the truth.
St Jerome † AD 420 Against the Pelagians 1.26
… And the flatterer is well described by the philosophers as “ a pleasant enemy .” Truth is bitter, of gloomy visage and wrinkled brow, and distasteful to those who are rebuked. Hence the Apostle says,
4:17
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
Ver. 17 . “They zealously seek you in no good way; nay, they desire to shut you out that ye may seek them.”
4:18
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Widows 5
32. Strive to equal her, my daughters: “It is good to be zealously affected in a good thing.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
Ver. 18 . “But it is good to be zealously sought in a good matter at all times, and not only when I am present with you.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 2
… v. 22 .) Again for instance, emulation, desire, [are useful]: the one when it hath reference to the procreation of children, the other when he directs his emulation to excellent things. As Paul also saith, “It is good to be zealously affected always in a good thing” (
4:19
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 5.8
… He says specifically “ sons of men ,” and not men promiscuously; thus exhibiting to us those who were the children of men truly so called, choice men, apostles. “For,” says he, “I have begotten you through the gospel;” and “Ye are my children, of whom I travail again in birth.”
Tertullian † AD 220 On Monogamy 14
… But so did circumstances require him to “become all things to all, in order to gain all;” “travailing in birth with them until Christ should be formed in them;”
Tertullian † AD 220 Five Books in Reply to Marcion 3
From the free woman, joys: (the slave expelled,
St Methodius † AD 311 The Banquet of the Ten Virgins; or Concerning Chastity 3.9
… and receiving and conceiving the seeds of life, he who was before a child, becomes a church and a mother, himself labouring in birth of those who, through him, believed in the Lord, until Christ was formed and born in them also. For he says, “My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you;”
St Methodius † AD 311 The Banquet of the Ten Virgins; or Concerning Chastity 8.8
… since the enlightened receive the features, and the image, and the manliness of Christ, the likeness of the form of the Word being stamped upon them, and begotten in them by a true knowledge and faith, so that in each one Christ is spiritually born. And, therefore, the Church swells and travails in birth until Christ is formed in us,
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Persecution in Egypt 1
… therefore these misbelievers have striven to introduce jealousy there also, or rather not they, but the devil who has stirred them up, in order that when his herald Antichrist shall come, he may find that the Churches in Egypt also are his own, and that the Meletians have already been instructed in his principles, and may recognise himself as already formed
St Basil the Great † AD 379 De Spiritu Sancto 6
… It is left then for our opponents to allege that this expression signifies inferiority of rank. Let them learn that “Christ is the power of God and wisdom of God,” and that “He is the image of the invisible God” and “brightness of his glory,” and that “Him hath God the Father sealed,” by engraving Himself on Him.
St Gregory of Nyssa † AD 395 On the Holy Spirit 1
… and if any one were to term some individual a man, and yet were unable to produce evidence in his case of the foregoing signs of human nature, his terming him so would be a valueless honour. Thus, too, the Christian is marked by his Belief in Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; in this consists the form of him who is fashioned
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 An Exhortation to Theodore After His Fall 1
… “Behold, I Paul tell you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing:” and again “ye who would be justified by the law are fallen away from grace:” and yet even after so great a lapse he welcomes them saying “my little children of whom I am in travail again until Christ be formed in you
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 To Olympias 1
… For although he was not subjected to bodily infirmity, yet he was buffeted by trials not less severe, which inflicted much physical pain. “For there was given unto me” he says “a thorn in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to buffet me”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 11
Put it in my power to speak out boldly, in the presence both of Gentiles and of Jews, and, above all, of God. Yea, I entreat you by the love, by the pangs wherewith I have travailed for your birth, “my little children.” I will not add what follows, “of whom I travail in birth again;” nor will I say, “until Christ be formed in you.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 32
… For he says, “Out of much affliction ( θλίψεως ) and anguish ( συνοχἥς ) of heart I wrote unto you.” ( ib. ii. 4 .) I were desirous to see that heart even after its dissolution, which burned at each one that was lost, which travailed a second time with the children that had proved abortions (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Second Corinthians 13
… For to the Romans he saith, “I long to see you;” and, “oftentimes I purposed to come unto you;” and, “If by any means now at length I may be prospered to come unto you.” ( Rom. i. 11, 13, 10 .) And to the Galatians, he says, “My little children of whom I am again in travail.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 1
… vi. 21 .) but to the Galatians, “O foolish Galatians.” ( Gal. iii. 1 .) And not once only, but a second time, also he has employed this reproof, and towards the conclusion he says with a reproachful allusion to them, “Let no man trouble me;” ( Gal. vi. 17 .) but he soothes them again with the words, “My little children, of whom I am again in travail:” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
Ver. 19 . “My little children, of whom I am again in travail until Christ be formed in you.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Philippians 10
Now he calls the Galatians indeed “children” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on 2 Timothy 1
Not merely his “son,” but, “dearly beloved”; since it is possible for sons not to be beloved. Not such, he means, art thou; I call thee not merely a son, but a “dearly beloved son.” As he calls the Galatians his children, but at the same time complains of them; “My little children,” he says, “of whom I travail in birth again.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 9
… And this is evident from many places. “For,” says one, “doth not he that falleth rise again? or he that turneth away, doth not he turn back to [God]?” ( Jer. viii. 4 .) It is possible, if we will, that Christ should be formed in us again: for hear Paul saying, “My little children of whom I travail in birth again, until Christ be formed in you.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 21
… but, which tended more to strengthen them, “ye have it,” he says. For to recover again that which has been cast away, requires more labor: but not to lose that which is held fast does not. But to the Galatians he says the very opposite: “My children of whom I travail in birth again, till Christ be formed in you” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 23
But I cannot be a father, if I do not weep. I am a father full of affection. Hear how Paul exclaims, “My little children, of whom I travail in birth again” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 31
… but to those who have fallen, that they may not fall into despair, he says the contrary, speaking thus, “My little children, of whom I travail in birth again, until Christ he formed in you.” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 69.6
… whereof everyone bear twins, and none is barren among them.” If none is barren among them, all of them must have udders filled with milk and be able to say with the apostle: “Ye are my little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you;”
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 2.10
… For if the Church admits but one rank, and has not many members in one body, what necessity is there for calling her bride, sister, mother? It must be that she is the bride of some, the sister of others, the mother of others. All indeed stand on the right hand, but one stands as a bridegroom, another as a brother, a third as a son.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Confessions 1.11
… On which, the mother of my flesh being much troubled,—since she, with a heart pure in Thy faith, travailed in birth
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Confessions 9.9
… for that through the testimony of the fruits of a holy conversation, they perceived Thee to be present in her heart. For she had “been the wife of one man,” had requited her parents, had guided her house piously, was “well-reported of for good works,” had “brought up children,” as often travailing in birth of them
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 82.4
… a Jew, livest after the manner of the Gentiles, and not as to the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?’” For whom can I confide in, as assuredly not deceiving me by spoken or written statements, if the apostle deceived his own “children,” for whom he “travailed in birth again until Christ (who is the Truth) were formed in them”?
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 93.31
… “O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you,” that, “having begun in the Spirit, ye are now made perfect in the flesh?” For thus you would misrepresent that learned man, who (like the apostle) was sternly rebuking the slow of heart and the timid, for whom he was travailing in birth a second time, until Christ should be formed in them.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 180.4
… these are literal words of a plain statement. Surely, in addressing persons “of whom he travailed in birth till Christ should be formed in them,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 5
… His mother is the whole Church, because she herself assuredly gives birth to His members, that is, His faithful ones. Also His mother is every pious soul, doing the will of His Father with most fruitful charity, in them of whom it travaileth, until Himself
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 24
… For this reason, in all religion, and especially in the Christian religion, young children are invited to membership. This is hinted at in the words of His apostle: "My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you."
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 50.27
… they that have borne cherish not their children, because they have given them to be nursed; but those that cherish, cherish not their own, but those of others: but he himself had borne, he was himself cherishing, to no nurse did commit what he had borne; for he had said, “Of whom I travail again until Christ be formed in you.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 53.1
… For he also was himself afterwards enlightened, and grafted on those members which he used to persecute; being pregnant with the same love, he said, “My little children, of whom again I travail, until Christ be formed in you.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 58.4
… Or what men to-day would be alive to hear these words to no purpose, unless they were born? Perchance therefore sinners have been alienated from a certain womb, wherein that charity was suffering pains, which speaketh through the Apostle, “Of whom again I am in labour, until Christ be formed in you.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 127.5
… The Church beareth children, the Bride of Christ; and if she beareth them, she travaileth of them. In figure of her, Eve was called also “the Mother of all living.” He who said, “My little children, of whom I travail in birth again, until Christ be formed in you,”
Theodoret of Cyrus † AD 458 Letters of the Blessed Theodoret, Bishop of Cyprus 77
… We can hear him exclaiming, “My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you.”
4:20
St Gregory of Nyssa † AD 395 Against Eunomius 3.2
… For he tells us that there are “words of wisdom” which reveal their aim “by a turn .” For that which is not directly understood needs some turn for the apprehension of the thing concealed; and as Paul, when about to exchange the literal sense of the history for figurative contemplation, says that he will “change his voice
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 1
Since Paul then saw the whole Galatian people in a state of excitement, a flame kindled against their Church, and the edifice shaken and tottering to its fall, filled with the mixed feelings of just anger and despondency, (which he has expressed in the words, “I could wish to be present with you now, and to change my voice,”—
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
Ver. 20 . “Yea, I could wish to be present with you now, and to change my voice.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 6
… To ask for aid bears the semblance of disgrace, but it ceased to be so, when their Teachers with all boldness urged their claim, so that their disciples derived from hence no small benefit, taught hereby to despise all appearances. Wherefore he says, “But
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 8
That they then were “become dull,” he said; but from what cause, he did not add, leaving it to themselves to know it, and not wishing to make his discourse hard to bear. But in the case of the Galatians he both “marveled” ( Gal. i. 6 ) and “stood in doubt” (
4:21
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 5.4
… by reason of which he adds in conclusion: “So then, brethren, we are not children of the bond woman, but of the free.”
Tertullian † AD 220 On Monogamy 6
Thenceforward let matters see to themselves. Figures are one thing; laws another. Images are one thing; statutes another. Images pass away when fulfilled: statutes remain permanently to be fulfilled. Images prophesy: statutes govern. What that digamy of Abraham portends, the same apostle fully teaches,
Origen † AD 254 Origen De Principiis iv.1.13
… “Tell me, ye who desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written that Abraham had two sons; the one by a bond-maid, the other by a free woman. But he who was of the bond-woman was born according to the flesh; but he of the free woman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants.”
Origen † AD 254 Origen Against Celsus 2.3
… Now, how should they have abandoned the law of their fathers, who are in the habit of rebuking those who do not listen to its commands, saying, “Tell me, ye who read the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written, that Abraham had two sons;” and so on, down to the place, “which things are an allegory,”
Origen † AD 254 Origen Against Celsus 4.44
… For it is written that Abraham had two sons; the one by a bond maid, the other by a free woman. But he who was of the bond woman was born after the flesh; but he of the free woman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the Mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.”
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 The Epistles of Cyprian 75.14
… Of which equality we see the sacrament celebrated in Exodus, when the manna flowed down from heaven, and, prefiguring the things to come, showed forth the nourishment of the heavenly bread and the food of the coming Christ. For there, without distinction either of sex or of age, an omer was collected equally by each one.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 7
… For neither was the Law given to any else than you. And for what reason did he not say, we know that what things soever the prophet saith, but what things soever the Law saith? It is because Paul uses to call the whole Old Testament the Law. And in another place he says, “Do ye not hear the Law, that Abraham had two sons?” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
Ver. 21 . “Tell me,” he says, “ye that desire to be under the Law, do ye not hear the Law?”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 15.2
… Nevertheless, what saith the Scripture? Cast out the bond woman and her son: for the son of the bond woman shall not be heir with the son of the free woman. And we, brethren, are not children of the bond woman, but of the free, in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Christian Doctrine 4.20
… Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the Mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Hagar. For this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Work on the Proceedings of Pelagius 14
… . . .Which things are an allegory: for these are the two testaments ; the one which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and is conjoined with the Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children; whereas the Jerusalem which is above is free, and is the mother of us all.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Against Two Letters of the Pelagians 3.12
… but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are in allegory; for these are the two testaments; the one in the Mount Sinai, gendering to bondage, which is Agar. For Sinai is a mountain in Arabia, which is associated with Jerusalem which now is, for it is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem that is above is free, which is our mother?”
Socrates Scholasticus † AD 440 The Ecclesiastical History of Socrates Scholasticus 5.22
… And the proof of the matter is plain; for no law of Christ permits Christians to imitate the Jews. On the contrary the apostle expressly forbids it; not only rejecting circumcision, but also deprecating contention about festival days. In his epistle to the Galatians
4:22
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 3.5
… and also alleges that the rock which followed (the Israelites) and supplied them with drink was Christ; teaching the Galatians, moreover, that the two narratives of the sons of Abraham had an allegorical meaning in their course;
St Gregory of Nyssa † AD 395 On the Baptism of Christ 1
Hagar, the handmaid of Abraham (whom Paul treats allegorically in reasoning with the Galatians
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 16
But if he receive not this, who is diseased with the Manichæan doctrines, let him hear Paul saying the very same in another place, “For Abraham had two sons, one by the bondmaid, and another by the freewoman; and these are two covenants.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
Ver. 22 . “For it is written, ( Gen. xv. 16 .) that Abraham had two sons, one by the hand-maid and the other by the freewoman.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 123.13
… Besides, if we are to deal with symbols and types of things to come, we must judge of them not by our own opinions but in the light of the apostle’s explanations. Hagar and Sarah, or Sinai and Zion, are typical of the two testaments.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 17.3
… but partly to the free city of God, that is, the true Jerusalem eternal in the heavens, whose children are all those that live according to God in the earth: but there are some things among them which are understood to pertain to both,—to the bond maid properly, to the free woman figuratively.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Profit of Believing 8
… which things were spoken by way of allegory. For these are the two Testaments, one of Mount Sinai gendering unto bondage, which is Agar: for Sinai is a mount in Arabia, which bordereth upon that Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But that Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Lying 26
… Seeing the Apostle, speaking of the sons of Abraham, of whom of course it is most easily said that they were born and did live in the natural order of propagating the people, (for not monsters and prodigies were born, to lead the mind to some presignification,) nevertheless asserteth that they signify the two Testaments;
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 22.51
… We see that, in the wife and bond-slaves of Abraham, the apostle understands the two Testaments.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Correction of the Donatists 2
… For he declares that the free mother of us all, the heavenly Jerusalem, that is to say, the true Church of God, was prefigured in that woman who cruelly entreated her hand-maid.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 39.6
… “the anointed stone” which was at Jacob’s head, is a figurative action. There is now due to your expectation an example made out of both together, something which is at once a literal fact, and which also signifies something else figured by it. “We know that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a free-woman;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 117.5
… whose praise is not of men, but of God; who belong to the Jerusalem that is free, our eternal mother in heaven, the spiritual Sarah, who casteth out the bond maid and her children from the house of liberty.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 120.6
… What meaneth, “I have had my habitation among the tents of Kedar”? “Kedar,” as far as we remember of the interpretation of Hebrew words, signifieth darkness. “Kedar” rendered into Latin is called tenebræ . Now ye know that Abraham had two sons, whom indeed the Apostle mentioneth,
4:23
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
Ver. 23 . “Howbeit the son by the handmaid is born after the flesh; but the son by the freewoman is born through promise.”
Rufinus of Aquileia † AD 411 A Commentary on the Apostles' Creed 29
… “When I shall be lifted up from the earth I shall draw all unto Me.” To this the Gospel bears witness, when it says, “The graves were opened, and many bodies of saints which slept arose, and appeared unto many, and entered into the holy City,” that city, doubtless, of which the Apostle says, “Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the Mother of us all.”
4:24
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 4.31.2
… Now the father of the human race is the Word of God, as Moses points out when he says, “Is not He thy father who hath obtained thee [by generation], and formed thee, and created thee?”
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on Matthew 10.14
… Here you will inquire if the scribe of the Gospel be as the scribe of the law, and if the former deals with the Gospel, as the latter with the law, reading and hearing and telling “those things which contain an allegory,”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies on the Statues to the People of Antioch 7.8
… and why written in the Hebrew tongue; and why in the wilderness of Sinai? For the Apostle doth not mention the place merely in a cursory manner; but shews that in that circumstance too there was a great subject of contemplation for us, when he saith to us: “For these are two covenants, the one from Mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
Ver. 24 . “Which things contain an allegory.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Confessions 6.4
… and with delight I heard Ambrose, in his sermons to the people, oftentimes most diligently recommend this text as a rule,—“The letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 16.31
… for she said, “God hath made me to laugh, so that every one who hears will laugh with me.” Then in a little while the bond maid was cast out of the house with her son; and, according to the apostle, these two women signify the old and new covenants,—Sarah representing that of the Jerusalem which is above, that is, the city of God.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 15.9
… And it is a very difficult and uncommon thing to express the names of the several modes or tropes in Latin, so as to refer its appropriate name to each. And hence some Latin translators, through unwillingness to employ a Greek word, where the apostle says, “Which things are an allegory,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 2.24
… In former times, however, the sacramental mystery of justification by faith lay concealed in every mode. Still it was the self-same faith in the Mediator which saved the saints of old, both small and great—not the old covenant, “which gendereth to bondage;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Against Two Letters of the Pelagians 1.12
… I say that either before the law, or in the time of the Old Testament, they were freed from sins,—not by their own power, because “cursed is every one that hath put his hope in man,” and without any doubt those are under this curse whom also the sacred Psalm notifies, “who trust in their own strength;” nor by the old covenant which gendereth to bondage,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Against Two Letters of the Pelagians 3.3
… but the Scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.” Hence it is that the Old Testament, from the Mount Sinai, where the law was given, gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. “Now we,” says he, “are not children of the bondmaid but of the freewoman.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 112.5
… Who can doubt that he, who had such a thing done for him by Christ, was yet destined to reign with Christ? And his being found as a servant, pertains also to that oldness that gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 68.10
… Thus then Heavens and Heaven, mountains and mountain, are not a different thing, but the very same thing: just as Churches many, and the One Church, are not a different thing, but the very same thing. Why then “Mount Sina, which gendereth unto bondage”?
Theodoret of Cyrus † AD 458 Dialogues. The “Eranistes” or “Polymorphus” of the Blessed Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus 3
Orth. —Yet the divine Apostle says that the narratives are types.
4:25
St Cyril of Jerusalem † AD 386 The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 13.7
… They speak against us, and say, “Does the Lord then suffer? What? Had men’s hands power over His sovereignty?” Read the Lamentations; for in those Lamentations, Jeremias, lamenting you, wrote what is worthy of lamentations. He saw your destruction, he beheld your downfall, he bewailed Jerusalem which then was; for that which now is
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
Ver. 25 . “Now this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia:”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 17.7
… Certainly none of the Israelites, who, cleaving to Christ, have continued in Him, shall ever be among those Israelites who persist in being His enemies even to the end of this life, but shall for ever remain in the separation which is here foretold. For the Old Testament, from the Mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Against Lying 33
… But as for us, when we ask whether it be the part of a good man sometimes to lie, we ask not concerning a person pertaining to Egypt, or to Jericho, or to Babylon, or still to Jerusalem itself, the earthly, which is in bondage with her children;
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Work on the Proceedings of Pelagius 14
… but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.” The children of the flesh, then, belong to the earthly Jerusalem, which is in bondage with her children; whereas the children of the promise belong to the Jerusalem above, the free, the mother of us all, eternal in the heavens.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Against Two Letters of the Pelagians 3.9
… And thus, in the will itself within him, he is guilty; and it is here that God, who gives the command, looks. Such were the children of the earthly Jerusalem, concerning which the apostle says, “For she is in bondage with her children,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 111.6
… God indeed gave the carnal Israelites an earthly Jerusalem, “which is in bondage with her children:” but this is the Old Covenant, pertaining unto the old man. But they who there understood the figure, even then were heirs of the New Covenant; for “Jerusalem which is above is free, which is our everlasting mother in heaven.”
4:26
St Polycarp † AD 155 Epistle to the Philippians 3
… And when absent from you, he wrote you a letter, which, if you carefully study, you will find to be the means of building you up in that faith which has been given you, and which, being followed by hope, and preceded by love towards God, and Christ, and our neighbour, “is the mother of us all.”
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 5.35
… [to its pristine condition], and Jerusalem rebuilt after the pattern of the Jerusalem above, of which the prophet Isaiah says, “Behold, I have depicted thy walls upon my hands, and thou art always in my sight.” And the apostle, too, writing to the Galatians, says in like manner, “But the Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.”
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 3.24
… But we do confess that a kingdom is promised to us upon the earth, although before heaven, only in another state of existence; inasmuch as it will be after the resurrection for a thousand years in the divinely-built city of Jerusalem, “let down from heaven,” which the apostle also calls “our mother from above;”
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 5.15
… He says that those who “remain unto the coming of Christ,” along with “the dead in Christ, shall rise first,” being “caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air.” I find it was in their foresight of all this, that the heavenly intelligences gazed with admiration on “the Jerusalem which is above,”
St Hippolytus † AD 235 The Refutation of All Heresies 5.2
… This, he asserts, is that which has been written: “I said, Ye are gods, and all children of the highest;” “If ye hasten to fly out of Egypt, and repair beyond the Red Sea into the wilderness,” that is, from earthly intercourse to the Jerusalem above, which is the mother of the living;
Origen † AD 254 Origen De Principiis iv.1.22
… but we understand that there exists a race of souls which is termed “Israel,” as is indicated by the interpretation of the name itself: for Israel is interpreted to mean a “mind,” or “man seeing God.” The apostle, again, makes a similar revelation respecting Jerusalem, saying, “The Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.”
Origen † AD 254 Origen De Principiis iv.1-2.22
… for “they who are the children of the flesh are not the children of God.” Again, the apostle teaches regarding Jerusalem as follows: “The Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.”
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on Matthew 11.17
… And corresponding, I think, “to the Jerusalem above, which is free, the mother”
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.13
… But it is no easy task to see what is intellectually meant by father and mother and children. What this means in point of truth God may know, and whether He Himself has given insight to us or not, he who can may judge. Only this is our conception of the passage; that, as “the Jerusalem which is above” is “the mother”
Eusebius of Caesarea † AD 339 The Church History of Eusebius martyrs-of-palestine.11.9
9. But he gave a second answer similar to the former, saying that Jerusalem was his country, meaning that of which Paul says, “Jerusalem which is above is free, which is our mother,”
Eusebius of Caesarea † AD 339 The Church History of Eusebius 10.4.70
70. But the region above the heavens, with the models of earthly things which are there, and the so-called Jerusalem above,
St Cyril of Jerusalem † AD 386 The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 18.26
… For this is the peculiar name of this Holy Church, the mother of us all, which is the spouse of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Only-begotten Son of God (for it is written, As Christ also loved the Church and gave Himself for it , and all the rest,) and is a figure and copy of Jerusalem which is above, which is free, and the mother of us all
St Gregory of Nazianzus † AD 389 Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 42.9
… And to the presiding Angels, for I believe, as John teaches me in his Revelation, that each Church has its guardian, Prepare ye the way of My people, and cast away the stones from the way, that there may be no stumblingblock or hindrance for the people in the divine road and entrance, now, to the temples made with hands, but soon after, to Jerusalem above,
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Second Corinthians 11
… But behold, both a new soul, (for it was cleansed,) and a new body, and a new worship, and promises new, and covenant, and life, and table, and dress, and all things new absolutely . For instead of the Jerusalem below we have received that mother city which is above (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
Ver. 26 . “But Jerusalem that is above is free.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Ephesians 23
Moral . Let not any one of them that eat this Passover look towards Egypt, but towards Heaven, towards “Jerusalem that is above.” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 22.24
… “I have found him whom my soul loveth; I will hold him, I will not let him go.” And He will answer: “My dove, my undefiled is but one; she is the only one of her mother, she is the choice one of her that bare her.” Now the mother of whom this is said is the heavenly Jerusalem.
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 53.8
… pass on to Jesus the son of Nave —a type of the Lord in name as well as in deed—who crossed over Jordan, subdued hostile kingdoms, divided the land among the conquering people and who, in every city, village, mountain, river, hill-torrent, and boundary which he dealt with, marked out the spiritual realms of the heavenly Jerusalem, that is, of the church.
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 58.2
… The city which we are to praise and to seek is not that which has slain the prophets and shed the blood of Christ, but that which is made glad by the streams of the river, which is set upon a mountain and so cannot be hid, which the apostle declares to be a mother of the saints,
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 84.8
… For my part I will hold fast in my old age the faith wherein I was born again in my boyhood. They speak of us as claytowners, made out of dirt, brutish and carnal, because, say they, we refuse to receive the things of the spirit; but of course they themselves are citizens of Jerusalem and their mother is in heaven.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Confessions 12.15
… For we also are called Thy righteousness; for thus saith a certain servant of Thine: “That we might be made the righteousness of God in Him.” Therefore, since a certain created wisdom was created before all things, the rational and intellectual mind of that chaste city of Thine, our mother which is above, and is free,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Confessions 12.16
… and will myself enter into my chamber, and sing there unto Thee songs of love,—groaning with groaning unutterable in my pilgrimage, and remembering Jerusalem, with heart raised up towards it,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 11.7
… or under the name of light the holy city was signified, composed of holy angels and blessed spirits, the city of which the apostle says, “Jerusalem which is above is our eternal mother in heaven;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 20.21
… By “Jerusalem,” too, we should understand not that which serves with her children, but that which, according to the apostle, is our free mother, eternal in the heavens.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Enchiridion 56
… Then we mention the Holy Church. And thus we are made to understand that the intelligent creation, which constitutes the free Jerusalem,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Catechising of the Uninstructed 20
… which earthly kingdom, nevertheless, sustained the image of a spiritual kingdom. There Jerusalem was founded, that most celebrated city of God, which, while in bondage, served as a sign of the free city, which is called the heavenly Jerusalem
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Faith and the Creed 6
13. We believe that He Ascended into Heaven , which place of blessedness He has likewise promised unto us, saying, “They shall be as the angels in the heavens,” in that city which is the mother of us all,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Patience 25
25. So then, as we are not to deny that this is the gift of God, we are thus to understand that there be some gifts of God possessed by the sons of that Jerusalem which is above,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 68.35
35. “From Thy Temple in Jerusalem, to Thee kings shall offer presents” ( ver. 29 ). Jerusalem, which is our free mother,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 79.4
4. But now in that which followeth, “they have made Jerusalem for a keeping of apples;” even the Church herself is rightly understood under this name, even the free Jerusalem our mother,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 79.7
… But in reference to the free Jerusalem our mother,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 87.2
… for Sion was a certain city of this world, which bore a typical resemblance as a shadow to that Sion of which he presently speaketh, that Heavenly Jerusalem, of which the Apostle saith, “which is the mother of us all;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 106.20
… milk and honey, signified something great, through which, as by a visible token, He was leading those who understood His wondrous works to invisible grace and the kingdom of heaven, they could not be blamed for scorning that land, whose temporal kingdom we also ought to esteem as nothing, that we may love that Jerusalem which is free, the mother of us all,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 116.11
11. Let therefore the slave purchased at so great a price confess his condition, and say, “Behold, O Lord, how that I am Thy servant: “I am Thy servant, and the son of Thine handmaid” ( ver. 16 ).…This, therefore, is the son of the heavenly Jerusalem, which is above, the free mother of us all.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 122.3
… What great thing then did he desire; to stand among those who slew the Prophets, and stoned them that were sent unto them? God forbid that he should think of that Jerusalem, who so loveth, who so burneth, who so longeth to reach that Jerusalem, “our Mother,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 149.3
… Let him regard his own conscience, and there he seeth God.…“And let the sons of Sion exult in their King.” The sons of the Church are Israel. For Sion indeed was one city, which fell: amid its ruins certain saints dwelt after the flesh: but the true Sion, the true Jerusalem (for Sion and Jerusalem are one), is “eternal in the heavens,” and is “our mother.”
John Cassian † AD 435 The Seven Books of John Cassian on the Incarnation of the Lord, Against Nestorius 5.12
… Who, as it was said, “ascended up where He was before,” and of whom we read: “No man hath ascended into heaven, but He who came down from heaven, even the Son of man who is in heaven.” For this cause, I say, He has left his father and mother, i.e., God from whom He was begotten and that “Jerusalem which is the mother of us all,”
Pseudo-Clement The First Epistle of the Blessed Clement, the Disciple of Peter the Apostle 5
… Art thou acquainted with the noble task of holy virginity? Dost thou know how, like a man, to enter “lawfully” upon this contest and “strive,” that, in the might of the Holy Spirit, thou choosest this for thyself, that thou mayest be crowned with a crown of light, and that they may lead thee about in triumph through “the Jerusalem above”?
4:27
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 1.10.3
… and she is beloved who was not beloved;” and in what sense He says that “more are the children of her that was desolate, than of her who possessed a husband.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
Ver. 27 . “Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not, break forth and cry, thou that travailest not, for more are the children of the desolate than of her which hath the husband.” ( Isa. liv. 1 .)
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 93.26
… Are you not afraid lest the Jews should say to you, “If your handful of men be the Church of Christ, what becomes of the statement of your Apostle Paul, that your Church is described in the words, ‘Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; breakforth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband;’
4:28
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 4.7.2
… As Paul does also testify, saying that we are children of Abraham because of the similarity of our faith, and the promise of inheritance.
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 5.32
… For his seed is the Church, which receives the adoption to God through the Lord, as John the Baptist said: “For God is able from the stones to raise up children to Abraham.” Thus also the apostle says in the Epistle to the Galatians: “But ye, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of the promise.”
Tertullian † AD 220 On Monogamy 6
… laws another. Images are one thing; statutes another. Images pass away when fulfilled: statutes remain permanently to be fulfilled. Images prophesy: statutes govern. What that digamy of Abraham portends, the same apostle fully teaches, the interpreter of each testament, just as he likewise lays it down that our “seed” is called in Isaac.
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 On the Holy Spirit 2.7
65. But we cannot deny Him. Far be it from us to deny that which is so great, since the Apostle says: “But ye brethren, like Isaac, are the children of promise, but as then, he that is born after the flesh persecutes him that is after the Spirit.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
Ver. 28 . “Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Against Two Letters of the Pelagians 3.12
… But Jerusalem that is above is free, which is our mother?” What is more clear, what more certain, what more remote from all obscurity and ambiguity to the children of the promise? And a little after, “Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.”
4:29
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
Ver. 29, 30 . “But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. Howbeit what saith the Scripture? ( Gen. xxi. 10 .) Cast out the handmaid and her son: for the son of the handmaid shall not inherit with the son of the freewoman.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 93.6
… And although we read that the bondwoman and her son suffered great hardships from Sarah, nevertheless the Apostle Paul says that Isaac suffered persecution from Ishmael: “But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 21.32
… For the “Holy Spirit of discipline will flee deceit.” Wherefore whosoever are baptized in the congregations or separations rather of schismatics or heretics, although they have not been born again of the Spirit, like as it were to Ishmael, who was Abraham’s son after the flesh; not like Isaac, who was his son after the Spirit,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 120.6
… he therefore said, “I have dwelt among the tents of Kedar.” The tents of Ishmael are called those of Kedar. Thus the book of Genesis hath it: thus it hath, that Kedar belongeth unto Ishmael. Isaac therefore is with Ishmael: that is, they who belong unto Isaac, live among those who belong unto Ishmael.
Pope St Gregory I the Great † AD 604 Register of the Epistles of St. Gregory the Great 11.45
… Abraham had two sons before he took Cethura to wife; and yet his carnal son persecuted the son of promise ( Genes. ix .). This the great teacher expounds, saying, As he who is after the flesh persecuted him that is after the Spirit, even so it is now (
4:30
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Christian Doctrine 3.32
… The Church declares itself to be at present both; and this because the good fish and the bad are for the time mixed up in the one net. For the tents of Kedar pertain to Ishmael, who “shall not be heir with the son of the free woman.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Patience 25
… For though it be written, “Cast out the bondmaid and her son, for the son of the bondmaid shall not be heir with my son Isaac:”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Work on the Proceedings of Pelagius 14
… whereas the Jerusalem which is above is free, and is the mother of us all.” Now, inasmuch as the Old Testament belongs to bondage, whence it is written, “Cast out the bond-woman and her son, for the son of the bond-woman shall not be heir with my son Isaac,”
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Letters 167
… And so a wife is different from a concubine, even as a bondwoman from a freewoman. For which reason also the Apostle in order to show the difference of these persons quotes from Genesis, where it is said to Abraham, “Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with my son Isaac
4:31
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Apparel of Women ii.7
… If you feel no shame at the enormity, feel some at the pollution; for fear you may be fitting on a holy and Christian head the slough of some one else’s head, unclean perchance, guilty perchance and destined to hell. Nay, rather banish quite away from your “free”
St Gregory of Nyssa † AD 395 Funeral Oration on Meletius 1
… Ye, therefore, that are brethren, and of the same kindred, do as they who were of another kindred did. On that occasion the tear of strangers was shed in common with that of countrymen; be it shed in common now, for common is the grief. Behold these your patriarchs. All these are children of our Jacob. All these are children of the free-woman
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 4
Ver. 31 . “Wherefore, brethren, we are not children of a handmaid but of the freewoman.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Against Two Letters of the Pelagians 3.12
… But Jerusalem that is above is free, which is our mother?” What is more clear, what more certain, what more remote from all obscurity and ambiguity to the children of the promise? And a little after, “Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.” Also a little after, “But we, brethren, are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free,”
4:1
The heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant. An infant, as the Greek word is, who has not yet attained to years of discretion, inasmuch as he is under a tutor and a pædagogue, and cannot exercise the right of dominion over his property, is in the position of a slave rather than a lord, nay, he is subject to a slave, viz., his pædagogue, and is under tutors and governors. Ver. 2. Governors. Stewards who administer his property.
4:2
Until the time appointed. The prescribed day when the power of the tutor came to an end, i.e., the date when the heir was twenty five years of age, which in many places is the age of majority. Ver. 3. Even so we. That is the Jews, whom he so describes in chap. iii. 25.
4:3
When we were children. Like boys untaught in the knowledge, and therefore in the love of God and His righteousness.
Under the elements of the world. 1. Serving the letter of the Old Law. For the law, as being imperfect, was first given to the world, i.e., to the Jews, and through the Jews to all nations, to teach them the rudiments of faith and piety. But the Gospel, succeeding the law, teaches their perfection. As Justinian calls his Institutes the "elements of the law," and as we speak of the elements of grammar, philosophy, and music, so here the Apostle speaks of the law as elementary. As boys, says Anselm, learn the elements, and their conjunction, but do not understand the words and sentences composed from them until they proceed to higher branches of learning, to which they can only attain by first learning the elements, so the Jews had the elements in their ceremonies, of which they did not understand the meaning, until by these elements, as their elevators, they come to the faith of Christ. S. Paul calls the men of the world by the name of the world. The reference is first to the Jews, then, by metonymy, to all men. God willed to open, in one corner of the world a school, where He might teach men the rudiments of faith and piety, until He should open everywhere schools where they were most learnedly taught. 2. More properly and naturally the elements of the world are the days, months, times, and years of verse 10. These he calls elements byan allusion to Gen. i., where it is said that God created the elements of the world in seven days, and then rested on the seventh day, and instituted the Sabbath as a memorial among the Jews of His creative rest. The days are thus called elements, because in them the elements were created, and their creation represented by metonymy on the Sabbath. Or they may be so called because time governs the world and all in it, as the generation, corruption, and succession of things. Accordingly, in grateful recollection of God's providence, disposing by sun and moon the succession of the seasons and of day and night, He willed that Sabbaths, new moons, and other days should be observed by the Jews, that they might continually recognise God as the Creator and Preserver of all things, through the instrumentality of these stated feasts, till, being better taught by the Gospel, they should worship God in spirit and in truth. Erasmus, however, thinks that the world here by catachresis stands for whatever has the nature of visible and transitory things, such as the ceremonies of the Old Law, which, in Col 2:20, he calls "the rudiments of the world." But this is not the usual meaning of the word with the Apostle, nor is it the meaning in Col 2:20, as I will prove when I come to comment on it. Cf. also infra, notes on verse 9. We were in bondage. Theophylact explains this from the analogy of the child under tutors. As this child differs nothing from a slave, so, when we were children in the knowledge of Christ and the love of God, we were, like slaves, under the aforesaid elements of the world, and under the tutorship of the Old Law. Ver. 4. But when the fulness of the time was come. When the time fixed beforehand for the end of the law and the beginning of the Gospel was fully come, we were transferred from the servitude of the law to the freedom of sonship. S. Bernard (Serm. 1 de Adventu) explains the passage somewhat differently: " The fulness and abundance of temporal things had brought about forgetfulness and famine of eternal things. It was at the moment when temporal things held sway that eternal things opportunely arrived." But this is a symbolical rather than literal explanation. Literally, the fulness of time is not the abundance of temporal things, but the full completion of the predetermined time.
4:4
God sent forth His Son, as His legate or Apostle, with full instructions to act on His behalf. He sent His Son, not by change of place, as though He left heaven and arrived at earth; but the Son, remaining where He was, in heaven and on earth, took a new role, viz., that of a Human Ambassador from God to man.
Made of a woman. Woman here denotes, not corruption, but the female sex, and applies as well to a virgin as to another woman. Made of a woman denotes conception without a male, from the sole substance of the mother. From this it clearly follows that Christ did not assume a heavenly body, which He brought to earth by passing through the Blessed Virgin as through a pipe, as the Valentinians formerly, and the Anabaptists now teach, but that His body was formed from the Virgin.
Made under the law. Though Christ, even as man, was not subject to the law, because He was still the Son of God, the giver of the law, yet of His own free-will He observed it, and of His own free-will submitted Himself to circumcision, and to its other ceremonial enactments. Made, therefore, denotes, not obligation, but practice; not right, but fact.
4:5
To redeem them that were under the law. By paying the price, might bestow on them Christian liberty The reference is to the bondage of the law, not of sin.
That we might receive the adoption of sons. (1.) The Son of God was made of a woman Son of man, that He might make the sons of men sons of God. " God was made man," says S. Bernard, " that man might be made God." (2.) This adoption is by grace, by which we obtain not only a right to be heirs of God the Father, but also participation in the Divine Nature, the Holy Spirit Himself, and sonship with God. (3.) Although all the righteous, even before Christ, were sons of God by adoption, yet the Apostle calls them all slaves (a) because, although the righteous were truly sons of God, yet they had not the status of sons, but only of slaves, being under the law, and consequently under the spirit of servile fear. (b) Because they had not the right of sonship through the law, but through their faith in Christ yet to come; and they belonged, therefore, more to the New Law than to the Old, as Augustine proves happily and exhaustively (contra Duas Epp. Pelag. cap. 4). (c) Because they lacked the fruit of adoption, in being unable to discern their heavenly inheritance before Christ revealed it. (d) Because Christ, in setting us free from the yoke of the law, substituted for it in the New Law the one spirit of adoption and of love.
4:6
Ver. 6. The Spirit of His Son. The Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. This is an argument from effect to cause, as when we say, "Where there is smoke there is fire." God first sent forth the Spirit of His Son to us, from which it followed that we became sons of God. Because we are sons, therefore, we know that He hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son, else should we not be sons. Because, therefore, denotes not so much the efficient cause as the logical reason. Or, better still, we may connect the particle because with the cry, " Abba, Father." God hath sent forth His Spirit, not to make you sons, but to make you cry, " Abba, Father."
Crying. Causing you to invoke God ardently, confidently, with filial affection. It is the clamour of the heart, not of the mouth, as in Exo 15:15.
Abba. The Hebrew Ab, the Syriac Abba, which in Greek and Latin becomes Abbas, denotes father. See my notes to Rom 8:15. As this place is a terror to the lukewarm, who rarely experience this feeling of filial prayer, so does it inspire the devout, who seek it within with a hope of salvation and enjoyment of their heavenly inheritance. Ver. 8. Howbeit then. When you were pagan unbelievers, and lived in ignorance of God.
4:8
Which by nature are no gods. But only in the estimation of man. Ver. 9. But now after that ye have known God, &c. Known by God, as beloved sons of their Father. " God is ignorant of no one," says S. Jerome, " but He is said to know those who have exchanged error for piety." Better still, it may be rendered, made to know, taught by God, by a common Hebraism. The Hiphil ("he caused to know") and the Hophal ("he was made to know") have no exact equivalent voice in Latin or Greek, and are, therefore, expressed by a participle, with a loss of the force of the original Hebrew. Cf. 1 Cor. viii. 3. In other places, God is said to know when He makes us to know; and the Holy Spirit is said to cry aloud, or to pray, when He makes us cry aloud or pray. Cf. Rom 8:26. The meaning of the verse is, therefore, this: Since you have been taught by God inwardly by His grace, outwardly by our preaching what is the way of salvation in Christ, why do you turn again to the elements of the law, to be taught perfection by them? You are like a metaphysician beginning again the elements of grammar, or a runner returning from the goal to the starting-point. You were once near the goal of salvation; why then go back to the place you started from? You were theologians taught by God; why do you return to the law, as though you had lost your rights and were beginning again?
4:9
To the weak and beggarly elements. What are these? 1. Augustine and Ambrose understand by the phrase the sun and moon, and the idols formerly worshipped by the Galatians, and see a reference to the false gods mentioned above in verse 3. Tertullian, in a similar vein, says (de Præscript. c. 33): " The Apostle censures Hermogenes, who, by introducing matter as uncreated, compares it to the uncreated God, and by making a goddess as mother of the elements, sets her up as an object of worship side by side with the one God." But the objection to this explanation is that the Galatians had no wish to return to Gentilism but to Judaism; and this the whole Epistle, with its condemnation of the Jewish ceremonies, clearly shows. 2. The explanation of Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Œcumenius is better. According to them, these elements are the sun and moon, to which the Galatians wished to return, not to serve them as gods, as they had been used to do before they embraced Christianity, but to determine by their courses the Sabbaths, New Moons, and other Jewish feasts. He calls these elements weak and beggarly with reference to God, whose support they require continually, without which they are weak, and even unable to exist. If God withdrew His hand, they would sink into the nothing from which they came. That S. Paul is referring to the sun and moon appears from the fact that they are properly the elements of the world, as he styled them in verse 3, and also because he asks, " Why turn ye again " to the things which you used to worship? Among the Galatians these of course were not the Jewish ceremonies, but the sun and moon. 3. But the best explanation is that of Jerome, Theodoret, Anselm, and Tertullian (contra Marcion, v. 4), who understand by these elements the Sacraments, and feast-days, and other ceremonies of the Old Law, which were given to the Jews, as the first rudiments of faith and piety, and through them to the whole world, and which were, as I have said in the notes to verse 3, symbols of the creation and government of the world. They are beggarly, and, as Tertullian calls them, fallacious, because they neither contain nor confer grace, but need for this the power of Christ. They are also weak, because they are of themselves of no efficacy to justify or sanctify; for without faith in Christ they could justify no one, nay, even with that faith they did not justify by themselves and ex opere operato, but only ex opere operantis, i.e., by the faith of the receiver. Accordingly, they were done away with when Christ came. That this last explanation is the correct one is evident from what follows; for S. Paul goes on to say, " Ye observe days and months, and times and years," by which he gives them to understand that these were the elements that they served. Moreover, this explanation is much the more simple and pertinent. For these elements, that is to say, these festal days they did observe, but they did not worship the sun and moon. Nor can it be said with strict truth that whoever observes the first day of the month is a moon-worshipper, or that one who keeps the Lord's Day is a sun-worshipper, when the Lord's Day is merely identified with Sunday, because the best of all days is assigned to the chief of all the heavenly bodies. It may be objected that the word again is opposed to the explanation, and implies that the Galatians, as being formerly worshippers of the host of heaven, had returned to this worship, and not to Jewish observances, to which they had not been addicted. I reply that S. Paul regards all men without distinction as having been under the law as their pædagogue, and accuses the Galatians of again setting up, by their action, the obsolete rites of Judaism. But the answer of Adam is perhaps better, who refers the word again, not to the wh le but to the part, as signifying only that slavery was restored in general, but not in this or that particular. The Galatians had at one time served idols, and afterwards Judaism, and they are here exhorted not to become slaves once more, whether to demons or to Jewish shadows. So we might say to a Lutheran who had embraced the Catholic faith, and afterwards lapsed into Calvinism: How can you fall into Calvinism again, that is into heresy? It is not Calvinism that is the significant word, but lapse, and the force of the question lies in its appeal against deserting the Catholic faith for heresy of any kind whatsoever. Ver. 10. Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. As S. Augustine (Ep. 119 and Enchirid. 79) and Anselm understand the elements to be the sun, moon, and idols, so do they understand this verse to mean days that were lucky or unlucky, according as astrology made them so. But Chrysostom and Jerome and others explain the days to be the Jewish Sabbaths; the months to be the new moons, and the seventh month, which was held sacred throughout; the times to be the stated feasts of the four seasons the Passover, Pentecost, the Day of Atonement, and the New Year; and the years to be the seventh year of remission of debts, and the fiftieth year of jubilee. By the observance of days, months, and years, S. Paul means the ceremonies of the Old Law as a whole. From this appears the error of the heretics, who infer from this that the feasts of the Church are condemned. If they were, then would the heretics themselves be condemned for keeping Sunday? What is condemned here is the observance of the Jewish feasts only. These are happily distinguished from those observed by Christians, by Gregory Nazianzen, in his Whitsuntide Oration, in which he says: " The Jew keeps feast days, but it is according to the letter; for by observing the corporeal law he attains not to the spiritual. The Gentile keeps feast days, but it is according to the body, in revelling and wantonness. [Accordingly Lucian (Saturnalia) bids that nothing be done during the time of the feast, whether in public or in private, but what pertains to sport, to pleasure, and to lust; nay, the feasts of the heathen were obscene in themselves, witness those of Venus, Priapus, and Bacchus, in whose honour every abomination was practised]. We Christians keep feasts, but only such as are pleasing to the Spirit. " Jerome, too, says: " Any one may say that if it is not lawful to observe days, and months, and times, and years, then we do what is forbidden in observing Wednesdays, and Good Friday, and the Lords Day, and the Lenten fast, and the Easier solemnities, and the Whitsuntide festivities, and the days set apart in different places in honour of the martyrs. A wise and simple reply to this will be that the Jewish feast-days differ from ours. We do not observe the feast of unleavened bread, but that of the Cross and the Resurrection, nor do we number our weeks to Pentecost as the Jews did, but celebrate one coming of the Holy Spirit." From which we may observe that, in S. Jerome's time, days were set apart in honour of the martyrs, and that the practice is approved by him.
4:12
Ver. 12. Be as I am. As you see me neglecting Jewish feasts, relying on my freedom in the Gospel, so do you neglect them and make use of the same freedom. I would be your leader into the land of liberty; follow me, therefore, and care nothing for what the Jews may say about the necessity of the Old Law.
I am as ye are. I live as a Gentile, and adapt myself to your needs, so far as I can with a safe conscience.
Ye have not injured me at all. Ifanybody, it is yourselves that you have injured. I do not say this in anger, but from love and pity. S. Jerome observes that the Apostle soothes here any feelings wounded by the rebuke of chap. iii. 1. Ver. 13. Through infirmity of the flesh I preached the Gospel unto you. S. Jerome explains this to mean that he gave them the first and weak elements only of the faith, because of their weakness with regard to spiritual things. He also gives as a second interpretation of infirmity of the flesh, Paul's sicknesses and headaches, and as a third, his persecutions, poverty, and sufferings in general, which might make him seem an Apostle, weak, miserable, and despicable, and so unable to gain the respect of the Galatians. Ver. 14. And my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not. Erasmus takes temptation in the active sense, viz., as though Paul had tempted the Galatians by his unattractive presence and speech. But it is better to take it passively, as being identical with the object of temptation. The meaning then is: You did not despise me in my weakness and my abject condition, which had the effect of making me a temptation to you, but you received me as an angel, nay, as Christ Himself. [ Note. The Vulgate is: "And your temptation which was in my flesh."] Ver. 15. Your blessedness. You beatified me for my sufferings for the faith, and as it were said to yourselves: Happy are we in having such an Apostle! "Happy they who have the privilege of hearing and seeing Paul!" S. Augustine is said to have wished to see three things Christ on earth in the flesh, Rome at the height of her power, and Paul thundering in his preaching. S. Paul now asks the Galatians what had become of their former opinion of him; why they had so soon changed their minds, and given up their love for him, which was once ardent enough to make them pluck out their eyes for him; and inquires whether he had become their enemy for telling them the truth, viz., that no one is justified by the law, but only by faith in Christ.
4:17
Ver. 17. They zealously affect you. The Judaisers do all they can to woo you to espouse their cause, and to bring you into subjection to their law, but their object is not good.
They would exclude you. Some texts read include here, which gives a very good meaning. These Judaisers are like crafty wooers, who, when they are seeking to win a wealthy wife, show her every kind of honour and service, and humour her whims in everything; but when they have attained their object, they shut her up, appoint custodians of her person, and treat her as a slave. They are now promising you, Galatians, great things; but they want to shut you up under the law, and shut you out from the liberty that is in Christ.
That ye might affect them. It is not friendship that animates them. They want to gain your confidence, that you may surrender to them, and become their disciples, and give, them ground for public boasting. Ver. 18. But it is good to be zealously affected always in a good thing. It is good to imitate others, but only in what is good. [The Vulgate reading is in the imperative: Be zealously affected always to the good in what is good.] Observe that the first good can be taken in the neuter, for what is good, or in the masculine. If the latter be read, then the meaning is: Do not be zealously affected towards Judaism, which is evil, but take as your models good Christian men like myself, whose manner of life among you ye know. You followed me when I was with you; you should do the same in my absence, for a good man is always to be imitated, whether absent or present. This is a hint that in the Apostle's opinion it was his absence which had been the cause of their lapse into Judaism. Ver. 19. My little children. I begat you to Christ by the Gospel, and now that you have left Him for Judaism, I travail in birth of you again, till you learn to look to Christ for grace and justification, and not to the law. " The Apostle here," says Chrysostom, " Speaks of a mother's anxiety over her children. You see the feelings of a mother rather than of a father; you see his nervousness, and the cry of pain, much more agonising than that of a woman in travail." As the Blessed Virgin bore Christ in the flesh but without pain, so did Paul labour with Christ spiritually, though with pain and grief, and strive to form the Galatians for Christ, that He might be all in all to them. S. Ambrose (de Isaac et Animâ, c. 8) says, with equal piety and point: " There [in the Cross and in baptism] did your mother travail; there did she who bore you labour. There are we born again, for they are brought forth in whom the image of Christ is formed. He tells us how Christ was formed in His Spouse. Set me as a seal upon thy heart, as a seal upon thine arm. Christ is the seal upon the forehead, that we may ever confess Him; on the heart, that we may always love Him; on the arm, that we may always work for Him; so that, if it be possible, His whole likeness may be expressed in us, and He be our seal whom God the Father hath sealed." Let those note who desire to convert souls to Christ, that they must labour and toil like a woman in travail. Hence the question is asked in Job xxxix. 1: " Knowest thou the time when the wild goats of the rock bring forth? or canst thou mark when the hinds do calve?... They bow themselves, they bring forth their young ones, they cast out their sorrows " where the reference is to the belief that the hinds suffer more acutely than most animals in parturition, a belief that was shared by Aristotle and Pliny. S. Gregory takes this passage mystically of preachers who, like hinds in labour, bring forth offspring to Christ with tears and sorrow. " I see," he says, " that Paul is like a hind bringing forth its young with great pain; for he says, 'My little children, of whom I travail in birth again.' See the pain, see the labour he suffered; even after he was delivered he was conspelled to give life again to his offspring when it had perished. " (Morals xxx. 21) Let bishops, too, learn from S. Paul to be not so much fathers as mothers to their subjects, as S. Bernard says excellently (Serm. 25 in Cant.). " Learn to be mothers, not lords, to those under your charge. Seek to be loved rather than feared; and if sometimes there is need of severity, let it be that of a father, not of a tyrant."
4:20
Ver. 20. I desire to be present with you now, and to change my voice. I would wish to say orally what a letter cannot sufficiently express; I would wish to coax, to beseech, to implore you, to treat you as a mother does her children, to manifest in every way a mother's affection, that I might persuade you to do what I wish. See what love makes men do. Paul makes himself a father, and becomes a boy with his children. So King Agesilaus, to amuse his boy, would lay aside his purple and his sceptre, to ride on a stick for him; and when one of his court remarked on his levity, he retorted: " Hold your tongue, for when you have children of your own, then I will give you leave to laugh at your king's folly." So here Paul would say that a mother's love knows no bounds, no shame; for it no toil is too great, nothing is too trivial or too shameful. I stand in doubt of you. "I am ashamed," as some render it, but wrongly. The meaning is: I am perplexed; I do not know what to say to you to persuade you. Maldonatus gives two interpretations: (1.) I have not obtained the expected fruit of my preaching, therefore I am confounded; and (2.) I do not know whether you are Christians or Jews. Ver. 21. Do ye not hear the law? A vigorous question. If you will not listen to me, will you not listen to the law, that you think so much of, for it will point you from itself to Christ? Ver. 22. Abraham had two sons. Ishmael, by his handmaiden, Hagar, who was, therefore, but a wife of secondary rank; and Isaac, by Sarah, his wife of honour. The latter was his heir; the former received such gifts as the father chose to give him. Cf. Gen. xxv. 5, 6. Ver. 23. He who was of the bondwoman. Ishmael was born according to the laws of natural generation, by which Abraham, though an old man, was able to raise up seed from his youthful bondwoman, Hagar.
4:23
He of the freewoman was by promise. Isaac was not born according to the usual laws of generation, for Sarah, his mother, was then sterile by age, so that Abraham could not in the order of nature beget a son by her. He was born by promise, i.e., by the supernatural power of God, in fulfilment of the promise made to Abraham. Ver. 24. Which things are an allegory. An allegory with rhetoricians is a continued metaphor. With ecclesiastical writers it is identical with a type or figure in which things and events of the Old Testament represented their parallels in the New.
4:24
For these are the two covenants. Sarah and Hagar signify respectively the two covenants, the New and the Old. There are four senses of Scripture: (1.) The literal, as e.g., when it is said that Abraham begat Ishmael of Hagar naturally, and Isaac of Sarah supernaturally; (2.) the allegorical, as when it is said, " These are the two covenants;" (3.) the tropological, of which we find an example in verse 29; (4.) the anagogical, which is used in verse 26. The first covenant referred to here is that made by God with Moses on Mount Sinai, in which God promised to be the God of the Hebrews, and to give them the land of Canaan, and the Hebrews on their part promised to keep the law of their God, whether moral, judicial, or ceremonial. The second covenant is that made with Christ and Christians at Jerusalem, in which God promised to be the God of the Christians, and to give them a heavenly inheritance; and the Christians on their part promised by Christ and His Apostles to preserve the faith of Christ, and to obey His precepts. This latter appears throughout the Gospels, and especially in the record of the Last Supper, given by S. John in chap. xiii. et seq. There Christ confirmed this covenant in His own blood, as is narrated by SS. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and Paul.
The one from the Mount Sinai. The Old Covenant, given from Mount Sinai, made slaves of the Jews, by bringing them under the shadows of burdensome ceremonies, obliging them to obedience under fear of punishment, or by the promise of earthly goods, such as abundance of corn and wine and oil.
Which is Agar. Hagar the slave typifies the covenant of slavery. Ver. 25. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia. Mount Sinai was called Hagar by the Arabs, according to Chrysostom and others. But this explanation is forced, and leaves a gap in the argument. As we have just seen, Hagar represents the Old Covenant given on Mount Sinai, and this is the sense of the passage.
4:25
In Arabia. Even the Arabs typify this Jewish slavery, for they themselves are subject to it. Hence the saying, "the Arabian pipe," mentioned by Julius Pollux, which shows their servile condition, since slaves only (and they for the most part came from Arabia) used to practise the art of music. The Old Covenant of slavery was, therefore, fitly entered into in Arabia, i.e., on Mount Sinai. Chrysostom adds: " Hagar in Hebrew denotes dwelling, Sinai temptation, Arabia falling, Ishmael the hearing of God." Jerome says: " Hagar shows by its meaning that the Old Covenant would not be for ever; Sinai that it would be a temptation; Arabia, that it would perish; Ishmael, as the name of one who heard only the commandments of God but did not do them, a rough man, a man of blood, the enemy of his brethren, that the Jews would be hard and harsh, enemies of Christians, hearers only of the law, and not doers." S. Jerome again says tropologically: " Those Christians are born of Hagar who look only at the shell of Holy Scripture, and serve the Lord in fear. Those are born of Sarah who treat the Old Covenant as an allegory, and seek for its spirit, and who serve the Lord in love." See also the remarks of S. Augustine (contra Duas Epp. Pelag. cap. 4), where he lays down that Abraham, Noah, Moses, and all the righteous men of the Old Covenant, were really children of the New, inasmuch as they were justified by the same faith in the Incarnation and Passion of Christ as Christians, and lived by the same grace and the same love of Christ; while, on the other hand, Christians who keep the law from fear of punishment are children of the Old and not of the New Covenant.
Which is joined to that which now is Jerusalem. So the Vulgate. S. Jerome and Chrysostom take it of a literal vicinity to Jerusalem, inasmuch as Jerusalem borders on the desert in which Sinai is situated, the hills of Idumæa alone intervening. But these hills comprise the whole of Idumæa, which is a large tract, and, therefore, it cannot be said Sinai is joined to Judæa. It would be more accurate to say that it was widely separated from it. S. Thomas interprets it to mean that Sinai is joined to Jerusalem, not by nearness, but by a continuous road, because the Hebrews went from Egypt by a straight road through Sinai into Judæa. But this is too far fetched. In the same way the Red Sea, and Egypt itself, might be said to be joined to Judæa. Accordingly, it is better to understand the words to mean that the conjunction is not of place but of likeness. With this agrees the Greek word here, συστοιχεί, which means kinship or likeness. Στοίχειν means to go forward in order, or to stand in one's place. So grammarians call the letters of the alphabet στοιχει̃α, because they are joined in a certain order. Philosophers call the elements earth, air, fire, and water by the same name, because each of them has its due place, and its relation to the others. Also verses are called στίχοι, and lines in order, στίχαι. Hence, as Budæus says, kindred things are called σύστοιχα, and συστοιχία is a series of similar things duly arranged. So here, of Mount Sinai it is said that it, συστοιχει̃, i.e., it has a similarity, it is in the same series or order of things as Jerusalem, because it represents it by a convenient type. This it does (1.) because, as Mount Sinai is sterile in the desert, so is Jerusalem in its ceremonies. Moreover, the law was given in the first, preserved in the second. (2.) Sinai was outside the Promised land; the Jerusalem of the law is outside the Church of Christ, whether militant or triumphant. (3.) Which is more germane to the Apostle's purpose; as Sinai nourished and brought up slaves whether Jews or Arabs, and as from it proceeded a servile law, with the sound of the trumpet, with thundering and earthquake, which, therefore, suitably drove its votaries into obedience by fear; so is now Jerusalem, so far as its life and doctrine are concerned, Sinaitic, and produces slaves to the shadows of the law, who obey through fear only. (4.) Sinai is related to Jerusalem also, because the Jews, who received the law at Sinai, were the fathers of those who kept it in Jerusalem; and as the I fathers were, so are the sons. By metonymy, Sinai and Jerusalem are put for their inhabitants. As Hagar the bondwoman signified the bondage of the Old Covenant, so Mount Sinai, in bringing forth slaves, typified Jerusalem, which did the same. Such as Sinai was, such is Jerusalem. The former was the parent of the slaves, so too is the latter. Subjoined is a tabular statement of the typology used here: SLAVERY FREEDOM Hagar the bondwoman Ishmael, a slave, born after the flesh The law given at Sinai The earthly Jerusalem, the synagogue of the Jews, in bondage The Jews immersed in the shadows of the ceremonial law. Two wives Two sons Two covenants Two cities Two sons Sarah the freewoman. Isaac, a freeman, born according to promise. The Gospel given at Sion. The heavenly Jerusalem, by grace the mother of all the faithful, free. The faithful who enjoy the grace of Christ. Jerusalem which now is. The earthly Jerusalem is contrasted with the heavenly, the transitory with that which is to endure for ever. It may be noted that Jerusalem is not compounded of Jebus and Salem, as Erasmus and others have thought, but of a Hebrew word meaning he shall see, and Salem, in allusion to Gen 22:14. Hence the meaning of the word is the vision of peace.
And is in bondage with her children. The reference is of course to Hager. As she, a bondwoman, bore Ishmael, he and his descendants inherit their mother's status; so does the Old Covenant, typified by her, bring forth bondmen. On the other hand, as Sarah was a free woman, her children are free, as are the children of the New Covenant. The slavery of the Old Covenant consisted mainly in two things, in its obliging men to obedience by fear, and in burdening them with a multitude of dumb ceremonies, which were of no avail to justification. On the other hand, the liberty of the Gospel consists in its leading us to obedience through love, and in teaching us to worship God in spirit and in truth. It has no doubt its own ceremonies, nut they are all aids only to the spiritual life. Ver. 26. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. The Christian Church, typified by Sarah, the mistress, is contrasted with the Jewish synagogue, typified by Hagar, the bondwoman, in four points: It is above; it is Jerusalem; it is free; it is a fruitful mother. 1. Why is it said to be above? Because (a) Christ, its Head, descended from heaven, and thither ascended to rule the Church from above. (b) Because the Church is perfected by heavenly things, faith, hope, and charity, which come from above (c) Because, the efficacy of the Sacraments is from above, and shows God Himself present in His Church, as though He had come down from above. (d) Because her conversation is in heaven, and there with her Spouse are her heart and treasure. (e) Because she is striving for her eternal crown laid up in heaven. Cf. Rev 21:2. 2. Why is she called Jerusalem? Because Jerusalem means the vision of peace. This God provides for His Church, so that she rejoices, not in earthly but in heavenly peace, according to the promise of her Lord. "Peace I leave with you, My peace I give unto you" (S. John xiv. 27). This peace comes from a good conscience towards God, self, and all men. Literally too the Church is entitled to be called Jerusalem, because there she had her beginning, as the Jewish Church had at Sinai. Hence the prophets repeatedly designate the Christian Church by the names of Sion or Jerusalem. 3. Why is she called free ? Freedom is fourfold: (a) Civil, to which is opposed the status of slaves. (b) Moral, by which is excluded slavery to passion and lust, to the fear of adversity. In this the Stoics placed the perfection of happiness, and desired that every man should be able to say of himself: Though the world were shattered around him, its fragments would strike, but not daunt him (Hor. Odes, iii. 3, 7). (c) Spiritual, springing from that perfect charity which casts out fear, by which we are able to serve God, not in servile fear, but in filial love; not with material ceremonies, but in spirit and in truth. This is the freedom in the Apostle's mind here. (d) Celestial, which excludes all slavery of mind or body to pain, and is the perfect bliss of mankind. The Church already enjoys moral and spiritual liberty; by hope and desire it tastes beforehand the heavenly freedom it is one day to possess. 4. Why is she called a mother? Because out of Gentile barrenness, which was subject to devils, the Church has been collected, and has borne, and still bears, many spiritual children to Christ, and this not from Jews alone, but from Jews and Gentiles, without distinction. Ver. 27. Rejoice, thou barren. Rejoice, O Church, called out of the Gentiles; thou who wast once barren, without faith in God, and formerly not wont to bear children to Him now that thou art espoused to Him break forth and cry. The synagogue, whose husband was the law, or even God Himself, not as a father tender, but as a lawgiver terrible, brought forth Jews only according to the flesh. But the Church embraces as a mother all the nations that believe on Christ. Therefore the synagogue has borne to God comparatively a small number of spiritual children. She bare the Prophets, the Patriarchs, and a few other righteous men, and that not in her own strength, but by the power of Christ, the father of the New Covenant. The Apostle quotes Isa. liv. 1. The Jews indeed interpret the passage of their return to the earthly Jerusalem. The Millenarians understood it of the thousand years of sensual happiness which they pretended that the Saints would spend on earth after the Day of judgment, as Jerome testifies of them. S. Paul, however, makes it clear that Isaiah was speaking of the happiness and fruitfulness of the Christian Church. Of this S. Ambrose writes very beautifully (de Virgin. lib. i.): " The Church is immaculate in conception, fruitful in offspring, a virgin in chastity, a mother in her family. We are born of a virgin who has been impregnated, not by a man but by the Spirit; who brings forth, not with bodily pain but with angelic rejoicing; who feeds her children with milk, not of earth but of the Apostles. She is a virgin in the Sacraments, and a mother in the virtues she produces. She is a mother to the nations, and Scripture testifies to her fruitfulness, saying: 'The desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.' Whether we interpret this of the Church among the nations, or the soul of each individual, in either case she is married to her heavenly Spouse by the word of God, without any deviation from the path of chastity." S. Jerome, too, says, in his comments on this passage: " The Church, long time barren, bore no children before Christ was born of the Virgin; but when she bore to Abraham, i.e., the elect father, Christ as Isaac, the laughter of the world, whose very name spoke of heavenly mysteries, then she brought forth many children to God. " Abraham in Hebrew is (according to Jerome) the elect father, with a mighty sound. 1. Abraham was first called Abram, the lofty father, and as such begat Ishmael from Hagar. Then when he entered into a covenant with God, and received the promise of the birth of Isaac, and of the possession by his seed of the land of Canaan, his name was changed to Abraham, the father of a great multitude, i.e., of a numerous offspring, to be begotten of Isaac according to the flesh, and of Christ according to the spirit. This is a sounder interpretation of the name than that given by Jerome. 2. Symbolically, Abraham represents God. From Hagar, the bondwoman, i.e., from the synagogue, he begat Ishmael, the bondservant, i.e., Moses and the Jews, who were under subjection to the Old Law. To them Abraham was a lofty father, giving the law in thunder from the heights of Sinai, and manifesting himself as a great and terrible Lord. On the other band, Abraham, i.e., God, begat from Sarah, the freewoman, i.e., the Church, Isaac, laughter, who represented Christ and His followers, heirs of the promises. To them Abraham was the father of a great multitude, gathered by Christ out of all nations, and regenerated by faith and baptism. Or if we take S. Jerome's interpretation of Abraham as denoting the elect father with a mighty sound, then we see the fulfilment of the name in the preaching of John Baptist, of Christ, and the Apostles, who with a loud voice called all nations to enter into the kingdom of God. 3. Isaac, i.e., Christ, is said to be born of Sarah, i.e., the Church, not as though the Church were actually the mother of Christ, or existed before Him, but because, in the Divine mind, the Church was, as it were, prior to Christ, and stood for His mother. For God first called the synagogue into existence, and then substituted for it the Church. Consequently, He had in His mind the idea of the synagogue first, of the Church second; and out of this He decreed that Moses should be born as the eldest son of this idea, and that he should reduce to actuality the remaining parts of the idea by instituting the synagogue. Similarly, He willed the creation of the Church, and the birth of Christ, as the first-born of His idea of the Church, who should carry out the idea, and found the Church of which He should be Himself the chief cornerstone. Hence Christ and Christians are called children of the promise and of the predestined purpose of God, because their existence was the product of the Divine will as the father, and of the Divine thought as the mother. Ver. 28. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. Since he was born of one barren through age not according to the flesh, but according to the promise of God. Ver. 29. He that was born after the flesh. Ishmael, born naturally of Hagar, persecuted Isaac, born supernaturally of Sarah, according to the Divine promise, and so a type of the spiritual children of the New Law. The reference is to Gen. xxi. 9. From a comparison of these two passages it is evident that the mockery mentioned was a sort of persecution, the sort of sport that cats have with mice. So in 2Sa 2:14: "Abner said to Joab, Let the young men now arise and play before us," where the play was a mortal combat. Jerome and others think that the reason why Ishmael persecuted Isaac was because his envy was stirred up by the festivities indulged in at Isaac's weaning, and because he was jealous of the birthright assigned to his brother by promise. Hence it appears that he was hostile to the promised Seed, i.e., to Christ.
4:29
So it is now. As formerly Ishmael mocked and persecuted Isaac, so now have the Jews mocked and crucified Christ, the King of liberty, and are still pursuing with bitter hatred His followers. So too are they persecuting you, O Galatians, that they may enslave you, and turn you from the right way. See the comments of Jerome and Rupert on Gen 21:9. Ver. 30. Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son. Although Abraham shrank from this proposal of Sarah, yet God approved it, and bade Abraham do as Sarah demanded, not only because her demand was lawful and right, but also because his action would be a type of future events. The rejection of Hagar and Ishmael would typify the rejection of the Jewish synagogue, and its exclusion from the blessings of the Church, for persecuting Christ and His followers. Allegorically, Christians, as freemen, are inheritors of Abraham's blessing, while the Jews are shut out from it, because they are envious bondmen, persecutors of Christian freemen, just as Ishmael was forbidden to share with Isaac the paternal roof. The bondman was driven away from the freeman.
4:1
Postquam ostendit apostolus legis defectum, hic consequenter ostendit gratiae dignitatem. Et primo per exemplum humanum; secundo per exemplum Scripturae, ibi dicite mihi qui sub lege vultis esse, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ostendit dignitatem gratiae supra primitivum statum veteris legis, per similitudinem a lege humana sumptam; secundo ostendit, quod ipsi facti sunt participes huius dignitatis per fidem, ibi quoniam autem estis filii Dei, etc.; tertio arguit ipsos, eo quod hanc dignitatem contemnebant, ibi sed tunc quidem ignorantes Deum, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ponit similitudinem; secundo adaptat eam ad propositum, ibi ita et nos cum essemus, et cetera. Notandum est quod in proposita similitudine quatuor tangit apostolus. Primo quidem dignitatem, quia non est servus, sed haeres. Unde dicit quanto tempore haeres, etc., quod aptatur et refertur ad populum Iudaeorum, qui fuit haeres promissionis Abrahae, Ps. CXXXIV, 4: elegit nos in haereditatem sibi et ad Christum, qui est haeres omnium, Hebr. I, 2: quem constituit haeredem universorum. Secundo eius parvitatem. Unde dicit parvulus est, quia et Iudaei parvuli erant secundum statum legis. Amos VII, 5: quis suscitabit Iacob, quia parvulus est? Similiter et Christus parvulus factus est per incarnationem. Is. IX, 6: parvulus natus est nobis, et cetera. Sed nota quod apostolus aliquando assimilat parvulo statum legis, sicut hic, aliquando statum praesentis vitae. I Cor. XIII, v. 11: cum essem parvulus, et cetera. Cuius ratio est, quia status veteris legis est sicut parvulus, propter imperfectionem cognitionis, in ipsa comparatione ad statum gratiae et veritatis, quae per Christum facta est. Sic et status praesentis vitae, in qua videmus per speculum in aenigmate, est sicut parvulus, comparatus statui futurae vitae, in qua est perfecta Dei cognitio, quia videtur sicuti est. Tertio eius subiectionem, cum dicit nihil differt a servo, cum sit dominus omnium, sed sub tutoribus, et cetera. Proprium enim servi est, quod sit subiectus alicui domino. Puer autem, quamdiu parvulus est, quia non habet cognitionem perfectam et usum liberae voluntatis propter defectum aetatis, committitur custodiae aliorum, qui et bona sua defendant: et hi dicuntur tutores; et negotia agant: et hi actores nominantur. Et ideo licet sit dominus omnium rerum suarum, tamen in quantum subiicitur aliis, nihil differt a servo, quia nec voluntatem liberam habet, imo cogitur: et haec adaptantur ad populum Iudaicum Is. XLIV, 1: et nunc servus meus Iacob, et cetera. Sed notandum est, quod in populo Iudaico aliqui erant simpliciter servi, illi scilicet qui propter timorem poenae et cupiditatem temporalium, quae lex promittebat, legem servabant. Aliqui vero erant, qui non erant servi simpliciter, sed, quasi servi existentes, erant vere filii et haeredes: qui licet attenderent exterius ad temporalia et vitarent poenas, nihilominus tamen in eis finem non ponebant sed accipiebant ea, ut figuram spiritualium bonorum. Unde licet viderentur nihil exterius differre a servis, inquantum caeremonias et alia legis mandata servabant, tamen erant domini, quia non ea intentione eis utebantur, ut servi, quia illis utebantur amore spiritualium bonorum, quae praefigurabant: servi vero principaliter timore poenae et cupiditate terrenae commoditatis. Christus erat etiam quasi servus, quia, licet sit dominus omnium, secundum illud Ps. CIX, v. 1: dixit dominus domino meo, etc., tamen nihil videbatur differre a servo in exterioribus, inquantum homo. Phil. II, 7: exinanivit semetipsum, formam servi accipiens, et habitu inventus ut homo. Sub tutoribus autem et actoribus erat, quia sub lege factus erat, ut dicitur infra eodem, factum sub lege, et hominibus subditus, ut dicitur Lc. II, 51: erat subditus illis.
4:2
Quarto ponit temporis congruitatem, cum dicit usque ad praefinitum tempus a patre, quia sicut haeres secundum determinationem patris praefinito tempore sub tutoribus est, ita et lex determinatum tempus habuit a Deo, quamdiu deberet durare, et quamdiu haeres, scilicet populus Iudaeorum, esset sub ea. Similiter et praefinitum tempus fuit a patre, quo Christus non erat facturus miracula et ostensurus dominium potestatis divinae. Io. II, 4: nondum venit hora mea. Hanc similitudinem adaptat, cum dicit consequenter ita et nos, et cetera. Et primo adaptat eam quantum ad Iudaeos; secundo quantum ad Christum, ibi at ubi venit plenitudo temporis.
4:3
Dicit ergo: dico quod quanto tempore haeres parvulus, etc., et ita nos, Iudaei, cum essemus parvuli, in statu legis veteris, sub elementis mundi eramus servientes, id est sub lege, quae temporalia promittebat Is. I, 19: si volueritis et audieritis me, bona terrae comedetis et comminabatur poenas temporales. Vel lex vetus dicitur elementum, quia sicut pueris, qui sunt instituendi ad scientiam, primo proponuntur elementa illius scientiae, per quae manuducuntur ad illam scientiam: ita lex vetus proposita est Iudaeis, per quam manuducerentur ad fidem et iustitiam. Supra III, 24: lex paedagogus noster fuit in Christo. Vel, sub elementis, id est corporalibus rerum ritibus quos servabant, sicut lunares dies, Neomenias et sabbatum. Nec tamen instandum est quod propter hoc non differrent a Paganis, qui elementis serviebant huius mundi, cum eis non servirent Iudaei, seu cultum impenderent; sed sub eis Deo serviebant, et eum colebant, gentiles vero elementis servientes, eis divinum cultum impendebant. Rom. I, 25: servierunt creaturae potius quam creatori, et cetera. Fuit autem necessarium, quod Iudaei sub elementis huius mundi deservirent Deo, quia iste ordo est congruus naturae humanae, ut a sensibilibus ad intellectualia perducantur.
4:4
Hic adaptat apostolus similitudinem propositam ad Christum. Et primo ponitur adaptatio; secundo finis rei, in qua similitudo adaptatur, ibi ut eos qui sub lege erant, et cetera. Sciendum est autem quod supra, in similitudine proposita, quatuor ostendit per ordinem, sicut dictum est. Hic autem illa quatuor adaptans ad Christum, incipit ab ultimo, scilicet a determinatione temporis, cuius ratio est, quia idem tempus fuit in quo Christus fuit humiliatus et in quo fideles fuerunt exaltati. Et ideo dicit at ubi venit plenitudo temporis, id est postquam tempus, quod fuerat praefinitum a Deo patre de mittendo filio suo, erat completum; et hoc modo accipitur Lc. II, 6: impleti sunt dies, et cetera. Dicitur autem plenum tempus illud propter plenitudinem gratiarum, quae in eo dantur, secundum Ps. LXIV, 10: flumen Dei repletum est aquis, et cetera. Item propter impletionem figurarum veteris legis. Matth. V, 17: non veni solvere legem, et cetera. Item, propter impletionem promissorum. Dan. IX, 27: confirmabit autem pactum multis hebdomada una. Hoc autem quod dicit at ubi venit plenitudo temporis, etc., similiter et in aliis Scripturae locis, ubi tempus circa Christum impleri dicitur, non est referendum ad fatalem necessitatem, sed ad divinam ordinationem, de qua dicitur in Ps. CXVIII, 91: ordinatione tua perseverat dies, et cetera. Assignatur autem duplex ratio, quare illud tempus praeordinatum est ad adventum Christi. Una sumitur ex magnitudine. Quia enim magnus est qui venturus erat, oportebat et multis indiciis et multis praeparationibus homines ad adventum eius disponi. Hebr. I, 1: multifarie multisque modis, et cetera. Alia ex conditione venientis. Quia enim medicus erat venturus, oportebat quod ante adventum suum convincerentur homines de morbo, et quantum ad defectum scientiae in lege naturae et quantum ad defectum virtutis in lege scripta. Et ideo oportuit utrumque, scilicet et legem naturae et legem Scripturae, adventum Christi praecedere. Secundo adaptat quantum ad haereditariam dignitatem, cum dicit misit Deus filium suum, scilicet proprium et naturalem. Et si filius, ergo et haeres. Dicit autem filium suum, id est proprium, naturalem et unigenitum, non adoptivum. Io. III, v. 16: sic Deus dilexit mundum, ut, et cetera. Misit, inquam, eum non a se separatum, quia missus est per hoc, quod assumpsit humanam naturam, et tamen erat in sinu patris, Io. I, 18: unigenitus, qui est in sinu patris aeternaliter. Io. III, 13: nemo ascendit in caelum, nisi qui descendit de caelo, filius hominis qui est in caelo, qui, licet descenderit per assumptionem carnis, tamen est in caelo. Item misit eum, non ut esset ubi prius non erat; quia, licet in propria venerit per praesentiam carnis, in mundo tamen erat per praesentiam deitatis, ut dicitur in Evangelio Io. I, 14. Similiter non misit eum quasi ministrum, quia sua missio fuit assumptio carnis, non depositio maiestatis. Misit ergo Deus filium suum ad sanandum, inquam, deviationem concupiscibilis, et ad illuminandum ignorantiam rationalis creaturae. Ps. CVI, 20: misit verbum suum, et cetera. Misit etiam ad liberandum a potestate Daemonis contra infirmitatem irascibilis. Is. XIX, v. 20: mittet eis salvatorem, qui liberet eos. Item ad remedium ab obligatione aeternae mortis. Os. III, 14: de manu mortis liberabo eos, de morte redimam eos. Item ad salvandum ab eorum peccatis. Io. III, 17: non misit Deus filium suum in mundum, ut iudicet mundum, sed ut salvetur mundus per ipsum, et cetera. Tertio adaptat similitudinem quantum ad parvitatem, cum dicit factum ex muliere. Is. IX, 6: parvulus natus est nobis, et cetera. Phil. II, 7: exinanivit semetipsum, et cetera. Parvum se fecit non dimittendo magnitudinem, sed assumendo parvitatem. In hoc autem quod dicit factum ex muliere, cavendi sunt duo errores, scilicet Photini, qui dixit Christum purum hominem esse et ex virgine principium essendi sumpsisse; et ideo ita dicit ipsum factum ex muliere, quasi totaliter initium ex ea sumpserit. Sed hoc est falsum, quia est contra illud quod dicitur Rom. I, 3: qui factus est ei ex semine David secundum carnem; non dicit secundum personam, quae est ab aeterno, scilicet ipsa hypostasis filii Dei. Unde sicut cum scutum fit album de novo, non oportet dicere, quod ipsa substantia scuti de novo fiat sed quod ei de novo albedo accesserit, ita ex hoc quod filius Dei de novo carnem assumpsit, non oportet dicere, quod persona Christi de novo sit facta, sed quod natura humana ei de novo advenit, sicut corpori cum absque sui mutatione quaedam accidunt. Aliqua enim adveniunt alicui et immutant ipsum, sicut formae et qualitates absolutae; quaedam vero absque mutatione adveniunt, et huiusmodi est assumptio carnis, secundum quod dicit relationem. Unde per hoc persona verbi in nullo mutatur. Et inde est, quod in divinis utimur his quae relationem significant etiam ex tempore. Unde dicimus illud Ps. LXXXIX, 1: domine, refugium factus es nobis, et quod Deus factus est homo. Non autem utimur formis et qualitatibus absolutis, ut: Deus factus est bonus, sapiens, et huiusmodi. Item vitandus est error Hebionis, qui dicit Christum ex Ioseph semine esse natum, motus ad hoc ponendum per hoc quod dicitur ex muliere. Nam, secundum eum, mulier tantum importat corruptionem. Sed hoc est falsum, quia hoc nomen mulier, in sacra Scriptura, designat etiam sexum naturalem, secundum illud Gen. III, 12: mulier quam dedisti mihi, et cetera. Vocat enim eam mulierem, quae tamen adhuc erat virgo. Per hoc etiam quod dicitur ex muliere factus, destruuntur duo errores, scilicet Valentini dicentis Christum non sumpsisse corpus de virgine, sed attulisse illud de caelo, et, per beatam virginem, sicut per fistulam seu canale, transivisse. Sed hoc est falsum, quia si verum esset quod dicit, non fuisset factus ex muliere, ut apostolus dicit. Haec enim praepositio, ex, causam materialem designat. Item, error Nestorii dicentis beatam virginem non esse matrem filii Dei, sed filii hominis: quod falsum esse ostenditur per hoc quod dicit apostolus hic, quod misit Deus filium suum factum ex muliere. Qui enim fit ex muliere, est filius eius. Si ergo filius Dei est factus ex muliere, scilicet ex beata virgine, manifestum est, quod beata virgo est mater filii Dei. Licet autem posset dici natus ex muliere signanter tamen dicit factum, et non natum. Nasci enim aliquid, est ipsum produci solum ex principio coniuncto, sed fieri etiam ex principio separato. Arca enim fit ab artifice, sed fructus nascitur ex arbore. Principium autem humanae generationis est duplex, scilicet materiale: et quantum ad hoc Christus processit ex principio coniuncto, quia materiam sui corporis sumpsit ex virgine. Unde secundum hoc dicitur nasci de ea. Matth. I, 16: de qua natus est Iesus, et cetera. Aliud est principium activum, quod quidem in Christo, quantum ad id quod principium habuit, id est quantum ad formationem corporis, non fuit coniunctum, sed separatum, quia virtus spiritus sancti formavit illud. Et quantum ad hoc non dicitur natus ex muliere sed factus quasi ex principio exteriori. Ex quo patet, quod hoc quod dixit ex muliere, non dicit corruptionem, quia dixisset natum et non factum. Quarto adaptat similitudinem quantum ad subiectionem, cum dicit factum sub lege. Sed contra est, quod dicitur infra V, 18: si spiritu ducimini, non estis sub lege. Si ergo Christus non solum est spiritualis, sed etiam dator spiritus, inconvenienter videtur dici quod sit factus sub lege. Respondeo. Dicendum est quod esse sub lege dicitur dupliciter. Uno modo, ut ly sub, denotet solam observantiam legis, et sic Christus fuit factus sub lege, quia circumcisus fuit et in templo praesentatus. Matth. V, v. 17: non veni legem solvere, et cetera. Alio modo, ut ly sub, denotet oppressionem. Et hoc modo ille dicitur esse sub lege, qui timore legis opprimitur et hoc modo nec Christus, nec viri spiritales dicuntur esse sub lege. Consequenter cum dicit ut eos qui sub lege, etc., ponit fructum rei in qua similitudo adaptatur, scilicet quod ideo voluit isto tempore fieri subiectus, ut haeredes fierent magni et liberi. Et haec duo ponit, et, primo, fructum liberationis contra subiectionem.
4:5
Et ideo dicit ut eos qui sub lege erant, id est sub maledicto et onere legis, liberaret. Supra III, v. 13: Christus nos redemit de maledicto legis, et cetera. Secundo fructum exaltationis, inquantum adoptamur in filios Dei per hoc quod accipimus spiritum Christi et conformamur ei. Rom. VIII, 9: si quis spiritum Christi non habet, et cetera. Et haec adoptio specialiter competit Christo, quia non possumus fieri filii adoptivi, nisi conformemur filio naturali. Rom. VIII, v. 29: quos praescivit conformes fieri imaginis filii eius, et cetera. Et quantum ad hoc dicit ut adoptionem filiorum reciperemus, id est ut per filium Dei naturalem efficeremur filii adoptivi secundum gratiam per Christum.
Supra apostolus ostendit beneficium Iudaeis exhibitum, hic ostendit hoc beneficium etiam ad gentiles pertinere. Et primo proponit ipsum beneficium; secundo modum adipiscendi, ibi misit Deus spiritum, etc.; tertio manifestat eius fructum, ibi itaque iam non est, et cetera. Dicit ergo, quod beneficium adoptionis filiorum Dei non solum pertinet ad eos qui sub lege erant sed etiam ad gentiles. Et ideo dicit: quoniam estis filii Dei, etc., id est quod sitis filii Dei, ista de causa factum est, quia non solum Iudaei, sed etiam omnes alii, qui in filium Dei credunt, adoptantur in filios, et cetera. Io. I, 12: dedit eis potestatem filios Dei fieri, et cetera. Modus autem adipiscendi illud donum est per missionem spiritus filii Dei in corda vestra. Augustinus autem dicit, quod Christus in carne existens praedicavit Iudaeis principaliter, gentibus autem perfunctorie. Rom. XV, 8: dico Christum Iesum ministrum fuisse circumcisionis, et cetera. Et ideo quidquid pertinet ad statum Iudaeorum, convenienter attribuitur Christo. Et quia possent dicere isti, Galatas non esse adoptatos in filios Dei, cum Christus ex eis carnem non sumpserit, nec eis praedicaverit, unde non videbantur in aliquo Christo coniungi, ideo apostolus modum huius adoptionis demonstrans, dicit quod et si non fuerunt coniuncti Christo secundum carnem, scilicet quantum ad gentem, neque secundum praedicationem, tamen fuerunt coniuncti per spiritum, et ex hoc adoptati sunt in filios Dei. Unde conversio gentilium specialiter attribuitur spiritui sancto. Et ideo Petrus, quando fuit reprehensus a Iudaeis, quod ivisset praedicare gentibus, excusavit se per spiritum sanctum, dicens, Act. XI, 12, non posse resistere spiritui sancto, cuius instinctu hoc fecerat.
4:6
Et ideo, quia misit Deus, pater, spiritum filii sui in corda nostra, Iudaeorum scilicet et gentium, coniungimur Christo, et per hoc adoptamur in filios Dei. Sed sciendum est, quod si alicubi in Scriptura invenitur spiritus sanctus mitti a patre, Io. XIV, 26, Paracletus autem spiritus sanctus, quem mittet pater, etc., aliquando vero a filio, Io. XV, 26, cum venerit Paracletus, quem ego mittam vobis, etc., nihilominus tamen spiritus sanctus communis est patri et filio, et ab utroque procedit et ab utroque datur. Et ideo est, quod ubicumque invenitur quod pater mittat spiritum sanctum, fit mentio de filio, sicut in praemissa auctoritate dicitur quem mittet pater in nomine meo. Et, similiter, ubi dicitur mitti a filio, fit mentio de patre; unde dicit quem mittam vobis a patre. Et etiam hic cum dicit misit Deus, pater, spiritum sanctum, statim fit mentio de filio, cum dicit filii sui. Nec refert si alicubi dicatur spiritus sanctus solum a patre procedere, quia, ex quo filius mittit eum, manifestum est quod ab ipso procedit. Unde spiritus sanctus dicitur spiritus filii, sicut mittentis, et sicut a quo procedit, et sicut a quo habet spiritus sanctus quidquid habet, sicut et a patre. Io. c. XVI, 14: ille me clarificabit, quia de meo accipiet, et cetera. Dicit autem in corda, quia duplex est generatio. Una carnalis, quae fit per semen carnale missum in locum generationis: quod quidem semen, licet sit quantitate parvum, tamen virtute continet totum. Alia est spiritualis, quae fit per semen spirituale transmissum in locum spiritualis generationis; qui quidem locus est mens seu cor hominis, quia in filios Dei generamur per mentis renovationem. Semen autem spirituale est gratia spiritus sancti. I Io. ult.: qui natus est ex Deo, non peccat: quoniam generatio Dei conservat eum, et cetera. Et hoc semen est virtute continens totam perfectionem beatitudinis. Unde dicitur pignus et arra beatitudinis Ephes. I, 14; Ez. XXXVI, 26: dabo spiritum novum, et cetera. Clamantem, id est clamare facientem, abba, pater, non magnitudine vocis, sed magnitudine et fervore affectus. Tunc enim clamamus abba, pater, quando per affectum accendimur calore spiritus sancti ad desiderium Dei. Rom. VIII, 15: non accepistis spiritum servitutis, et cetera. Abba, pater, et cetera. Idem autem est in significatione, abba, quod est Hebraeum, et pater, quod est Latinum, et patir, quod est Graecum. Et utrumque ponit ut ostendat quod gratia spiritus sancti communiter se habet quantum ad utrumque populum, quantum est ex se. Consequenter cum dicit itaque iam non est servus, etc., ponit fructum huius beneficii. Et primo quantum ad remotionem omnis mali, a quo liberamur per adoptionem spiritus sancti et haec est liberatio a servitute. Et quantum ad hoc dicit itaque, scilicet quia spiritus clamat in nobis, pater, iam, a tempore gratiae, non est aliquis nostrum, qui in Christum credimus, servus, in timore scilicet serviens. Io. XV, 15: iam non dicam vos servos, sed amicos, et cetera. Rom. VIII, 15: non accepistis spiritum servitutis, et cetera. Sed est filius. Rom. VIII, 16: ipse spiritus testimonium reddit spiritui nostro, quod sumus filii Dei. Licet enim conditione servi simus, quia dicitur Lc. XVII, 10: cum feceritis omnia quae praecepta sunt vobis, dicite: servi inutiles sumus, tamen non sumus servi malevoli, ex timore scilicet servientes, quia tali servo debentur tortura et compedes; sed sumus servi boni et fideles, et amore servientes, et ideo libertatem per filium consequimur. Io. VIII, v. 36: si filius vos liberaverit, vere liberi eritis.
4:7
Secundo, ponit fructum quantum ad consecutionem omnis boni, et quantum ad hoc dicit quod si filius, et haeres per Deum, Rom. VIII, 17: si filii et haeredes, haeredes quidem Dei, et cetera. Haec autem haereditas est plenitudo omnis boni, cum nihil aliud sit quam ipse Deus, secundum illud Ps. XV, 5: dominus pars haereditatis meae, et cetera. Gen. c. XV, 1: dixit ad Abraham: ego ero merces tua magna nimis, et cetera. Dicit autem per Deum, quia sicut Iudaei haereditatem adepti sunt per Dei repromissionem et iustitiam, ita et gentiles per Deum, id est per Dei misericordiam. Rom. XV, 9: gentes autem super misericordia honorare Deum, et cetera. Vel per Deum, id est per Dei operationem. Is. XXVI, 12: omnia opera nostra operatus es in nobis, domine.
4:8
Posita dignitate beneficii gratiae, et ostensa per exemplum humanum, hic apostolus arguit Galatas, qui hanc gratiam contemnebant, utpote ingrati tanto beneficio. Et primo arguit eos de ingratitudine; secundo excusat se, quod hoc non facit ex odio et livore, ibi fratres, obsecro vos, non me laesistis, et cetera. Circa primum tria facit. Primo commemorat statum pristinum; secundo extollit et commendat beneficium susceptum, ibi nunc autem cum cognoveritis, etc.; tertio exaggerat peccatum commissum, ibi quomodo convertimini, et cetera. Dicit ergo sed tunc, etc., quasi dicat: nunc estis filii et haeredes per Deum, sed tunc quidem, cum gentes essetis. Eph. V, v. 8: eratis aliquando tenebrae, etc., ignorantes Deum, per infidelitatem, serviebatis, cultu latriae, his qui non sunt natura dii, sed opinione hominum. I Cor. XII, 2: cum gentes essetis, ad simulacra muta prout ducebamini euntes, et cetera. Rom. I, 25: servierunt creaturae potius quam creatori, et cetera. Hoc autem quod dicit qui natura non sunt dii, est ad confutationem Arianorum dicentium Christum Dei filium non esse Deum per naturam. Quod si verum esset, non esset ei exhibendus cultus latriae, et quicumque exhiberet ei esset idololatra. Sed potest obiici, quia nos adoramus carnem et humanitatem Christi, ergo sumus idololatrae. Sed dicendum est, quod licet adoremus carnem, seu humanitatem Christi, adoramus tamen eam, ut unitam personae divini verbi, quod quidem verbum est suppositum divinum. Unde cum adoratio debeatur supposito divinae naturae, quidquid in Christo adoratur, absque errore fit. Consequenter cum dicit nunc autem cum cognoveritis, etc., commemorat acceptum beneficium, quasi dicat: si ignorantes eratis et peccabatis, tolerari poterat, nam, caeteris paribus, gravius est peccatum in Christiano, quam in gentili. Sed nunc cum cognoveritis Deum, id est sitis conducti ad Dei cognitionem, gravius peccatis quam olim, serviendo et ponendo spem in his in quibus non debetis. Ier. XXXI, 34: omnes cognoscent me, et cetera.
4:9
Sed hoc quod dicit imo cogniti sitis a Deo, videtur contrarietatem habere, cum Deus ab aeterno omnia cognoverit. Eccli. XXIII, 29: domino enim Deo antequam crearentur omnia sunt agnita, et cetera. Sed dicendum hoc causaliter esse dictum, ut sit sensus imo cogniti sitis a Deo, id est Deus fecit quod vos cognosceretis eum. Sic enim Deus dicitur cognoscere, inquantum est causa cognitionis nostrae. Et ideo, quia supra dixit: cum cognoveritis Deum, quae fuit vera locutio, statim corrigit et explicat eam praefiguratam innuendo quod non possumus Deum cognoscere ex nobis, nisi per ipsum. Io. I, 18: Deum nemo vidit unquam, sed unigenitus, qui est in sinu patris, et cetera. Consequenter exprobrat peccatum commissum, dicens quomodo convertimini, et cetera. Et primo exaggerat eorum peccatum; secundo ostendit imminens periculum, ibi timeo vos ne forte, etc.; tertio reducit eos ad salutis statum, ibi estote sicut ego, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo proponit peccatum commissum; secundo de peccato commisso eos convincit, ibi dies observatis, et cetera. Sciendum est autem, quod haec littera dupliciter legitur. Uno modo, quia isti Galatae a fide convertebantur ad idololatriam, et ideo dicit quomodo convertimini a fide iterum, id est denuo, II Petr. II, 21: melius erat eis non cognoscere viam iustitiae, quam post, et cetera. Is. XLII, 17: conversi sunt retrorsum, etc. ad elementa, scilicet mundi, quae sunt infirma, per se subsistere non valentia, quia in nihilum deciderent, nisi ea manus cuncta regentis teneret, secundum illud Hebr. I, 3: portans omnia verbo virtutis suae, etc. et egena, quia egent Deo et seipsis ad invicem, ad complementum universi, quibus, scilicet elementis, denuo, id est iterum, servire vultis, servitute scilicet latriae. Probatio huius manifeste apparet, quia observatis dies, scilicet faustos et infaustos, et menses, et tempora, et annos, id est constellationes et cursum corporum caelestium, quae omnia ortum habent ab idololatria. Contra quod dicit Ier. X, 2: a signis caeli nolite metuere, quae gentes, et cetera. Et quod observationes huiusmodi malae sint et contra cultum Christianae religionis, patet: quia distinctio dierum, mensium, annorum, et temporum attenditur secundum cursum solis et lunae. Et ideo tales temporum distinctiones observantes, venerantur corpora caelestia, et disponunt actus suos secundum iudicium astrorum, quae nullam directam impressionem habent in voluntate hominis, et in his quae dependent a libero arbitrio. Et ex hoc imminet grave periculum. Unde dicit timeo ne forte sine causa, id est inutiliter laboraverim in vobis. Et ideo cavendum est fidelibus talia observare; sed nulla debet esse eis suspicio harum rerum, quia prospere potest cedere quidquid sub Dei devotione simpliciter agitur. Sed numquid licet in aliquo cursum stellarum servare? Dicendum est, quod corpora caelestia quorumdam quidem effectuum causa sunt, scilicet corporalium: et in istis licet ipsorum cursum attendere; quorumdam autem non sunt causa, scilicet eorum quae dependent a libero arbitrio, seu a fortuna, vel infortunio: et in istis servare cursum astrorum pertinet ad idololatriam. Sed licet haec lectura sustineri possit, non tamen est secundum intentionem apostoli. Cum enim ipse in tota praecedenti serie huius epistolae, et in sequenti, arguat Galatas de hoc quod a fide transtulerunt se ad observantiam legis, ideo magis ad propositum exponitur de hoc, quod ad legales observantias convertuntur. Unde dicit: cum cognoveritis Deum per fidem, quomodo convertimini a fide ad elementa, id est ad litteralem legis observantiam? Quae dicitur elementa, quia lex fuit prima institutio divini cultus; elementa, dico, infirma, quia non perficit iustificando Hebr. c. VII, 19: neminem ad perfectum adduxit lex; egena, quia non confert virtutes et gratiam, adiuvando per se. Sed quid est quod dicit convertimini? Et videtur hoc inconvenienter dictum. Similiter et hoc, quod dicit denuo. Nam isti nec Iudaei fuerant, nec alias legalia servaverant. Ad quod dicendum est, quod cultus Iudaeorum medius est inter cultum Christianorum et gentilium. Nam gentiles colebant elementa ipsa tamquam viva quaedam; Iudaei vero elementis quidem non serviebant, sed Deo sub ipsis elementis, inquantum observationibus corporalium elementorum Deo cultum exhibebant. Supra eodem: sub elementis huius mundi eramus servientes. Christiani vero serviunt Deo sub Christo, id est in fide Christi. Quando autem aliquis pervenit ad terminum, transacto medio, si iterum redire velit ad medium, idem videtur ac si velit redire ad principium. Et ideo apostolus, quia isti iam pervenerant ad terminum, scilicet ad fidem Christi, et tunc redierunt ad medium, scilicet ad cultum Iudaeorum, inde est, quod propter quamdam conformitatem medii ad principium, dicit eos converti ad elementa, et denuo eis servire.
4:10
Et quod ita sit probat, cum dicit dies observatis, Iudaico ritu, scilicet sabbata, et decimum primi mensis, et huiusmodi, quae dicuntur in Glossa; menses, id est Neomenias, ut primum et septimum mensem, ut habetur Lev. XXIII, 5 ss.; tempora, scilicet egressionis de Aegypto, et quod Ierosolymam tribus vicibus veniebant per singulos annos. Item annos iubilaei, et septimum annum remissionis. Et ex hoc sequitur periculum, quia ex hoc nihil prodest fides Christi.
4:11
Unde dicit timeo vos ne forte sine causa, id est inutiliter, in vobis laboraverim. Infra V, 2: si circumcidimini, Christus vobis nihil proderit. Consequenter cum dicit estote sicut ego, reducit eos ad statum salutis; quasi dicat: ita timeo vos, ne forte sine causa laboraverim in vobis, sed ne ita sit, estote sicut ego. Hoc in Glossa tripliciter legitur. Primo modo sic estote sicut ego, scilicet legem deserentes, sicut ego dimisi. Secundo modo sic estote sicut ego, errorem scilicet pristinum corrigentes, sicut ego errorem meum correxi. Et hoc potestis, quia ego, supple sum, sicut vos, et tamen de errore meo correctus sum. Tertio modo sic: estote sicut ego, scilicet sine lege viventes, quia ego, supple: qui legem habui, et in lege natus sum, modo sum sicut vos, supple fuistis, scilicet sine lege.
4:12
Postquam reprehendit apostolus Galatas, hic ostendit se hoc non ex odio fecisse. Et primo ostendit se non habere veram causam odii ad eos ullam; secundo quod nec habet causam aestimatam, ibi ergo inimicus factus sum vobis, etc.; tertio assignat causam praemissae reprehensionis, ibi filioli mei, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ostendit, quod non habet causam odii ad eos; secundo quod magis habet causam amoris, ibi scitis autem quod per infirmitatem, et cetera. Circa primum notandum est, quod consuetudo est boni pastoris in correctione subditorum asperis dulcia miscere, ne scilicet ex nimia severitate frangantur. Lc. X, 34 legitur de Samaritano, quod in curatione sauciati infudit vinum et oleum. E contra, de malis pastoribus dicitur Ez. XXXIV, 4: cum austeritate imperabatis eis. Et ideo apostolus sicut bonus praelatus ostendit, quod non ex odio increpat eos, blande loquendo eis quantum ad tria. Primo quantum ad charitatis nomen. Unde dicit fratres, Ps. CXXXII, 1: ecce quam bonum et quam iucundum habitare fratres in unum. Secundo quantum ad modestiae verbum. Unde dicit obsecro vos, Prov. XVIII, 23: cum obsecrationibus loquitur pauper. Tertio quantum ad excusationem. Unde dicit nihil me laesistis, et ego non sum talis, quod habeam odio illos, qui me non offendunt. Secundo ostendit se ad eos habere causam amoris, cum dicit scitis autem, quod per infirmitatem, et cetera. Ubi tria ponit ex quibus homines se diligere consueverunt. Primum est mutuum societatis auxilium, et ex hoc etiam amor in hominibus confirmatur, secundum illud Lc. XXII, v. 28: vos estis, qui permansistis mecum, et cetera.
4:13
Et quantum ad hoc dicit scitis autem, etc., ubi primo commemorat tribulationem quam passus est apud eos; secundo ostendit quomodo ei astiterunt et tentationem vestram, et cetera. Dicit ergo quantum ad primum: dico quod nihil me laesistis, imo servivistis mihi. Scitis enim, id est recordari poteritis, quod evangelizavi vobis iampridem, id est transacto tempore, per infirmitatem carnis, id est cum infirmitate et afflictione carnis meae, vel cum multis tribulationibus quas patiebar a Iudaeis (qui sunt de carne mea) me persequentibus. I Cor. II, 3: cum timore et tremore multo fui apud vos. II Cor. XII, 9: virtus in infirmitate perficitur. Et licet haec infirmitas fuerit causa spernendi me, et tentationis vestrae, secundum illud Zach. XIII, 7: percute pastorem, et dispergentur oves, etc., vos tamen tentationem vestram, quae erat in carne mea, id est tribulationem meam, quae erat vobis causa tentationis, non sprevistis. Eccli. XI, 2: non spernas hominem in visu suo. Quia, ut dicit dominus Lc. X, 2: qui vos spernit, me spernit, et cetera. Neque respuistis doctrinam meam et me, quin velletis esse socii tribulationum. Is. XXXIII, 1: vae qui spernis, nonne et ipse sperneris, et cetera. Secundum autem, quod confirmat inter homines dilectionem, est mutuus amor et mutua dilectio ad invicem, secundum illud Prov. VIII, 17: ego diligentes me diligo, et cetera.
4:14
Et quantum ad hoc dicit sed sicut Angelum Dei excepistis me, id est ita honorifice sicut nuntium verba Dei nuntiantem. I Thess. II, v. 13: cum accepissetis a nobis verbum auditus Dei, et cetera. Et inde est, quod praedicatores dicuntur Angeli. Mal. II, 7: legem requirent ex ore eius, et cetera. Et non solum sicut Angelum recepistis, sed sicut Iesum Christum, id est ac si Christus ipse venisset, qui Christus profecto in ipso ad eos venerat, et in eo loquebatur, secundum illud II Cor. ult.: an experimentum quaeritis eius, qui in me loquitur Christi? Matth. X, 40: qui vos recipit, me recipit, et cetera. Deinde increpat eos, quod sic deteriorati erant.
4:15
Unde dicit ubi est ergo beatitudo vestra? Quasi dicat: nonne ex hoc homines beatificabant vos, quod me honorastis, et praedicationem meam recepistis? Iob IV, v. 6: ubi est timor tuus, et fortitudo tua, patientia tua, et perfectio viarum tuarum? Tertium, quod amorem confirmat est mutua beneficentia. Et quantum ad hoc dicit testimonium perhibeo, quod si fieri posset, id est iuste fieri potuisset illud enim fieri potest, quod iuste fit vel ad utilitatem Ecclesiae fuisset, oculos eruissetis et dedissetis mihi, quasi dicat: ita me diligebatis, quod non solum mihi vestra exteriora, sed etiam oculos vestros dedissetis mihi. Consequenter cum dicit ergo inimicus factus sum vobis, etc., ponit causam aestimati odii, et primo unam ex parte apostoli; secundo aliam ex parte pseudo, ibi aemulantur vos, et cetera. Dicit ergo: ex quo mihi tot bona fecistis, estne credendum, quod factus sim inimicus vobis, verum dicens vobis? Verbum autem hoc, quod dicit inimicus, dupliciter potest intelligi. Uno scilicet modo, quod ipse habeat eos odio, et isto modo legitur sic tunc: factus sum inimicus, id est habeo vos odio.
4:16
Et sic hoc quod sequitur verum dicens vobis, potest aestimari ut signum odii, quod tamen est signum dilectionis, scilicet dicere verum, suo tamen loco et tempore. Alio modo potest intelligi inimicus passive, scilicet quod ipse habeatur odio ab eis. Et tunc sic legitur: ego factus sum inimicus vobis, id est habetis me odio; et hoc ideo, quia dico vobis verum, ut sic dicens verum vobis ponatur, ut sit causa odii. Nam homines veritatem dicentes, a malis odio habentur. Veritas enim odium parit. Amos c. V, 10: odio habuerunt in porta corripientem, et cetera. Sed contra est quod dicitur Prov. c. XXVIII, 23: qui corripit hominem, gratiam postea inveniet apud eum magis quam qui per linguae blandimenta decipit. Sed dicendum est, quod solutio haec potest haberi ex hoc quod dicitur Prov. IX, 8: noli arguere derisorem, ne oderit te; argue sapientem, et diliget te. Bonitatis enim signum est, si iste qui corripitur corripientem diligit, et, e converso, si eum oderit, signum est malitiae. Cum enim homo naturaliter odiat illud quod contrariatur ei quod diligit, si tu odis eum qui corrigit te de malo, manifestum est quod malum diligis. Si vero diligis eum, ostendis te odire peccata. Quia enim homines a principio cum corripiuntur, per amorem ad peccata afficiuntur: inde est, quod in principio peccator corripientem odit, sed postquam iam correctus est et affectum peccati deposuit, corripientem diligit. Et ideo signanter in proposita auctoritate dicitur, quod postea inveniet gratiam apud eum. Consequenter cum dicit aemulantur vos, etc., ponit aliam causam aestimatam, ex parte scilicet pseudo. Et primo ponit eam; secundo excludit eam, ibi bonum autem aemulamini, et cetera. Quantum autem ad primum, sciendum est quod, sicut dictum est supra, quidam pseudo ex Iudaeis conversi, circumeuntes Ecclesias gentium, praedicabant servari legalia. Et quia Paulus contrarium dicebat, ideo isti detrahebant ei. Et hoc magis faciebant ut excluderent Paulum, quam pro salute eorum. Et ideo dicit aemulantur vos, id est non patiuntur in vobis (quos diligunt potius amore concupiscentiae, quam amicitiae) consortium nostrum. Aemulatio enim est zelus ex amore quocumque proveniens, non patiens consortium in amato. Sed quia amor eorum ad istos non erat bonus, tum quia non amabant eos propter utilitatem ipsorum, sed propter commodum proprium: et hoc patet quia volebant excludere apostolum ab eis, utpote propriae utilitati contrarium, tum quia hoc cedebat in damnum Galatarum, quia quaerebant in eis lucrum, per quod ipsi damnificabantur, ideo dicit aemulantur vos, sed non bene, quia non amant bonum vestrum. Et hoc apparet, quia volunt vos excludere, ut aemulemini illos, id est, ut nullum recipiatis nisi eos. Prov. III, 31: ne aemuleris hominem iniustum, et cetera. Et Prov. XXXI: non aemuletur cor tuum peccatores. Hoc autem excludit consequenter cum dicit bonum autem aemulamini, etc., quasi dicat: non debetis eos aemulari in doctrina eorum, sed aemulamini bonum doctorem, me scilicet et huiusmodi. I Petr. III, v. 13: quis est, qui vobis noceat, si boni aemulatores fueritis? Sed quia aliquis potest esse bonus doctor, in quo potest esse aliquid mali, ideo addit: aemulamini bonum doctorem, sed dico tamen, in bono, id est in eo quod bonum est. I Cor. XIV, 1: sectamini charitatem, aemulamini spiritualia. Licet autem apostolus de se loquatur, secundum Glossam, cum dicit aemulamini bonum, addit tamen in bono, quia, sicut ipse dicit I Cor. IV, 4: nihil mihi conscius sum, sed non in hoc iustificatus sum.
4:18
Sed quia aliqui aemulantur doctorem bonum in sua praesentia solum, ideo addit semper, et non tantum cum praesens sum apud vos; quia aemulatio in bonum est signum quod ex amore et timore Dei, qui omnia videt, procedat, si etiam in absentia doctoris perseverat. Col. III, 22: servi, obedite per omnia dominis vestris, et cetera.
4:19
Supra apostolus removit falsam causam correctionis Galatarum, hic consequenter apostolus dictae correctionis assignat causam veram, quae est dolor de eorum imperfectione. Et ideo primo dolorem cordis ex quo loquebatur, exprimit; secundo ponit desiderium de manifestatione huius doloris, ibi vellem autem, etc.; tertio ponit causam doloris, ibi quoniam confundor, et cetera. Dolor autem iste ex charitate procedebat, quia dolebat de peccatis eorum. Ps. CXVIII, 158: vidi praevaricantes, et tabescebam, et cetera. Et ideo verbum charitatis proponit dicens filioli mei. Signanter autem non eos filios vocat, sed filiolos, ut designet eorum imperfectionem, qua diminuti sunt. I Cor. III, 1: tamquam parvulis in Christo, et cetera. Sed notandum est, quod puer dum est in parturitione, dicitur filiolus. Et isti tales erant, quia indigebant iterata parturitione, cum tamen parentes carnales semel tantum parturiant filios. Et ideo dicit eis quos iterum parturio. Nam semel eos parturierat in prima conversione, sed quia iam aversi erant ab eo, qui eos vocavit in aliud Evangelium, indigebant quod iterato parturiret eos. Ideo dicit parturio, id est cum labore et dolore ad lucem fidei reduco. In quo apparet dolor apostoli. Unde conversio hominis, partus dicitur. Iob XXXIX, 3: incurvantur ad foetum et pariunt. Apoc. XII, 2: clamabat parturiens, et cruciabatur ut pariat. Et inde est quod apostolus ex dolore dure eos corrigit, sicut mulier ex dolore partus dure clamat. Is. XLII, v. 14: quasi parturiens loquar, et cetera. Et ratio iteratae parturitionis est, quia non estis perfecte formati. Unde dicit donec Christus formetur in vobis, id est recipiatis similitudinem eius, quam vestro vitio perdidistis. Et non dicit, formemini in Christo sed formetur Christus in vobis, ut hoc terribilius insonet auribus eorum. Nam Christus per fidem formatam formatur in corde. Eph. III, 17: habitare Christum per fidem, et cetera. Sed quando quis non habet fidem formatam, iam in eo moritur Christus. II Petr. I, 19: donec dies illucescat, et cetera. Et sic secundum hominis profectum in fide, Christus in homine proficit, et, e converso, secundum defectum deficit. Quando ergo fides in homine efficitur informis per peccatum, Christus non est in eo formatus. Et ideo, quia in istis non erat fides formata, indigebant iterum parturiri, donec Christus in eis formaretur per fidem formatam, scilicet quae per dilectionem operatur. Vel donec Christus formetur in vobis, id est, formosus aliis per vos appareat. Posset autem aliquis dicere: absens tu dicis talia, sed si esses apud nos, haec non diceres, secundum illud II Cor. X, v. 10: praesentia quidem corporis infirma, et sermo contemptibilis, et cetera.
4:20
Et ideo ponit desiderium manifestandi dolorem suum asperius, dicens vellem autem esse apud vos modo et mutare vocem meam, quasi dicat: modo blandis verbis utor, vocans vos fratres et filios in absentia; sed si essem praesens, asperius corriperem. Nam si quae per litteras scribo, nunc praesens et ore proferrem, durior esset correctio, utpote quia magis possem vocem obiurgantis exprimere, et irascentis resonare clamorem et dolorem pectoris, magis quam per litteras explicare, et magis cor vestrum viva vox ad confusionem de errore vestro et mea turbatione moveret. Et causa huius doloris est, quia confundor in vobis, id est, erubesco apud alios pro vobis. Nam, sicut Eccli. XXII, 3 dicitur confusio est patris de filio indisciplinato. Nam, cum filius sit res patris, et discipulus, inquantum huiusmodi, res magistri, magister gaudet de bono quod videt in eo relucere, quasi de bono proprio, et gloriatur, et, e converso, de malo dolet et confunditur. Unde quia isti mutati erant de bono in malum, apostolus confundebatur inde.
4:22
Supra apostolus probavit dignitatem gratiae per consuetudinem humanam hic autem probat eam auctoritate Scripturae. Et primo proponit factum; secundo exponit mysterium, ibi quae sunt per allegoriam dicta, etc.; tertio concludit propositum, ibi itaque, fratres mei, non sumus, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo excitat ad attentionem; secundo proponit suam intentionem, ibi scriptum est enim, et cetera. Dicit ergo dicite mihi, etc., quasi dicat: si vos estis sapientes, attendite ad ea quae obiicio, et si non potestis contradicere, cedatis. Iob VI, 29: respondete, obsecro, absque contentione, et cetera. Facio vobis autem hanc obiectionem: aut legistis legem, aut non legistis. Sed si legistis, scire debetis ea quae in ea scripta sunt: sed ipsa probat se dimittendam; si autem non legistis, non debetis recipere quod nescitis. Prov. IV, 25: palpebrae tuae praecedant gressus tuos. Dicit autem sub lege, id est sub onere legis. Nam subire aliquod leve non est vis, sed subire grave onus, sicut est onus legis, magnae stultitiae signum esse videtur. Act. XV, v. 10: hoc est onus, quod neque patres nostri, neque nos portare potuimus, etc., quod est intelligendum de illis, qui volunt carnaliter esse sub lege. Consequenter cum dicit scriptum est enim, etc., proponit suam intentionem, dicens: ideo quaero an legistis legem, quia in ipsa continentur quaedam, quae manifeste dicunt legem non esse tenendam. Et specialiter apostolus facit mentionem de duobus filiis Abrahae. Et primo ponit unum in quo conveniunt; secundo duo in quibus differunt. Conveniunt quidem in uno patre. Unde dicit scriptum est, quoniam Abraham duos filios habuit. Habuit etiam alios quam istos duos filios, quia post mortem Sarae alios genuit de Caethura, ut dicitur Gen. XXV, 2; de quibus mentionem non fecit apostolus, quia non pertinent ad hanc significationem. Possunt tamen per istos duos, scilicet filium ancillae et filium liberae, duo populi scilicet, Iudaeorum et gentium, designari; per alios vero filios Caethurae, schismatici et haeretici. Qui quidem duo populi conveniunt in uno patre; quia Iudaei sunt filii Abraham secundum carnem, gentiles vero secundum imitationem fidei. Vel sunt filii Abrahae, id est Dei, qui est pater omnium. Mal. II, 10: nonne Deus pater omnium, etc., Rom. III, v. 29: an Iudaeorum tantum? Differunt autem in duobus, scilicet in conditione matris, quia unus est de ancilla, ut dicitur Gen. XXI, 10. Nec tamen peccavit Abraham ad eam accedens, quia accessit ad eam coniugis affectu et ordinatione divina. Alius autem est de libera, scilicet Isaac, quem genuit ei Sara uxor sua. Gen. c. XVIII, 10: veniam ad te tempore isto, vita comite, et Sara uxor tua, et cetera. Item differunt in modo generationis, quia qui de ancilla, scilicet Ismael, secundum carnem natus est; qui autem de libera, scilicet Isaac, per repromissionem. Sed vitandus est hic duplex falsus intellectus.
4:23
Unus, ne intelligatur per hoc, quod dicit secundum carnem natus est, ut accipiatur hic caro pro actu peccati, secundum illud Rom. VIII, 13: si secundum carnem vixeritis, moriemini, etc.; II Cor. X, 3: in carne ambulantes non secundum carnem militamus; quasi Abraham peccante natus sit Ismael. Alius intellectus, ut per hoc, quod dicitur per repromissionem, credatur Isaac non secundum carnem natus, id est, secundum carnalem commixtionem, sed per spiritum sanctum. Est ergo dicendum, quod secundum carnem, id est secundum naturam carnis natus est Ismael. Nam naturale est in hominibus, quod ex muliere iuvencula foecunda, sicut erat Agar, et sene, nascatur filius. Et quod per repromissionem, id est supra naturam carnis, natus est Isaac. Non enim ad hoc se extendit natura carnis, ut ex viro seni et vetula sterili, sicut fuit Sara, filius nascatur. Per Ismael significatur populus Iudaeorum, qui secundum carnem natus est; per Isaac vero intelligitur populus gentium, qui natus secundum repromissionem, qua promissum est Abrahae, quod esset futurus pater multarum gentium. Gen. XXII, 18: in semine tuo benedicentur, et cetera.
4:24
Mysterium autem exponit, cum dicit quae sunt per allegoriam dicta. Et primo ponit modum mysterii; secundo exemplificat, ibi haec enim duo sunt testamenta, et cetera. Dicit ergo: haec quae sunt scripta de duobus filiis, etc., sunt per allegoriam dicta, id est per alium intellectum. Allegoria enim est tropus seu modus loquendi, quo aliquid dicitur et aliud intelligitur. Unde allegoria dicitur ab allos, quod est alienum, et goge, ductio, quasi in alienum intellectum ducens. Sed attendendum est, quod allegoria sumitur aliquando pro quolibet mystico intellectu, aliquando pro uno tantum ex quatuor qui sunt historicus, allegoricus, mysticus et anagogicus, qui sunt quatuor sensus sacrae Scripturae, et tamen differunt quantum ad significationem. Est enim duplex significatio. Una est per voces; alia est per res quas voces significant. Et hoc specialiter est in sacra Scriptura et non in aliis; cum enim eius auctor sit Deus, in cuius potestate est, quod non solum voces ad designandum accommodet (quod etiam homo facere potest), sed etiam res ipsas. Et ideo in aliis scientiis ab hominibus traditis, quae non possunt accommodari ad significandum nisi tantum verba, voces solum significant. Sed hoc est proprium in ista scientia, ut voces et ipsae res significatae per eas aliquid significent, et ideo haec scientia potest habere plures sensus. Nam illa significatio qua voces significant aliquid, pertinet ad sensum litteralem seu historicum; illa vero significatio qua res significatae per voces iterum res alias significant, pertinet ad sensum mysticum. Per litteralem autem sensum potest aliquid significari dupliciter, scilicet secundum proprietatem locutionis, sicut cum dico homo ridet; vel secundum similitudinem seu metaphoram, sicut cum dico pratum ridet. Et utroque modo utimur in sacra Scriptura, sicut cum dicimus, quantum ad primum, quod Iesus ascendit, et cum dicimus quod sedet a dextris Dei, quantum ad secundum. Et ideo sub sensu litterali includitur parabolicus seu metaphoricus. Mysticus autem sensus seu spiritualis dividitur in tres. Primo namque, sicut dicit apostolus, lex vetus est figura novae legis. Et ideo secundum quod ea quae sunt veteris legis, significant ea quae sunt novae, est sensus allegoricus. Item, secundum Dionysium in libro de caelesti hierarchia, nova lex est figura futurae gloriae. Et ideo secundum quod ea quae sunt in nova lege et in Christo, significant ea quae sunt in patria, est sensus anagogicus. Item, in nova lege ea quae in capite sunt gesta, sunt exempla eorum quae nos facere debemus, quia quaecumque scripta sunt, ad nostram doctrinam scripta sunt; et ideo secundum quod ea quae in nova lege facta sunt in Christo et in his quae Christum significant, sunt signa eorum quae nos facere debemus: est sensus moralis. Et omnium horum patet exemplum. Per hoc enim quod dico fiat lux, ad litteram, de luce corporali, pertinet ad sensum litteralem. Si intelligatur fiat lux id est nascatur Christus in Ecclesia, pertinet ad sensum allegoricum. Si vero dicatur fiat lux id est ut per Christum introducamur ad gloriam, pertinet ad sensum anagogicum. Si autem dicatur fiat lux id est per Christum illuminemur in intellectu et inflammemur in affectu, pertinet ad sensum moralem.
Superius posuit apostolus intellectum mysticum, hic aperit mysterium. Et primo quantum ad matres; secundo quantum ad filios, ibi nos autem fratres, et cetera. Per duas autem matres intelligit duo testamenta. Et ideo primo ponit significatum; secundo exponit, ibi unum quidem in monte, et cetera. Dicit ergo hae, scilicet duae uxores, ancilla et libera, sunt duo testamenta, vetus et novum. Ier. XXXI, 31: feriam domui Israel foedus novum, ecce novum testamentum, non secundum pactum, etc., ecce testamentum vetus. Libera enim significat testamentum novum, ancilla vero vetus. Ad sciendum autem quid sit testamentum, attendi debet, quod testamentum idem est quod pactum seu foedus eorum quae testibus confirmantur. Unde in Scriptura multoties loco testamenti ponitur foedus vel pactum. Ubicumque autem intervenit foedus, vel pactum, fit aliqua promissio. Et ideo secundum diversitatem promissionum, est diversitas testamentorum. Duo autem sunt nobis promissa, scilicet temporalia in veteri lege et aeterna in nova. Matth. V, 12: gaudete et exultate, et cetera. Hae ergo duae promissiones sunt duo testamenta. Unde apostolus consequenter cum dicit: unum quidem, etc., exponit ipsa. Et primo quantum ad vetus; secundo quantum ad novum, ibi illa autem quae sursum, et cetera. Ad evidentiam autem litterae sciendum est, circa primum, quod quilibet civis alicuius civitatis dicitur esse filius illius, et ipsa civitas est sicut mater eius. Lc. c. XXIII, 28: filiae Ierusalem, nolite flere, et cetera. Thren. ult.: filii Sion inclyti, et cetera. Per hoc igitur quod aliqui fiunt alicuius civitatis cives, efficiuntur filii eius. Duplex autem est civitas Dei, una terrena, scilicet Ierusalem terrestris; alia spiritualis, scilicet Ierusalem caelestis. Per vetus autem testamentum homines efficiebantur cives civitatis terrestris, per novum autem, caelestis. Et ideo circa hoc duo facit. Primo ponit mysterium expositum; secundo expositionis mysticae rationem assignat, ibi Sina enim, et cetera. Dicit ergo primo: dico quod significat duo testamenta, scilicet vetus et novum. Et quantum ad hoc dicit: primum quidem in monte Sina, et cetera. Ubi, primo, ponitur locus in quo datum fuit, quia ad litteram in monte Sina, ut dicitur Ex. XX, cuius, secundum Glossam, mystica ratio est, quia Sina interpretatur mandatum. Unde et ab apostolo vetus lex vocatur lex mandatorum, Eph. II, 15; mons autem significat superbiam, Ier. XIII, 16: antequam offendant pedes vestri ad montes caliginosos, et cetera. Unde per montem istum in quo data est lex, significatur superbia Iudaeorum duplex: una qua superbiebant contra Deum, Deut. XXXI, 27: ego scio contentionem tuam, etc.; alia qua superbiebant contra alias nationes abutentes eo, quod dicitur in Ps. CXLVII, 20: non fecit taliter omni nationi, et cetera. Secundo vero proponit ad quid sit datum, quia non ad faciendum liberos, sed filios matris ancillae, generans in servitutem, quae est Agar, id est significatur per Agar, quae quidem in servitutem generat, scilicet vetus testamentum. Et hoc tripliciter, scilicet quantum ad affectum, quantum ad intellectum et fructum. Quantum ad intellectum quidem secundum cognitionem, quia in homine est duplex cognitio: una libera, quando scilicet rerum veritatem secundum seipsam cognoscit; alia vero ancilla, id est subiecta velaminibus figurarum. Et talis fuit cognitio veteris testamenti. Quantum ad affectum vero, quia nova lex generat affectum amoris, qui pertinet ad libertatem, nam qui amat, ex se movetur. Vetus autem generat affectum timoris, in quo est servitus; qui enim timet, non ex se, sed ex alio movetur. Rom. VIII, 15: non accepistis spiritum servitutis iterum in timore, et cetera. Sed quantum ad fructum, quia lex nova generat filios quibus debetur haereditas; sed illis, quos vetus generat, debentur munuscula, sicut servis. Io. VIII, 35: servus non manet in domo in aeternum, filius manet in domo in aeternum.
4:25
Rationem mysterii assignat, cum dicit Sina enim mons est in Arabia, et cetera. Ubi primo oritur dubitatio, quia cum Sina distet a Ierusalem per viginti fere dietas, videtur falsum quod Sina iunctus sit Ierusalem, ut hic apostolus dicit. Sed ad hoc mystice respondetur in Glossa sic, ut Sina sit in Arabia. Arabia enim humilitas vel afflictio interpretatur, in qua datum est vetus testamentum, quia homines quasi servi et alieni sub ea affligebantur carnalibus observantiis. Act. XV, v. 10: hoc est onus, quod neque patres nostri, neque nos, et cetera. Qui, mons, coniunctus est, non per spatii continuitatem sed per similitudinem, ei quae nunc est Ierusalem, id est, Iudaico populo; quia sicut ipsi terrena diligunt, et pro temporalibus serviunt sub peccato, ita et mons ille in servitutem generabat. Sed haec non videtur intentio apostoli. Nam ipse vult, quod vetus testamentum, quod in monte Sina datum est, ex ipso loco servitutis in servitutem generet; quia illud dabatur in Sina, non tamen ibi remanentibus filiis Israel, sed proficiscentibus ad terram promissionis. Ierusalem enim etiam generat filios servitutis, et ideo quantum ad hoc coniungitur mons Sina cum illa. Et hoc est quod dicit qui coniunctus est ei, scilicet per continuationem itineris euntium in Ierusalem, quae nunc est Ierusalem, et servit cum filiis suis, servitute scilicet legalium observantiarum (a qua redemit nos Christus) et servitute diversorum peccatorum Io. VIII, 34: qui facit peccatum, servus est peccati et (ad litteram) a servitute Romanorum, qui eis dominabantur.
4:26
Deinde cum dicit illa autem quae sursum est Ierusalem, etc., hic consequenter aperit mysterium de libera. Et primo exponit mysterium; secundo inducit prophetiam, ibi scriptum est enim, et cetera. Primum quidem potest dupliciter intelligi, secundum quod hanc matrem possumus intelligere, vel illam per quam generamur, quae est Ecclesia militans; vel illam matrem in cuius filios generamur, quae est Ecclesia triumphans. I Petr. I, 3: regeneravit nos in spem vivam, et cetera. Sic ergo generamur in praesenti Ecclesia militante, ut perveniamus ad triumphantem. Hoc ergo modo illud exponentes, a quatuor describitur mater nostra, scilicet a sublimitate, cum dicit sursum, secundo a nomine, cum dicit Ierusalem, tertio a libertate, cum dicit libera est, quarto a foecunditate, cum dicit mater nostra. Est ergo sublimis per apertam Dei visionem, et per perfectam Dei fruitionem, et hoc quantum ad Ecclesiam triumphantem. Is. LX, v. 5: videbis, et afflues, et cetera. Col. III, 2: quae sursum sunt sapite, et cetera. Item sublimis per fidem et spem, quantum ad Ecclesiam militantem. Phil. III, 20: nostra conversatio in caelis, et cetera. Cant. III, 6 et VIII, 5: quae est ista quae ascendit, et cetera. Sed est etiam pacifica, quia Ierusalem, id est, visio pacis. Quod quidem competit Ecclesiae triumphanti, ut habenti pacem perfectam. Ps. CXLVII, 14: qui posuit fines tuos pacem, et cetera. Is. XXXII, 18: sedebit populus meus in pulchritudine pacis. Item competit Ecclesiae militanti, quae in Christo pacem habens quiescit. Io. XVI, 33: in me pacem habebitis. Est etiam libera, Rom. VIII, 21: ipsa creatura liberabitur, et cetera. Et hoc quantum ad triumphantem, et etiam quantum ad militantem, ut Apoc. XXI, 2: vidi civitatem sanctam Ierusalem, et cetera. Sed foecunda est, quia mater nostra. Militans quidem ut generans, triumphans ut in cuius filios generamur. Ps. LXXXVI, 5: numquid Sion dicet homo, et cetera. Is. LX, 4: filii tui de longe venient, et cetera. Scriptum est enim, scilicet Is. LIV, v. 1, secundum enim Septuaginta. Hic ponitur prophetia, per quam primo probatur libertas matris praedictae; secundo eius foecunditas, ibi quia multi filii, et cetera. Sciendum est autem, circa primum, quod in muliere foecunda, primo quidem est tristitia in pariendo, secundo subsequitur gaudium in suscepta prole, secundum illud Io. XVI, 21: mulier cum parit, et cetera. Sed mulier sterilis nec patitur in partu, nec gaudet in prole. Differunt autem parere et parturire, quia parturire dicit conatum ad partum; parere vero dicit eductionem foetus iam facti. In parturitione ergo dolorem experitur foecunda, et in partu gaudium. Sterilis autem dolore parturitionis et gaudio partus privatur. Sed haec duo propheta indicit sterili, dicens laetare, sterilis, etc., ubi loquitur de Ierusalem, quam dicit liberam, significatam per Saram sterilem. Nam Ecclesia sterilis erat, scilicet Ecclesia militans gentium ante conversionem, quae non offerebat filium Deo, sed Diabolo. Unde ad Babylonem dicitur Is. XLVII, v. 9: sterilitas et viduitas venerunt tibi, et cetera. Et Ecclesia triumphans ante passionem Christi sterilis erat, quia non generabantur aliqui in filios eius per introitum gloriae nisi in spe. Posita enim erat romphaea ante ianuam Paradisi, ut nullus intrare posset. Huic ergo sterili dicitur laetare, quae non paris, etc., quasi dicat: steriles, ut dictum est, non dolent de partu, sed de eo quod non pariunt. I Reg. I, 10: cum esset Anna amaro animo, et cetera. Sed tu laetaberis in multitudine filiorum. Is. LX, 5: tunc dilatabitur et mirabitur cor tuum, scilicet laetitiam mentis extra ostendens. Duo enim sunt in partu, scilicet dolor ex eruptione reticulorum, quibus continetur foetus in matrice, et clamor ex ipso dolore. Et ideo dicit tu quae non parturis, scilicet Ecclesia militans, quae non conaris ad partum per desiderium, et triumphans, quae non parturis dolendo, vel quia nondum venit tempus recipiendi filios: erumpe, id est laetitiam quam interius habes manifesta exterius, et clama voce laudis. Is. LVIII, 1: clama, ne cesses, et cetera. Et haec duo ad libertatem pertinent, scilicet clamare et erumpere: sic ergo apparet libertas matris.
4:27
Sequitur foecunditas quia multi filii, et cetera. Sed cum supra dictum sit Ecclesiam liberam significari per Saram, videtur esse dubium an Sara fuerit deserta. Ad quod sciendum est, quod deserta fuit ab Abraham, ut hic dicitur, non per divortium, sed quantum ad opus carnale. Nam Abraham vacabat quidem operi carnali, non propter concupiscentiam, sed propter prolem suscipiendam. Cum ergo innotuit ei Saram sterilem esse, deseruit eam, non frangens coniugalem thorum, sed quia non utebatur ea ab illo praecise tempore quo Sara introduxit ei ancillam. Per quod datur intelligi, quod Ecclesia gentium deserta erat a Christo, quia nondum venerat Christus, et quod Ecclesia triumphans deserta erat ab hominibus, quibus ad eam nondum patebat accessus. Huius ergo desertae, scilicet Ecclesiae gentium, sunt multi filii, id est plures, magis quam eius, scilicet synagogae, quae habet virum, scilicet Moysen. I Reg. II, 5: sterilis peperit plurimos, et quae multos filios habebat, et cetera. Et hoc veniente sponso, scilicet Christo, a quo deserta erat, non dilectione, sed partu postposito.
4:28
Exposito mysterio quantum ad matres, hic exponit illud quantum ad filios. Et primo ponit filiorum distinctionem; secundo principalem conclusionem, ibi itaque, fratres mei, et cetera. Distinctionem autem filiorum ponit quantum ad tria. Primo quantum ad modum originis; secundo quantum ad affectum dilectionis, ibi sed quomodo tunc, etc.; tertio quantum ad ius haereditatis, ibi sed quid dicit Scriptura, et cetera. Modus autem originis quo aliqui nascuntur filii Abrahae est duplex: quidam origine carnali, sicut Ismael de ancilla; quidam autem non carnali origine, sicut Isaac de libera: non quod naturali opere natus non fuerit, sed quia sicut dictum est supra naturalem virtutem carnis fuit ut de vetula sterili filius nasceretur. Per hos autem filios intelligitur duplex populus. Nam per Ismaelem intelligitur populus Iudaeorum, qui carnali propagatione est ab Abraham derivatus. Per Isaac autem, populus gentium, qui per imitationem fidei ab Abraham descendit. Et ideo dicit nos autem, fratres, scilicet fideles, tam Iudaei, quam gentiles, secundum Isaac, id est, in similitudine Isaac, promissionis filii sumus facti Abrahae. Rom. IX, 8: qui sunt filii promissionis aestimantur in semine. Sed nota, quod filii carnis Abrahae ad litteram sunt Iudaei, mystice autem, qui propter carnalia et temporalia bona ad fidem veniunt. Secundum affectum autem distinguuntur, quia qui natus erat secundum carnem, persequebatur illum qui natus erat secundum spiritum. Sed hic est quaestio. Primo quia non legitur, quod Ismael persecutionem aliquam fecerit contra Isaac, sed quod tantum luserit cum eo. Gen. XXI, 9: cum vidisset Sara filium ancillae Agar ludentem, et cetera. Responsio. Dicendum est, quod apostolus illum ludum dicit persecutionem, quia ludus magni ad parvum est quaedam illusio, cum maior cum parvo ludens intendit eum decipere. Vel etiam, ut dicunt quidam, Ismael cogebat Isaac adorare imagines luteas quas faciebat. Per hoc autem docebat eum averti a cultu unius Dei, quod est magna persecutio, cum maius malum sit inferre mortem spiritualem, quam corporalem. Quod tamen ideo in Genesi appellatur ludus, quia sub specie ludi hoc faciebat.
4:29
Est etiam quaestio quomodo filii secundum carnem persecuti fuerint et persequantur filios secundum spiritum. Sed ad hoc est responsio, quia a principio primitivae Ecclesiae Iudaei persecuti sunt Christianos, ut patet in actibus apostolorum, et facerent etiam nunc si possent. Nunc etiam carnales persequuntur in Ecclesia spirituales viros, etiam corporaliter, illi scilicet qui quaerunt gloriam et temporalia lucra in Ecclesia. Unde dicitur in Glossa: omnes qui in Ecclesia terrenam facultatem quaerunt a domino, ad hunc Ismaelem pertinent. Ipsi sunt qui contradicunt spiritualibus proficientibus, et detrahunt illis, et habent labia iniqua et linguas dolosas et subdolosas. Spiritualiter autem persequuntur spirituales filios, superbi et hypocritae. Nam aliquando aliqui manifeste carnales et mali culpam suam recognoscentes, bonis se humiliant, fatui vero bonitatem, quam ipsi non habent, persequuntur in aliis. Est etiam quaestio, quia haeretici quos nos persequimur, dicunt se natos secundum spiritum, nos vero secundum carnem. Sed dicendum est, quod duplex est persecutio. Una bona, qua aliquis persequitur alium, ut reducat eum ad bonum, et hanc viri iusti faciunt malis et spirituales carnalibus, vel ut eos corrigant si converti volunt, vel si obstinati sunt in malo, destruant, ne gregem domini inficiant. Alia persecutio est mala, qua quis persequitur alium, ut pervertat ad malum, et hanc qui secundum carnem nati sunt, faciunt his, qui nati sunt secundum spiritum. Quantum vero ad ius haereditatis, distinguuntur per auctoritatem Scripturae, Gen.
4:30
XXI, 10: eiice ancillam et filium eius. In quo datur intelligi, quod Iudaei et persecutores fidei Christianae, et etiam carnales et mali Christiani eiicientur a regno caelesti. Matth. VIII, 11: multi venient ab oriente, et cetera. Apoc. XXII, 15: foris canes et venefici, et cetera. Ancilla etiam, id est malitia, et ipsum peccatum eiicietur. Eccli. XIV, 20: omne opus corruptibile in fine deficiet. Et ratio horum subditur, quia non erit haeres filius ancillae cum filio liberae. In mundo enim isto boni sunt malis permixti, et mali bonis. Cant. II, 2: sicut lilium inter spinas, et cetera. Sed in aeterna patria non erunt nisi boni. Iudic. XI, 2 dicitur ad Iephte: haeres in domo patris nostri esse non poteris, quia de adultera natus es. Quam quidem libertatem habemus a Christo.
4:31
Unde dicit qua libertate, et cetera. Io. VIII, 36: si filius vos liberaverit, vere liberi eritis.
4:1
1. Dico autem: quanto tempore haeres parvulus est; nihil differt a servo, cum sit Dominus omnium. Ex occasione ejus, quod postremum intulerat: secundum promissionem haeredes, novam assumit parabolam non dissimilem superiori, qua legem dixerat paedagogum Judaeorum fuisse ad Christum. Nunc enim eosdem Judaeos, id est, eos, qui sub lege sunt, puero haeredi comparat, ipsam vero legem tutoribus et actoribus, quorum curae subjicitur puer, donec ad haereditatem introducatur. Sensus: Quod dico, tale est, quamdiu haeres pupillus in minori adhuc aetate constitutus est, nulla re differt a servo, quantum ad vitao rationem attinet; quia perinde ut servus alieno regitur arbitrio, nec liberum usum habet bonorum a patre relictorum, quamvis haereditatis jure ac voluntate paterna eorum omnium sit dominus. Illud: nihil 10.-12. differt a servo, potest etiam verti: Nulla re antecellit servo. Sicut Heb. 1. Quanto differentius, id est, excellentius, prae illis nomen haereditavit.
4:2
2. Sed sub tutoribus et actoribus est usque ad praefinitum tempus a patre. Hoc est, sed sub curatoribus et dispensatoribus, graece oeconomis, agit, quorum arbitrio tum ipse, tum bona ejus haereditaria reguntur et administrantur; donec tempus testamento praefinitum a patre aut alioqui legibus decretum advenerit, quo jam ipse suarum rerum curam et administratiorem suscipiat, jamque re ipsa appareat, quantum a servo differat.
4:3
3. Ita et nos, cum essemus parvuli, sub elementis mundi eramus servientes. Graece: Sub elementa mundi eramus in servitutem adacti. Ambrosianus, eramus subjecti. Cum ait, nos, in persona Judaeorum, qui sub lege fuerant, loqui se significat; in qua et superius locutus fuerat, ubi Judaeorum statum sub lege, tanquam paedagogo exponebat: nam quae media sunt ab illo loco: Omnes enim filii Dei estis, ad Galatas, qui sub lege nunquam fuerant, in secunda persona dicuntur. Est autem hujusmodi accommodatio parabolae: ita et nos Judaei, cum tanquam adhuc parvuli, ad percipiendam promissae benedictionis haereditatem, quae nobis ex praedestinatione Dei competebat, nondum essemus idonei; sub elementis mundi, id est, sub corporalibus signis et carnalibus ceremoniis legis Mosaicae eramus velut quadam servitute pressi. Parvulos sive pueros vocat Judaeos, quia tam intellectu quam affectu similes erant pueris; nam de Deo et rebus divinis, ac nominatim de justitia hominis apud Deum, carnaliter sapiebant Rebus quoque sensibilibus, quibus pueri delectantur, addicti erant. Eosdem servos sub lege fuisse dicit, tum propter onus legis ceremonialis eis impositum, quod, inquit Petrus Act. 15., neque patres nostri, neque nos portare potuimus: tum quia signis ita adhaerebant, ut ea pro rebus amplecterentur, significationem eorum non intelligentes: imo ne hoc quidem scientes, ea signa esse. Sic autem signis adhaerere, servorum est, teste Augustino. Tum denique propter timorem servilem, quo continebantur aliquatenus in officio. Acceperant enim spiritum servitutis in timore: nondum autem spiritum adoptionis filiorum, in quo clamarent Abba, Pater, ut de eis dici posset, si filii, et haeredes, Rom. 8. Purro quae vocet Apostolus elementa mundi, variant sententiae. Quidam physica quatuor elementa, ex quibus mixta corpora gignuntur, intelKgi putant. Alii solem et lunam accipiunt, quod haec duo luminaria motibus suis eas res nobis etBciant, quas paulo inferius a Galatis observatas Apostolus reprehendit, id est, dies et menses, tempora et annos, ut UcT&vufjUxtwg ex causa effectusintelligatur. Quod etsi probabilitatem nonnullam habeat: rectius tamen illi, qui ex aliis locis ejusdem Apostoli colligunt, quid elementorum nomine significetur. Ea loca sunt Col. 2., ubi semel et iterum ab elementis mundi Colossenses revocat, et Heb. 5., ubi rudimenta Christianae fidei vocat elementa exordii sermonum Dei. Unde satis apparet, Apostolo elementa dici in genere rudimenta, sive initia doctrinae alicujus, praesertim ad religionem pertinentis, seu veram seu falsam. Nam de vera religione sermo est ad Hebr., de falsa ad Coloss. Tametsi nomen elementi metaphorice huc esse translatum a primis illis corporibus, quae usitatissime elementa vocantur, haud negaverim. Sed notandum, quod tam hoc loco, quam ad Coloss., non nude nominavit elementa, sicut ad Heb., sed elementa mundi. Siquidem elementa mundi videntur intelligi rudimenta mundana, id est, crassa, corporea, sensibilia. Nam mundus pro rerum universo, qua parte corporoum et sensibile est, saepenumero ponitur in Scriptaris. At hujusmodi elementa non sunt illa, de quibus ad Heb., utpote pertinentia ad Christianam religionem; sed ea, de quibus ad Coloss. et hoc loco. Quapropter elementa mundi, secundum materiam praesentem, interpretati sumus corporalia signa et carnales ceremonias Mosaicae legis. Quod confirmari potest ex v. 5. hujus cap., ubi dicitui: eos, qui sub lege erant. Vide etiam ad Hebr. cap. 9. v. 9. et 10. Videri autem potest, Apostolum alludere ad pueros elementarios, qui serviliter compelluntur addiscere elementa, literas scilicet ac rudimenta literaturae, nescientes, quid ex iis sit proventurum utilitatis.
4:4
4. At ubi venit plenitudo temporis, misit Deus Filium suum. Graece emisit. Pergit in applicatione similitudinis assumptae. Nam sicut puer haeres expleto tempore, quod erat a Patre praefinitum, liberatur ab illa servitutis specie, qua tutoribus et actoribus subjectus erat et ad liberum usum atque administrationem haereditatis admittitur; ita et nos, inquit, ubi venit plenitudo temporis, id est, ubi tempus impletum est, quod erat a Deo Patre praeordinatum, liberamur a servitute legis et haereditatem filiis promissam accipimus. Ad hoc enim emisit Deus in terram Filium suum unigenitum, sibi consubstantialem.
Factum ex muliere. De Eva legimus, quod facta sit ex viro, quia nimirum de ejus substantia facta atque formata fuit. Ita Filius Dei factus ex muliere; quia de mulieris substantia carnem accepit. Et sicut Eva ex viro solo, ita Christus ex muliere sola. Non tamen Adam pater Evae, sicut Maria mater Christi, quia non per viam generationis ac nativitatis Eva facta ex viro, sicut Christus ex muliere. Et tamen factum ex muliere dicere maluit Apostolus, quam natum, quomodo nonnulli legendum putarunt, referente Beda super Evangelio Luc. 11. ad illud: Beatus venter, qui te portavit, ut significaret, non communi more nascentium, sed operatione Spiritus sancti, absque virili semine conceptum atque formatum fuisse. Porro mulieris nomine, secundum morem Hebraicae linguae non virgineum decus negatur, sed femineus sexas ostenditur, ait Augustiuusserm. 19. detempore. Ex hoc loco facile est refellere tam veteres haereticos, qui Christum non ex substantia Mariae virginis, sed aliunde carnem assumsisse dixerunt; quam impium Nestorium, qui eandem virginem non Dei, aut Filii Dei matrem, sed hominis tantum, aut Christi voluit appellari.
Factum sub lege. Oraece sub legem, id est, legi subjectum. Sed quaeritur utrum sub lege factus, quia legem observavit, an quia revera legi obnoxius, sicut habetErasmiana versio, hoc est, ad legem observandam obligatus. Respondetur, Filium Dei sub lege factum esse non obligatione, sed observatione. Voluit enim circumcidi et caetera omnia, quae legis sunt, subire, ut et humilitatis exemplum nobis praeberet, et populo, in quo nasci dignatus est, quoad instituta divina conformem se redderet legemque paternam honoraret. Denique,.ut legalis servitutis similitudinem in carne sua gerens, eos qui sub lege erant, uti mox dicitur, redimeret, quamvis alioqui nullo praecepto ad eam observandam obligatus. Quod ipse in Evangelio significavit, quando dixit Dominum esse filium hominis, etiam sabbati. Matth. 12. Sic Ambrosius lib. 1. de fide cap. 6. factum sub lege interpretatur per observantiam legis. At dices, Christum accepisse mandatum a patre non tantum, ut nasceretur, pateretur, moreretur; sedetiam,utcircumcideretur et alia, quae legis sunt, observaret. Respondeo, Dei Patris ad Filium non esse proprie mandatum seu praeceptum; hoc enim in Deum, cui semper summa libertas est agendi vel non agendi quidlibet, cadere non poteit, sed est Patris ad Filium decretum aeternum, idque Patri cum Filio et Spiritu sancto commune. Quod tamen interdum praeceptum vocatur Patris ad Filium, qui et obediens Patrifactus diciturusque ad mortem, Phil. 2., quia illius decreti in Patre est auctoritas. Est enim Pater principium Filii. In Filio autem, ut homine, ejusdem decreti facta est executio. Quod si contendas, Filio, ut homini, proprie datum a Patre praeceptum, fatebimur Christum hominem, ut sanctae Trinitatis servus fuit, ita etiam a seipso tanquam Deo et a Spiritu sancto idem praeceptum ei datum esse, et proinde fuisse obedientem non Patri tantum, verum et Spiritui sancto et sibi ipsi. Nec ideo tamen lege fuit ligatus Mosaica; sed peculiari Patris praecepto. Factus igitur est sub lege Filius Dei voluntaria subjectione; q uomodo et parentibus suis subditus fuisse legitur Luc. 2. Facit autem hic locus adversus eos, qui Christum dicunt aliquando revera legem solvisse violando sabbatum, aut similia contra legem opera faciendo. Quorum opinionem latius ex Scripturis refutare, non est hujus loci.
4:5
5. Ut eos, qui sub lege erant, redimeret. Id est, dato pretio eximeret a servitute legis, suosque faceret. Id enim significat graeca vox eSayopaCstv, qua peculiariter hoc loco Paulus utitur, id est, mercari rem, quae alterius erat; pretii commutatione suam facere, sibique vendicare. Lucrifacere legit Ambrosius super Luc. 2., licet hoc verbum non adeo quadret. Caeterum in Graeco non mutatur persona, nam verti potest: ut sub lege existentes, id est, nos Judaeos, qui sub lege eramus, redimeret, quoniam et sequens membrum primam habet personam. Notanda congruentia, Christum factum sub lege, ut eos, qui sub lege erant, redimeret, licet aliter Christus sub lege, aliter illi, quemadmodum patet ex supra dictis. ZJt adoptionem filiorum reciperemus. Nos Judaei. Hucusque enim ex persona Judaeorum loquitur. Est autem haec pars referenda ad illud: Misit Deus Filium suum factum ex muliere. Nam sensus est: Idcirco FiliumDei factum esse filium hominis, id est, nostrae naturae participem ex femina; ut nos homines efficeremur per adoptionem filii Dei, utque haereditatem, adoptionis jure debitam, consequeremur. Hunc Apostoli locum male intellexerunt, qui ex eo probare conati sunt, justos veteris testamenti non fuisse participes adoptionis Christi, nec potuisse vocari filios Dei per adoptionem; contra illud Heb. 2. Qui multos filios in gloriam adduxerat. Nam simili argumento negabunt, eosjustos fuisse etlegem implevisse; cum scriptum sit, Deum misisse FiNum suum, ut justificatio legis impleretur in nobis. Rom. 8. Respondetur ergo, virtutem passionis Christi, qui in plenitudine temporis missus est, pertinuisse etiam ad tempora praecedentia; licet amplior et copiosior ab ea fructus post passionem illius et resurrectionem, Evangelio per orbem praedicato manaverit.
4:6
6. Quoniam autem estis filii, misit Deus Spiritum Filii sui in corda vestra clamantem: Abba, Pater. Graece emisit. Quomodo superius, posteaquam ostendisset, legem fuisse paedagogum Judaeorum in Christo, ad Galatas reflectit sermonem dicens: Omnes enim filii Dei titis etc.; ita et hic, eademque ratione, post applicatam Judaeis parabolam de parvulo haerede, mutata persona prima in secundam. Galatas gentiles alloquitur, occupans, quod ab illis dici poterat: Si Judaeis eo gradu contigit filiorum adoptio, ut prius sub lege essent tanquam sub tu-,tore; et, si Christus sub lege factus est, ut eos, qui sub lege erant, redimeret: debemus et nos prius esse sub lege, ut per Christum redimamur et filiorum adoptionem accipiamus. Ad hoc respondet: vos Galatae jam non indigetis legis tutela; quandoquidem eetis filii, non sicut haeres parvulus nihil differens a servo, sed in statu libertatis filiorum constituti. Quod autem tales filii sitis, inde liquet, quia misit Deus in corda vestra Spiritum Filii sui, clamantem, id est, in quo clamatis, Abba, Pater. Sic enim hic locus per alterum similem Rem. 8. exponendus est. Probat, Galatas jam esse filios Dei testimonio Spiritus sancti; quod nimirum impulsi a Spiritu Filii Dei magno cordis affectu in orationibus suis Deum patrem appellarent dicentes: Abba, Pater; vocabulo ex duabus linguis geminato. Verisimile est enim, gentiles Christianosutrumque vocabulum orando conjungere solitos. Quod autem Graeci quidam codices, astipulante etiam Ambrosiano, legunt in corda nostra, quasi Judaeos una cum gentilibus hic comprehendere voluerit Apostolus, non probamus; nam et illud praecedens: Quoniam estis filii; et ea, quae demceps sequuntur, secundam personam exigunt; et omnia Latina manuscripta in hanc eandem conspirant lectionem. Nonnulli sic exponunt: Quoniam divina praedestinatione eratis filii; ideo nunc in plenitudine temporis dedit Deus in cordibus vestris Spiritum, per quem ut filii ipsum invocaretis, dicentes: Abba, Pater. Sed hunc commentarium plane refugit praesentis temporis verbum estis. Porro cum dicit, Spiritum Filii sui, significat Spiritum sanctum non a Patre solo, sed etiam a Filio procedere. Non enim Spiritas Filii dici potest nisi spirantis, et ut Theologi loquuntur, principiantis. Apposite vero Filii mentionem adjunxit, ut filiorum adoptionem in naturalem Dei Filium referret. Denique in his Apostoli verbis observa sanctae Trinitatis, id est, trium in Deo personarum expressam significationem: simul et processionis earum, id est, Filii ex Patre et Spiritus sancti ex utroque, non obscuram insinuationem.
4:7
7. Itaque jam non est servus, sed filius. Est, Graece et Syriace es} in secunda persona, consentientibus etiaio Latinis quibusdam; eaque lectio probabilior. Adhuc enim Galatas alloquitur, sed numero, propter emphasim, mutato in singularem. Tu igitur, inquit, quisquis es, qui per Spiritum Filii Dei clamas ad Deum, Abba, Pater; non amplius jam servus es ab haereditate alienus; sed, vel ipsius Spiritus sancti testimonio, filius.
Quod si filius, et haeres per Deum. Graece et Syriace, haeres Dei per Christum. Similiter Hieronymus, nisi quod genitivum Dei non apponat. Sequela autem manifestaj est. Quod si filius es, quamvis adoptivus; igitur et haeres illius, cujus es filius, scilicet Dei, per meritum Christi Filii ejus naturalis. Dubium enim non est, ait Ambrcsianus, quin ideo quis adoptet sibi filium, ut haeredem illum relinquat. Haec autem haereditas non post mortem patris exspectatur, sed vivente patre accipitur et simul cum eo, bonorum ejus participatione, possidetur, partim quidem inpraesenti vita secundum varia Spiritus sancti dona, quae sunt instar arrhabonis; plenissime vero iu vita futura.
4:8
8. Sed tunc quidtm ignorantes Deum iis, qui natura non sunt dii, serviebatis. Dixerat Paulus, jam non es servus • per quod insinuabat, Galatas aliquando servos fuisse. At quomodo servo3, dicere poterant illi, si nunquam sub lege fuimus servientes, sicut Judaei; et nunc ab illa servitute nos prohibes? Respondet Apostolus, omnino eos servos fuisse, sed alio quodam genere servitutis, eoque longe deteriori. Sed tunc quidem, inquit, id est, priusquam essetis filii, non ut Judaei Deum serviliter colebatis, sed Deum verum ignorantes serviebatis iis, qui naturaliter dii non sunt, et in quibus non est veritas divinae naturae; sed hominum opinione atque institutione pro diis habentur.
4:9
9. Nunc autem, cum cognoveritis Deum, imo cogniti sitis a Deo. Graece, magis autem cogniti; quemadmodum et Hieron. legit: sed sensum optime reddidit interpres noster. Nam magis hoc loco non tam comparantis est, quam corrigentis. Qua correctione praevenientem Dei gratiam commendare voluit Apostolus, quasi dicat: Xunc autem, posteaquam ab illa ignorantia conversi, Deum cognovistis, imo vero cogniti, atque dilecti a Deo, id est, per ejus dilectionem attracti ad eum cognoscendum. Juxta illud 1 Joan. 4.: Non quasi nos dilexerimus Deum, sed quoniam ipse dilexit \nos. Igitur cognitio, sive dilectio, cum effectu intelligitur; cum ipsa alioqui sit ab aeterno. Unde bene Theophylactus sic exponit cogniti, id est, assumpti. Vide Com-
Quomodo convertimini iterum ad infirma et egena elementa, quibus denuo servire vultis? Graece pro denuo duae dictiones sunt, iterum ab initio, seu de integro. Cum, inquit, Deus jam vos dignatus sit sui cognitione, qua a servitute falsurum Deorum vos avocavit, insuper et fitios suos fecerit, sicut supra dictum est; quomodo vultis iterum in servitutem relabi? Quomodo iterum vos convertitis ad infirma et egena elementa, ut de novo, quasi nullam antea servitutem passi, sub illis servire velitis? Volebant enim Galatae denuo servire elementis mundi et ad ^a iterum convertebantur non eadem numero vel specie, sed genere. Qui enim servierant idolis, servire volebant sub signis ac ceremoniis Judaicae legis. Haec enim per ea, quae dicit elementa, significari, patet ex verbis proxime sequentibus: dies observatis etc. Vocat autem illa Apostolus infirma et egena elementa, non tantum quia post Christi passionem viribus destituta sunt, quomodo quidam hunc locum exponunt; sed quia omnia illa veteris legis instituta, sive sacramenta, sive sacrificia, sive quocunque alio nomine censeantur, quatenus ad illam legem pertinebant, nihil conferebant ad justitiam et salutem vitae aeternae. Unde ait Heb. 7. Reprobatio quidem fit praecedentis mandati, propter infirmitatem ejus et inutilitatem: nihil enim ad perfectum adduxit lex. Et cap. 10. TJmbram habens lex futurorum bonorum, non ipsam imaginem rerum, nunquam potest accedentes perfectos facere. Et iterum: Impossibile enim est, sanguine taurorum et hircorum auferri peccata. Nec mirum, quia, si per legem justitia, sicut dictum est superius, gratis Christus mortuus est. Si qui tamen, veteri lege durante, sacramentis ejus et sacrificiis utebantur ex fide Mediatoris, gratiam per ea consequebantur, non ut erant veteris legis instituta carnali populo tradita, sed quatenus eis accidebat, ut cum ejusmodi fidei devotione, quae ad novam legem pertinet, exercerentur. Dici etiam potest, quod erant infirma et egena elementa Judaeis carnalibus, qui ex illis exspectabant justitiam; non spiritualibus, qui illis bene utebantur. Erant infirma et egena iis, qui illis plus tribuebant, quam ipsis competebat: simpliciter autem non erant hujusmodi; quia valebant adid, ad quod erant instituta. Verum ea de re peculiaris est tractatio in 4. Sent. dist. 1. Caeterum ex hoc loco apparet, etiam idola et idololatrici cultus ceremonias elementorum mundi nomine comprehendi: dicens enim Apostolus, iterum convertimini ad elementa, significare videtur, et illa priora, quibus servierant Galatae, elementa fuisse, quamvis Judaicis elementis dissimilia. Haec enim infirma dumtaxat et egena, illa vero etiam perniciosa: et haec aliquando licita; illa perpetuo mala. Forsitan autem cuipiam videatur hic esse sensus: quibus elementis vos gentiles servire vultis, sicut Judaei 'hactenus servierunt, ut iteratio intelligatur in facto simili, non in personis iisdem. Sicut enim Judaei sub jugo legalium servierant; ita Galatae, male ab illis persuasi, sub eodem jugo servire volebant. Forte etiam quispiam referat hanc iterationem ad Judaeos fideles, qui erant inter Galatas. Nam et in Galaticam regionem dispersos fuisse Judaeos, constat ex 1. epist. Petri cap. 1. Electis advenis dispersionis Ponti, Galatiae etc. Verum ex textu manifestum est, Paulum eos compellare, qui dudum idolis servierant, iis, inquam, qui natura non sunt dii: eosdemque reprehendere, quod iterum converterentur ad infirma et egena elementa. Quocirca retinenda est expositio, quam primo dedimus, ut menti et contextui Apostolico magis apposita.
4:10
10. Dies observatis, et menses, et tempora, et annos. Partibus explicat, quod in genere dixerat, eos iterum converti ad infirma et egena elementa. Locum hunc Ambrosianus accipit de superstitiosis observationibus dierum ac temporum; dum ea fausta vel infausta putantur. Quem errorem a gentilitate ad Christianos permanasse, saepe queritur Augustinus; qui etiameodem sensu verba haec accepit Ench. cap. 79. Sed et in commentario sensum hunc adfert priore loco. Verum mox alteram praefert, quo de Judaicis observationibus exponitur, utpote scopo totius epistolae congruentem. Quae eadem expositio est Hieronymi, Chrysostomi, Theophylacti et aliorum. Dies ergo, quos observabant Galatae a pseudapostolis edocti, erant, verbi gratia, sabbatum, neomenia, scenopegia, caeteraeque solemnitates Judaicae. Menses, ut primus et septimus festorum causa celebriores. Tempora, quale est, ait Hieron., ter per annos singulos Hierosolymam venire. Anni denique, ut septimus annus remissionis et quinquagesimus jubilaoi. Ex his porro liquet, quam prave detorqueant hanc Apostoli sententiam haeretici adVeprehensioneraejus consuetudinis, qua certjs quosdam dies festos ^annua celebritate recurrentes, et certa jejuniorum tempora, ex Ecclesiae praecepto fidelesobservant. Baecenim ecclesiastica dierum ac temporum observatio neque ad superstitionem gentilium pertinet, neque ad legem a Christo abrogatam, sed ex Apostolica traditione descendit. Et quidem quod ad natalitia martyrum, aliorumque sanctorum cum Christo regnantium attinet, instituta sunt ea propter tres potissimum causas, quas Augustinus lib. 20. contra Faustum Man. cap. 21. breviter complexus est his verbis: Populus Christianus memorias martyrum religiosa solemnitate concelebrat, et ad excitandam imitationem, et ut meritis eorum consocietur, atque orationibus adjuvetur. Quod si omnis dierum observatio damnanda esset; neque ad iter agendum, neque ad serendum et metendum, et ad alia hujusmodi, commodos ct opportunos dies exspectare liceret. Abolendus quoque esset dies Dominicus, cujus observationem Apostolicam esse constat ex Scriptura: quod tamen nec adversarii dicere aut factre audent, apud quos usque nunc ille dies est in observatione. Sed quid multa? cum Hieronymus jam olim isti haereticorum calumniae prudenter obviaverit in hujus loci commentario.
4:11
11. Timeo vos, ne forte sine causa laboraverim in vobis. Graece: Ne quo modo frustra laboraverim in vos, sive erga vos. Tametsi recte noster interpres vertit, ne forle; nam Hieronymus et Graeci particulam hanc urgent, tanquam sit dubitantis et spem correctionis adhuc relinquentis. Timeo vos, dictum pro eo, quod Latine diceretur, timeo vobis aut de vobis. Non enim Galatas timebat Apostolus, sed declarat suam pro cis solicitudinem, metuens, nc inanem sumserit operam ac laborem in eorum conversione. Frustrancus enim redditur erga eos labor praedicationis, qui in fide suscepta non perseverant, sed ad vomitum redeunt. Melius est enim non cognoscere viam justitiae, quam post agniHonem retrortum converti. 2 Petr. 2.
4:12
12. Estote sicut ego, quia et ego sicut vos. Dupliciter hoc exponi potest: uno modo, Judaicas observationes meo exemplo abjicite, neque legem servitutis patiamini vobis imponi; nam et ego me vestrae infirmitati accommodavi, ut vos Christo lucrifacerem. Aliter: Estote in eadem mecum sententia et veritate doctrinae; nam et ego aliquando in eodem errore versatus sum, in quo vos modo versamini; quem moneo ut exemplo meo deseratis. Hic sensus Graecorum est interpretum, sed prior magis est germanus. Congruit cum eo, quod alibi dicit: Factus sum infirmis infirmus, utinfirmos lucrifacerem. Omnibus omnia factus sum, ut omnes facerem salvos. 1 Cor. 9.
Fratres obsecro vos. Referendum hoc esse ad superiora, Hieronymus admonet; nam cum sequentibus minus apte cohaeret. Fratres, inquit, rogo vos et obsecro, nt quemadmodum dixi, faciatis. Videmus Apostolum tentare omnemviam rnvocandi GaJatas ab errore. Hactenus enim argumentis et rationibus eos pressit, interdum increpationes admiscuit; nunc precatur et obsecrat. Sic enim episcopo et doctori facieudnm esse praecipit 2 Tim. 4. Argue, obsecra, increpa, in omni patientia et doctrina.
Nihil me laesistis. Planius ex Graeco, nulla me injuria afFecistis. Quod, inquit, in superioribus vos durius increpavi, non feci contumeliose tanquam injuria lacessitus, ut iracundi solent; sed amore ac studio vestrae salutis. Nam quod ad vos et factum vestrum attinet, nulla in re laesus sum a vobis; quin potius beneficiis apud vos affectus sum. Cum non sine injuria tanti Apcstoli doctrinam ejus Galatae tam cito deseruissent: negat tamen se laesum ab illis, vel quia defuit animus laedendi, vel quia magis in Christum erat haec injuria, quam in Paulum; vel certs, quia de tempore, quo apud Galatas fuerat conversatus, loquitur. Quem sensum probabilem faciunt ea, quae sequuntur.
4:13
13. Scitis autem, quia per infirmitatem carnis evangelizavi vobis jam pridem. Infirmitatem carnis nonnulli morbum corporis interpretantur, ut sensus sit: Cum apud vos agerem et Evangelium vobis praedicarem, vidistis me hominem corpore infirmum et morbo afflictatum. Addunt, referente Hieronymo, Paulum saepe gravissimo capitis dolore vexatum; et hunc fuisse angelum Satanae datum ei, ut ipsum colaphizaret; et de hac infir mitate nunc Apostolum loqui. Verum magis placet posterior ejusdem Hieronymi, quae et aliorum fere omnium est, expositio, qua per camis infirmitatem generaliter intelligunt adversitates et afflictiones homini exterius illatas; ut contumelias, verbera, persecutiones, carceres; et hujusmodi malorum pericula, quae infirmitatum nomine ab Apostolo significari in 2 Cor. 11. et 12. satis ostendimus. Potest etiam, et quidem probabilius, ni fallor, intelligi illa infirmitas, de qua dicit cap. 10. ejusdem Epistolae: Praesentia corporis infirma et sermo contemptibilis. Quo loco non persecutiones aut pericula, sed humilitatem corporalis suae praesentiae vuluit significare; quemadmodum et 1 Cor. 2. dicens: Et ego in infirmitate, et timore, et tremore multo, fui apud vos. Juxta hunc sensum accipi poterit haec pars ut probatio ejus, quod dixit: Ego sicut vos; quasi diceret, ut me vobis accommodarem, magna cum humilitate, velut homo abjectus, Evangelium vobis praedicavi, jampridem: pro quo Graece to 7tpOT£pov, prius, id est, dudum ac superiori tempore.
4:14
14. Et tentationem vestram in carne mea non sprevistis, neque respuistis. Graece: Et tentationem meam, quae in carne mea etc. Latina quoque nonnulla meam habent. At vero nostrae lectioni favent pleraque ouraia Manuscripta, necnon omnes Latini commentatores, qui vestram legunt et exponunt. Dixit autem interpres tentationem vestram pro tentatione vestri, id est, ea, qua vos ex infirmitate mea tentabamini aut certe tentari poteratis. Quod igitur Apostolus hac et praecedenti parte dicit, tale est: non solum me non laesistis, verum etiam benevolentiam mihi magnam ostendistis. Cum enim vobis dudum inter medias, ut scitis, persecutiones et pericula, vel in corpore infirmo et contemptibili, praesens Evangelium praedicarem; non tamen estis passi offendiculum in illa carnis meae infirmitate, neque eam aversati estis, nec per eam ad mei contemptum aut ad respuendum Evangelium adducti; sed sicut angelum Dei etc. Magna laus est, virtutem in vase fragili nun contemnere: unde et Christus ait Matth. 11. Beatus, qui non fuerit scandalizatus in me, id est, quem non oflenderit humilitas carnis meae, quo minus agnoscat et credat, quis et quantus ego sim. Porro Graeca lectio potest hunc habere sensum, et tentationem meam, quae erat in carne mea, id est, persecutiones et verbera, quae in corpore meo passus sum, non estis aspernati; non illa vos offenderunt, ut propter illa minoris me faceretis. Et haec Graecorum expositio est. Constat autem, tentationem in Scripturis interdum significare afRictionem, ut Jac. 1. Omne gaudium existimate, cum in varias tentationes incideritis. Et Luc. 22. Vos estis, qui permansistis mecum in tentationibus meis.
Sed sicut angelum Dei excepistis me, sicut Christum Jesum. Id est, nihil offensi illa carnis meae infirmitate, tanti me fecistis, et tanto cum honure me suscepistis, ut si angelum caelitus a Deo missum, in quo carnis infirmitas locum non habet, susciperetis: quodque amplius est, suscepistis me, sicut Christum Jesum; quia considerastis in me non humilitatem meae personae, sed dignitatem ejus, cujus sum minister et Apostolus. Bene dicit, sicut angelum Dei, quia Paulus vere angelus, id est, nuntius Dei erat.
4:15
15. Ubi est ergo beatitudo vestra? Graece: Quae igitur beatificatio vestra? Sed annotat Oecumenius, Ttg, id est, quae pro ubi positum esse. Illud vero: beatitudo, seu beatificatio vestra, potest vel active vel passive intelligi. Active quidem, ut sensus sit: Ubi nunc plausus illi et verba, quibus me beatum appellabatis? quasi dicat: Nunc videmini longe aliter de me sentire; quandoquidem ab Evangelio, quod vobis praedicavi, recessistis. Passive, hocmodo: Tanta cum tenevolentia et honore me vobis evangelizantem excepistis, ut ego vos prae multis aliis beatos praedicarem; at nunc cogor vos stultos et insensatos vocare. Hunc sensum Hieron. et Graeci tradunt; tametsi prior, quem Theophyl. etiam attingit, aptius convenit cum iis, quae proxime praecedunt et sequuntur.
Testimonium enim perhibeo vobis, quia si fieri posset, oculos vestros eruissetis et dedissetis mihi. Hyperbole est, qua Galatarum ingentem erga se affectum significat. Eam Graeci usitatiori schemate sic explicant: habebatis me cariorem oculis vestris; id est: Eram vobis carissimus. Temperat autem sermonis excessum Apostolus, dum addit, si fieri posset3 id est, si natura permitteret.
4:16
16. Ergo inimicus vobis factus sum, verum dicens vobis? Pro vobis priori loco graece: vester. Sensus: Ergone propterea me pro inimico habere coepistis, quod veritatem vobis dixerim? Hinc apparet, Galatas a pseudapostolis, qui Paulum oderant, male persuasos, priorem illum affectum erga suum Apostolum remisisse atque adeo coepisse nonnihil in contrarium flecti, quod hic vocat inimicitiam. Quaeres, an Apostolus non ab initio veritatem dixerit Galatis; ut nunc queratur, se ex amico factum illis inimicum, postquam veritatem dicere coepit. Respondeo, non omnia Christianae religio nis statim principio fuisse tradenda, sed quaedam in tempus opportunum differenda fuisse; quale illud de legis et ceremoniarum abrogatione. Nam hujus rei mentione, in primis fidei rudimentis, apud Galatas ac caeteros gentiles opus non erat; eo quod legem non accepissent. Sed posteaquam etiam usque ad Galatas penetrarant Judaei, qui dicerent: Nisi circumcidamini, non potestis salvari Act. 15., necesse fuit Apostolo, de ea re veram et apertam doctrinam proferre.
4:17
17. Aemulantur vos non bene: sed excludere vos volunt, ut illos aemulemini. De pseudapostolis suppresso nomine loquitur, et sensus est: Illi, per quos inimicus vobis factus sum, vos ambiunt, tanquam vestrae salutis admodum cupidi; caeterum, id faciunt non bene, vel quia zelus eorum non est secundum scientiam, vel quia zelum ac studium vestri magis simulant quam habent, ut qui revera vos excludere velint a libertate evangelica, et servituti legis subjicere; quo sic vos habeant discipulos et imitatores, sibi tanquam magistris addictos et suae gloriae studiosos. Non aliud enim illi quam gloriam quaerunt ab hominibus. Congruit huic loco testimonium Salvatoris de studio Judaeorum, proselytos ex gentilibus facere quaerertium. Vae vobis, inquit, Scribae et Pharisaei hypocritae, quia circuitis mare et aridam, ut faciatis unum proselytum; et cum fuerit factus, facitis eum filium gehennae, duplo quam vos, Matth. 23. Monet Erasmus, in quibusdam Graecis exemplaribus haberi includere; est autem npud Graecos quam minima differentia inter Ix/.XsTaai excludere, et lyxAsloai includere. Hoc modo si legamus, sensus erit: Sed concludere vos volunt et captivoshabere, ferarum more, quae caveis includuntur, id est, in servitutem redigere vos conantur, et suos facere, vosque pro libito velut sibi obnoxios tractare. Sic enim pseudapostolos cum Corinthiis egisse, testantur illa Apostoli ad eos verba: Sustinetis enim, si quis vos in servitutem redigit, si quis devorat, si quis accipit, si quis extollitur, si quis in faciem vos caedit. 2 Cor. 11.
4:18
18. Bonum autem aemulamini in bono semper: et non tantum cum praesens sum apud vos. Graece: bonum autem, supple est, aemulari in bono semper etc. Quomodo et Augustinus legit. Vindicat hanc lectionem articulus ~b, qui verbo praepositus non sinit aliter legi, quam aemulari modo infinitivo; quamvis alioqui C^AoDo^a'. et Cy>ojo{>s facile potuerint commutari. Nostra lectio, quae etiam apud Hieronymum est, potest hunc habere sensum: Ego vero vos moneo, non ut illos aemulemini, sed ut bonum quemque in re bona et honesta aemulemini, hoc est, imitandum vobis proponatis; etiam cum absens sum a vobis. Quasi tacite dicat: me, qui bonam vobis doctrinam tradidi, non solum praesentem, verum etiam absentem aemulari debuistis. QuanquamHieronymusbonum non de persona, sed de rebus exponit; sensu coactiori; tanquam dicas, ea quae bona sunt aemulamini in bono. Laborat eodem incommodo textus Ambrosianus, qui sic habet: aemulamini autem meliora dona in bono semper. Quae lectio alludit ad illud 1 Cor. 12. Aemulamini autem charismata meliora. Verum hic non de charismatum, sed personarum aemulatione, id est, imitatione aut studio agitur. Porro Graeca lectio contextv.i Apostolico melius quadrat et planum habet sensum hujusmodi: Illi volunt, ut ipsos aemulemini; atqui bonum est et laudabile, ut aemulemini magistros vestros; qualis ego inprimis sum, id enim intelligi vult; nec in quibuscunque, sed tantum in re bona; idque semper, id est, constanter et non solum me vobis praesente. Qua postrema parte latenter accusat Galatas, quod ipso absente defecissent ab ejus doctrina, quem praesentem tantis honoribus affecerant.
4:19
19. FilioHmei, quos iterumparturio, donec formetur Christus in vobis. Pathopoeia est, qua tanquam materno loquitur affectu. Parturio, Graece u>8ivu), quo verbo dolor parturientis exprimitur. Potest autem sententia tam ad superiora, quam ad sequentia coaptari. Sensus est: Semel vos Christo peperi, quando ad fidem Christi perduxi, eaque ratione filioli mei estis generatione spirituali. Sed quoniam a veritate Evangelii vobis traditi tanquam a vita defecistis; nunc iterum V08 parturio, id est, magno nixu et labore conor ad Evangelii veritatem revocare; idque tantisper ago, donec Christus in vobis formetur, id est, donec perfectam Christi formam accipiatis, hoc est, rectam fidem de Christo, qua nimirum credatis, Christum vobis ad salutem sufficere, sine jegalium observatione. Non enim omnino a Christo recesserant, sed Christo legem, velut in subsidium, adjungere volebant. Nonnulli formam hanc de robore fidei interpretantur; minus recte: nam parturio non est ad robur, sed ad perfectionem. Hic autem nota, quod Christus est quodammodo forma hominis Christiani.
4:20
20. Vellem autem esseapudvosmodo, ei mutare vocem meam. Pergit affectus sui magnitudinem erga Galatas declarare. Utinam, inquit, vobis nunc adessem, ut coram, prout viderem vobis convenire, vocem meam mutare possem, id est, inflectere et accommodare sermonem meum conditioniaudientium; quod absens facere nequeo, tum quia viva vox magis aflicit, quam epistola, tum quia non video, quemadmodum sitis affecti, ut secundum hoc aptarem sermonem. Unde sequitur:
Quoniam confundor in vobis. Quod quidam sic exponunt: Quia pudore afficior propter vos, qui tam leviter recesseritis ab eo, quod ego vos docui. Hic «orninen* tarius est apud Augustinum, Ambiosiastrum, S. Thomam, caeterosque fere Latinos. Sed sciendum, pro verbo confundor, Graecis esse a7iopoDu.ai, id est, haereo et anceps sum animi. Quo verbo etiam alias utitur Apostolus, ut 2 Cor. 4., ubi nos habemus: Aporiamur, sed non destituimur, atque eo loco verbi Graeci significationem plenius expHcuimus. E-espondet ei Syriaca versio, quae habet stupefactus sum, attonitus et inops consilii de vobis, id est, quomodo vobiscum agere debeam. Quod res ipsa satis declarat; cum in hac epistola vertat se in omnem orationis formam.
4:21
21. Dicite mihi, qui sub lege vultis esse: legem non legistis? Graece: non auditis? Hieronymus et Augustinus: non audistis? quamvis apud Hieronymum q. 8. ad Algas. habetur legistis. Legem posteriori loco totum vetus testamentum intelligi putat Occuinenius, idque non male. Tota enim vetus Scriptura erat Judaeis pro lege. Confer Rom. 3. et 1 Cor. 14. Et certe, qua ratione histoiia Geneseos sine dubio hic nomine legis comprehenditur; eadem et reliqui libri sacri veteris testamenti possunt. Vide Hieronymum ad Algas q. 8., ubi ait, historiam quoque nomine legis interdum comprehendi; cujus hic est exemplum. Quare minus verisimile est, Apcstolum hic eo nomine solum Mosis Pentateuchum, ex quo testimonium profert, comprehendere voluisse. Nam quamvis Christus in Evangelio legem a Prophetis interdum distinguit, ut Matth. 5. 7. 11. et 22., tamen notum est, non solum historiam sa eram, sed Psalmos etiam et Prophetas interdum legis nomine comprehendi. Psalmos quidem, velut Joan. 15. Ut adimpleatur sermo, qui in lege eorum scriptus est, quia odio habuerunt me gratis. 68. Prophetas vero. ut 1 Cor. 14. In lege scriptum est, quoniam in aliis linguis et labiis aliis loquar populo huic; et nec sic exaudient me, dicit Dominus. Quod invenitur apud Jes. cap. 28. Post preces et blandimenta, quibus affectum movit Apostolus, nunc rursus argumentis urgere Galatas incipit. Argumentatur autem ex ipsa lege, id est, ex Scriptura, quae legem tradit, contra eos, qui sub lege esse volebant. Etenim lex ipsa docet, non esse bonum sub lege teneri. Jam quidem supra bis terve ex lege contra legis justitiam ratiocinatus est. Sed hic id ipsum facit alio modo, scilicet ex historia allegorice exposita.
4:22
22. Scriptum est enim: quoniam Abraham duos filios habuit; unum de ancilla et unum de libera. Scribitur hoc Gen. 16. et 21. Non est, inquit, sine mysterio, quod Scriptura narrat, Abraham duos suscepisse filios, Ismael et isaac; illum ex Hagar ancilla, id est, serva; hunc vero ex Sara libera. Fuerunt Abrahae et alii filii, quos post obitum Sarae genuit, ut legitur Gen. 25., sed illi ad praesentis rei mysterium non pertinent; unde nec de iis Scriptura narrationem longius prosequitur, contenta, generationem eorum prodidisse.
4:23
23. Sed qui de ancilla, secundum carnem natus est; qui autem de libera, per repromissionem. Ismael ex ancilla genitus secundum carnem natus dicitur, quia usitata lege naturae secundum insitam carni virtutem generandi natus est. Habet enim ordo naturae, ut ex juvencula possit quis non nimium senex filios procreare. Isaac vero ex libera genitus per promisaionem dicitur natus, quia supra naturae facultatem ejus generatio fuit; nimirum ex virtute divioitus et promissa et suppeditata; cum et Abrahae corpus esset emortuum et emortua vulva Sarae, quemadmodum dicitur ad Rom. 4.
4:24
24. Quae sunt per allegoriam dicta. Giaece est praesens participium aXkrflQpouusva. Allegoria est, quum ex eo, quod dicitur, aliud quiddam significatur. Unde Augustinus lib. 15. de Trin. cap. 9. dicit, quosdam Latinos interpretes ita vertisse, quae sunt aliud ex alio significantia. Sunt autem allegoriae duo genera: alterum in verbis, alterum in rebus. Quorum illud commune est Scripturae sacrae cum scriptoribus non sacris: est enim ea allegoria continua quaedamin verbis metaphora; qualis ia eo, quod paulo ante dixit Apostolus: Filioli mei, quos iterum parturio, donec formetur etc. Alterum vero genus est ei peculiare; ut quoties vera quidem secundum literalem sensum verborum narratur historia, vel quippiam aliud dicitur; sed in ea re, quae narratur aut dicitur, secretior quaedam latet altioris rei significatio. Ita vere quidem haec de duobus Abrahae filiis historia, sicuti narratur, contigit: sed illa res gesta ulteriorem habet alterius cujusdam rei significationem. Quod jam consequenter docet.
Haec enim sunt duo testamenta. Id est, in his, quae de duobus Abrahae filiis et eorum matribus Scriptura narrat, est significatio duorum testamentorum, veteris et novi. Graeca possunt accipi hoc modo. Hae, id est, hae duae feminae Hagar et Sara sunt duo testamenta per significationem, id est, sunt signa et figurae duorum testamentorum. Quem sensum subsequens declaratio probabilem facit.
Unum quidem a monte Sina, in servitutem generans. Vitiose quidam codices in monte legunt, reclamantibus non solum Graecis, verum etiam manuscriptis omnibus Latinis ac textu, quo tam Hieronymus, quam Ambrosianus usi sunt. Sensus est: Alterum quidem duorum testamentorum a monte Sina, in quo lex data est, ortum seu profectum; generans filios in servitutem, id est, ipsa generatione servituti obnoxios. Qui enim ex matre serva nascitur, nisi quid aliud obstet, servus nascitur. Dicitur itaque vetus testamentum a monte Sina profectum, quia in illo monte lata est lex, cujus observatio veteris testamenti, id est, pacti inter Deum et veterem populum initi conditio fuit 5 sed minime a populo servata. Servitus autem, ad quam filios suos generabat vetus testamentum, posita erat partim in importabili jugo praeceptorum ceremonialium cervicibus filiorum ejus imposito; partim in affectu et timore servili, quo iidem illi regebantur; quem Apostolus Rom. 8. vocat spiritwn servitutis in timore. Quae sane posterior ratio magis propria est filiorum veteris testamenti, utpote essentialis quaedam illius testamenti proprietas. Distinguuntur enim vetus et novum testamentum essentialiter per timorem et amorem.
Quae est Agar. Relativum quae non ad servitutem referendum est, sed ad testamentum, quod in Graeco foemininum est; ut potius vertendum fuerit, quod est Agar: tametsi interpretem facile excusat loquendi consuetudo, qua relativum saepe genus suum accipit a substantivo sequente. Proinde sensus est: quod testamentum per Agar ancillam typice significatum est.
4:25
25. Sina enim mons est in Arabia. In omnibus Gr&ecorum codicibus sic legitur: Nam Agar Sina mons est in Arabia. Praefigitur autem ipsi Agar articulus to neutri generis, quem interpretes Graeci referunt ad ejusdem generis dictionem opoc, id est, montem. Putant enim Sina montem, in quo data est lex, Arabum lingua nominatum fuisse Agar; et hoc Apostolum his verbis significare, ut sensus sit: recte per Agar ancillam vetus testamentum figuratum est, quia Sina mons Arabiae etiam Agar appellatur. Sensum hunc expressit versio Hentenii, quae sic habet: mons enim Sina Agar dicitur apud Arabes. Verum hujusmodi interpretatio non admodum probabilis est; nusquam enim legitur, illum montem Sina alio nomine vocatum Agar; nec arbitror filios Israel per Arabiae deserta transeuntes alio nomine montem illum vocasse, quam quo apud indigenas seu vicinos Arabes vocabatur. Igitur Graecae lectionis commodior hic sensus reddi posse videtur: Quod per Agar ancillam typice significatur, idem est cum eo, quod Sina mons Arabiae per typum significat, quasi dicat, Agar et Sina ejusdem rei gerunt significationem, scilicet veteris testamenti. Sensus hic optime servit iilustrandae allegoriae, quam adfert Apostolus. Porro nostra lectio, quae apud omnes est Latinos interpretes, varie ab illis exponitur. A nonnullis hoc modo: Bene testamentum illud vetus generans in servitutem ortum est a monte Sina; quia mons ille situs est in Arabia, quae regio est extra terram promissionis: ut intelligatur, filios veteris testamenti non pertinere ad promissionem Abrahae factam. Alii vim probationis ponunt in eo, quod postea sequitur: et servit cum filiis suis: tanquam argumentetur ApostoJus ex qualitate seu conditione montis et filiorum sive accolarum ejus, qui cum, ut plurimum, servi sint, recte mons ipse, quem accolunt, typum habet testamenti generantis in servitutem. At quoniam haec posterior expositio, quemadmodum et ea, quae probationem accipit ex etymo vocis Arabiae, qua significatur humilitas ac depressio servituti propria, longius petitae videntur; atque adeo incertum est, an habitatores montis Sinai, quo tempore Paulus haec scribebat, servilis fuerint conditionis: idcirco juxta priorem expositionem magis arbitramur, Apostolum urgere velle situm et qualitatem loci, sine consideratione personarum, quasi dicat, convenienter a monte Sina vetus testamentum profluxit; nam Sina mons est horridus in Arabia, longe extra fines terrae promissae situs; proinde aptissimus ad significandam veteris testamenti qualitatem, quae" est timorem et horrorem incutere et servos facere, promissionis exortes, et ab haereditate alienos.
Qui conjunctus est ei, quae nunc est Jerusalem. Graece, conjungitur autem ei. Hieronymus legit, qui conterminus est ei. Quaeritur, quomodo mons Sina conjunctus seu conterminus sit civitati Jerusalem, cum secundum veram geographiam distet ab ea ferme viginti dierum itinere, quemadmodum etiam Thomas testatur. Qaidain respondent, conjunctum esse non vicinitate loci, sed per radices illuc usque protensas. Genebrardus exponens Psalm. 132. affirmat, montem Sina perpetuo dorso porrigi usque ad montana Sionis. Sed haec aegre fidem admittunt ob nimiam, ut dictum est, locorum distantiam, nec ullo fide digno testimonio suffragante. Sunt, qui conjunctum interpretentur, e regione situm, etsilonge distantem. Thomas conjunctum intelligit per continuationem itineris Israelitarum ex illo monte proficiscentium in terram promissionis et in ipsam Jerusalem. Ahi alias expositiones adferunt, quas diligenter recenset Adamus Sasbout. LIt autem germanum sensum assequamur, sciendum est, verbum Graecum 063T0t)(£l, quod interpres noster vertit, conjunctum esse, Erasmus et Hentenius confinem esse, Theophylacti interpres contiguum esse; non qualemcunque significare conjunctionem, sed eam, quae est in natura et proprietate ingenii aut in re quacunquesimili: quam conjunctionem Latini consensum, cognationem, affinitatem vocare solent; ut et ea, quae sic conjuncta sunt, affinia seu cognata inter so, quemadmodum docte explicatBudaeus in commentariis linguae Graecae. Sensum igitur hunc esse putamus: Qui mons Sina cognationem habet cum ista terrena Jerusalem, eique congruit, quoad mysticam significationem. Nam Sina vetus testamentum significat, terrena Jerusalem sedes est populi Judaici, id est, filiorum veteris testamenti. In monte Sina lex vetus data est; in terrena Jerusalem principatus est legis veteris, propter templum et ceremonias, et studium legis retinendae. Denique idem est populus continuitate successionis, qui legem in monte Sina accepit, et qui nunc in Jerusalem habitans, pro eadem lege pugnaciter contendit. Adfert hunc sensum Theophylactus secundo loco, et sic quidem, ut approbare eum videatur. Quod ergo dicit Apostolus: Quae nunc est Jerusalem, non ita exponendum: quae nunc dicitur aut vocatur Jerusalem, quomodo Erasmus et Hentenius nimium licenter transtulerunt; quasi sensus sit, quae quidem olim aliis nominibus appellata fuit, ut Jebus et Salem, nunc autem Jerusalem vocatur. Neque enim ad rem praesentem facit. quod ea civitas non idem semper nomen habuerit, cum utique etiam illo tempore, quo lex lata est, eam vocatam fuisse Jerusalem satis ex libro Josue perspicuum sit. Sed: quae nunc est, id est, hujus temporis ac saeculi; haec, inquam, terrena Jerusalem. Mox enim opponit illam, quae sursum est, id est, coelestem Jerusalem, cujus spes omnis in futurum saeculum extenditur, juxta illud Hebr. ult. Non habemus hic manentem civitatem, sed futuram in~ quirimus. Similis antithesis alibi, cum ait: Quae sursum sunt sapite, non quae super terram. Col. 3. Atque haec interpretatio veterum est tam Latinorum quam Graecorum. Postremo notandum, partem illam: Conjungitur autem ei, quae nunc est Jerusalem, sic enim in Graeco legitur, referri posse juxta graecam lectionem ad Agar, de qua praecesserat: Nam Agar Sina mons est in Arabia; tametsi Graeci interpretes, uti supra dictum est, Agar a Sina in hac parte non distinguunt.
Et servit cum filiis suis. Quidam hoc ad eam, quae nunc est Jerusalem, referunt, eamque servire cum filiis suis interpretantur, vel quia civitas illa cum populo suo serviebat Romanis, vel quia legis Mosaicae servitute. premebatur. Quam expositionem probabilem facit pars sequens, qua e diverso dicitur eam, quae sursum est Jerusalem, liberam esse. Sed ut eo referatur, Graeca vix admittunt. Alii proinde copulant cum illa parte: Quae est Agar, nam caetera media claudunt parenthesi, quemadmodum in multis codicibus impressis videre est. Secundum hos itaque sensus est: Vetus testamentum, significatum per Agar, servit cum filiis suis, id est, in filiis; quatenus scilicet filios suos in servitutem generat. Dicit autem cum filiis, eo quod ipsa Agar, in qua veteris testamenti typus erat, serva fuerit, et per hoc servitutem filiorum veteris testamenti praefiguraverit. Porro alii referunt ad Sina montem, ac filios ejus intelligunt illius montis accolas. Quem sensum jam ante diximus minus nobis probari. Quocirca, sive ad Jerusalem terrenam, sive potius ad vetus testamentum, quod est Agar, sive etiam ad Sina montem, pars ista referatur; intelligendum est, quodlibet horum servire cum filiis suis, quo'i homines comprehendat, aut gignat, aut significet obnoxios illi servituti, de qua jam dixerat: Unum quidem a monte Sina, in servitutem generans.
4:26
26. Illa autem, quae sursum est Jerusalem, libera est; quae est mater nostra. Dixit Apostolus, quid per Agar ancillam allegorice significetur; nunc, quid per Saram liberam significatum fuerit, ostendit, scilicet novum testamentum, quod filios suos in libertatem generat. Id enim volunt haec ApostoK verba, quibus dicit eam Jerusalem, quae sursum est, intellige, quae est Sara per significationem, liberam esse ac matrem nostram. Nec refert ad rem propositam, sive per Saram dicatur intelligi novum testamentum, sive Ecclesia novi testamenti. Sunt enim haec duo conjuncta, sic ut alterum ex altero intelligatur. Unde Apostolus utrumque dicit: illud quidem, cum ait: Haec enim sunt duo testamenta. Istud vero, praesenti loco, Saram exponens Jerusalem, quae sursum est. Kam et similiter dici poterat, per Agar vetus testamentum significari et Ecclesiam veteris testamenti, id est, Synagogam, quae filios suos in servitutem generabat. Porro novi testamenti Ecclesiam Apostolus vocat Jerusalem, quae sursum est, id est, Jerusalem supernam, et ut loquitur Hebr. 12. coelestem; non quod solam triumphantem in coelis Ecclesiam hic intelligi velit (totam enim Christi Ecclesiam hac notatione comprehendit), sed quia etiam qua parte militat et peregrinatur in terris, tamen per fidem et spem sursum est, dum ea, quae sursum sunt, quaerit et sapit, non autem ea, quae super terram, Col. 3., cujus et conversatio in coelis est Phil. 3. Unde et Joannes in Apoc. 21. Lanc eandem sanctam civitatem Jerusalem novam videt descendentem de coelo a Deo. Contra vero, qui ad vetus testamentum et terrenam Jerusalem pertinent, sicut de terra sunt, ita terrena quaeiunt ct sapiunt, et terrenis ducuntur promissis: qualia nimirum vetus proponebat testamentum. Libera est autem superna Jerusalem, et filios suos in libertatem generat eam, quae servituti filiorum Agar dudum a nobis explicatae opponitur. Quae proinde libertas praecipue posita est in spiritu dilectionis, quem Apostolus Rom. 8. vocat spiritam adoptionis filiorum, in quo clamant Abba, Pater. Secundaria autem ratione consistit in eo, quod filii novi testamenti per Christum exempti sunt a servili jugo legis Mosaicae. Jam quod addit Apostolus, quae est mater nostra; significat, nos, quos per fidem et baptismum Ecclesia gignit, liberos esse; utpote ex matr<3 libera genitos. Ubi notandum, in Greco et Syriaco legi, quae est mater omnium nostrum; eandemque lectionem apud Hieronymum et Primasium haberi. Videtur enim Apostolus hac universali nota significare voluisse magnam fidelium novi testamenti multitudinem ex gentibus collectam et colligendam; atque ita etiam Galatas esse filios coelestis Jerusalem, ac proinde liberos. Eo namque peitinet probatio sequens de multis filiis.
4:27
27. Scriptum est enim, apud Jesaism cap. 54. Citat hoc Prophetae testimonium Apostolus, non ut in Hebraeo est, sed juxta versionem LXX., quorum tamen sensus per omnia concordat cum Hebraica veritate, quemadmodum facile liquet conferenti.
Laetare sterilis, quae non paris; erumpe et clama, quae non parturis. Verba sunt Pror. betae ad Ecclesiam novi Testamenti. Tu, inquit, Ecclesia, quae usque ad Christi adventum sterilis fuisti, et ex gentibus quidem pene nullos, ex Judaeis vero paucissimos Christo filios, eosdemque sub servitutis velamine, tanquam et ipsi servi essent, latitantes, enixa es (nam parere et parturire pro eodem hic ponuntur), laetare, erumpue et clama, id est, cum laetitia Deum lauda, et in clamorem et cantica laudis erumpe. Sic enim sensum complemus ex Hebraeo, ubi pro laetare lauda, et pro erumpe et clama, decanta laudem et hinni legimus. Ratio laudis et laetitiae sequitur:
Quia multi filii desertae, magis quam ejus, quae habet virum. Desertae, id est, solitariae: nam in Graeco nomen est, non participium. Desertam autem vocat, quasi a toro repulsam aut sejunctam propter sterilitatem. Eam vero, quae habet virum, intelligit eam, cum qua vir consuetudinem habet propter foecunditatem. Nam hac phrasi, qua vir dicitur habere mulierem et mulier virum, significari commixtionem viri cum muliere, ostendimus in expositione cap. 5. et 7. prioris Epist. ad Corinthios. Proinde sensus est: Merito laetandum tibi est, quia tu, quae hactenus solitaria faisti, nec viro ad gignendos filios conjuncta (sterilis enim eras); nunc foecunda reddita, Christo viro tuo filios paries multo plures, quam Synagoga viro suo conjuncta, id est, legem Mosnicam studiore amplexata, toto veteris Testamenti tempore filios peperit. Nam legem Mosai- o nil. Estii Comm. Tom. II. cam virum fuisse Synagogae docet Apostolus Rom. 7. Potest autem et hac ratione intelligi deserta seu solitaria, quod sola esset, filios non habens, ex quibus familia multiplicaretur. Unde quod juxta Symmachi interpretationem legitur Psalm. 67. Deus inhabitare facit solitarios in domo; id Psalm. 112. ita expiessum est: Quihabitare facit sterilem in domo, matrem filiorum laetantem. Et haec expositio videtur magis germana, conGideranti has et similes Scripturas. Qualis est illa Thren. 1. Quomodo sedet sola, id est, sine filiis, civitas prius populosissima. Et Jes. 49. Ego destituta et sola, ubi praecesserat: Ego sterilis, et non pariens. Item Baruch. 4. Ego derelicta sum sola. Quod autem quidam hic speculantur, desertam fuisse Ecclesiam, quia fuerit derelicta in cultu idolorum aliisque peccatis: non facile est recipiendum, cum sit alienum a mente. Apostoli et rrophetae. Nec unquam verum fuit, Ecclesiam servire idolis aut esse derelictim a Deo: licet Gentilitas sic fuerit derelicta, ex qua postea congregata et multiplicata fuit Ecclesia, quae Ecclesia fuerat antea in paucis hominibus. Caeterum apposite admodum Apostolus, cum de mysterio Sarae sterilis ageret, adduxit hoc Prophetae testimonium, in quo Christi Ecclesia, per Saram praefigurata, sterilis vocatur; ut quemadmodum Sara post longam sterilitatem, tandem ex divina promissione ac virtute foecundata, filium peperit, in quo semen Abrahae multiplicaretur; ita significetur Ecclesia post sterilitatem tot saeculorum, tandem adveniente Christo, quam plurimos promissionis filios paritura, confluentibus ad eam undique gentilium populis.
4:28
28. Nos autem, fratres, secundum Isaac promissionis filii sumus. Allegoriam hactenus expositam propirs admovet instituto. Loquitur autem in persona Christi fidelium. Nos, inquit, qui in Christum credimus, non secundum Iamael carnis filii sumus, sed secundum Isaac filii promissionis. Id est, juxta typum et similitudinem Isaac, quem supra naturae ordinem mater sterilis ex Dei promissione concepit, filii matris Ecclesiae sumus; non ex viribus naturae, sed supra naturam ex virtute Dei, qui Abrahae promisit, geniti, et, ut ait Joannes Evangelista: Non ex sanguinibus, neque ex voluntate carnis, neque ex voluntate viri } sed ex Deo nati. Hinc colligendum relinquit Apostolus, eos, qui in Christum credunt, non debere esse sub lege. Qui enim sub lege sunt, non secundum Isaac promissionis filii sunt ex libera, sed secundum Ismael filii carnis ex ancilla.
4:29
29. Sed quomodo tunc is, qui secundum carnem natus fuerat, persequebatur eum, qui secundum spiritum; ita et nunc. En altera congruentia figurae cum re figurata. Nam sicut quondam Ismael, qui secundum carnem natus erat, persequebatur Isaac, qui natus erat secundum spiritum; ita et nunc, inquit, qui secundum carnem nati sunt, id est, legis aemulatores, qui cx sola legis cognitione sibi justitiam promittunt, persequuntur eos, qui secundum spiritum nati sunt, id est, per virtutem Spiritus sancti in filios adoptati. Secundum carnem natus Ismael dicitur, quia genitus secundum naturalem virtutem carnis, scilicet ex matre foecunda; quemadmodum explicatum.est supra. Isaac vero secundum spiritum, quia per iriraculum natus ex matre sterili et vetula. Nam ea, quae supra naturam fiunt, peculiariter adscribuntur operationi Spiritus sancti. Non est autem hinc consequens, Isaac fuisse conceptum de Spiritu sancto, quod nos in symbolo de Christo profitemur. Hac enim locutione significatur, quod omne virile opus in Christi generatione suppleverit operatio Spiritus sancti. Quod. non ita fuit in conceptione Isaac, ut qui natus est ex paterno semine. Sed quaeritur, quae fuerit illa persecutio Ismaelis adversus Isaac. Nam Gen. 21., quo Paulum respexisse constat, non persecutionem, sed lusum legimus. Cum, inquit, vidisset Sara filium Agar Aegyptiae ludentem cum Isaac filio suo, dixit etc. Respondeo, ludum non uno modo accipi in Scripturis. Interdum enim lusum serium significat, id est, pugnam, ut 2 Reg. 2., dicente Abner ad Joab: Surgant pueri, et ludant coram nobis, id est, dimicent. Sic ergo nonnulli existimant, Ismaelem lusisse cum Isaac, id est, ludendo conatum fuisse eum perdere, ut haereditas ipsi soli remaneret. Interdum vero dicitur de lusu ac gestibus colentium idola, ut Exod. 32. Sedit populus manducare et bibere, et surrexerunt ludere. Porro quidam vocem Hebraeam in Gen. vertunt deridentem, sive subsannantem aut illudentem. Quo pertinet, quod Augustinus in sermone de Agar et Ismaele, citatus a Beda super hunc locum, sic ait: Lusum illum Paulus persecutionem vocat; quia lusio illa, illusio erat. Hieronymus quoque lusum hunc non simplicem fuisse docet, sed jurgiam et contentionem, qua circumcisionis oraerogativam, et primogenita sibi ver.dicabat Ismael contra parvulum Isaac. Alii denique vertunt lascivientem; quibus consonat Primasii commentarius. Persecutio nominatur, inquit, quia scurrllem eum et levem volebat facere, qualis ipse erat, ne sibi in haereditate praeponeretur. Sunt, qui intelligant, Ismael per ludum inducere voluisse Isaac ad idola colenda; sive quemadmodum S. Thomas refert, ad adorandas imagines luteas, quas faciebat. Quemcunque vero lusum ex omnibus jam dictis intelligas, recte persecutio vocata est ab Apostclo, quia in omnibus illis persecutio quaedam est. Corporalis quidem in machinanda morte, et in derisione et vendicatione primogenitorum; spiritualis vero, quae corporali gravior est in eo, quod ad idololatriam, vel ad lasciviam induceie puerum voluit. Sane utroque modo carnales Judaei filios Ecclesiae persecuti sunt. Corporaliter quidem; nam ut ait Apostolus 1 Thess. 2. Et Dominum occiderunt Jesum et Prophetas, et nos persecuti sunt, tt omnibus hominibus adversantur; adeo ut testetur Hieronymus, multo majores persecutiones a Judaeis in Christianos, quam a gentibus concitatas {uisse. Spiritualiter autem, in quantum fideles a Christo revocare, et ad legem suam traducere summo studio conati sunt. Prioris generis persecutionem Paulus ipse prae caeteris expertus fuerat; posteriorem experiebantur Galatae, ad quos scribit. Quanquam non soli Judaei, sed in universum quicunque tam in Ecclesia, quam extra secundum carnem vivunt; mystice per Ismaelem significantur et spiritualem Isaac, id est, filios promissionis, qui secundum spiritum vivunt, alterutro genere persecutionis exagitant. Omnes enim, qui pie volunt vivere in Christo Jesu, perseculionem patientur; utique a malis et ca/nalibus hominibus. 2 Tim. 3.
4:30
30. Sed quid dicit Scriptura? Id est, quid Scriptura commemorat Saram dixisse viro suo Abraham, quando vidit filium ancillae ludentem cum filio suo? Hoc nimirum, quod sequitur.
Ejice ancillam et filium ejus. Hic jam tertia congruentia figurae eum re figurata indicatur. Sicut enim Sara postulante, et Deo postulatum ejus approbante, ejecta est e domo Abrahae Agar ancilla cum filio suo; sic Ecclesia per spiritum Dei instante et perurgente, legem cum suis quasi necessariae observatoribus ejici oportuit e familia et populo Dei. Per quod palam democstratur legis ac prioris testamenti cessatio. Atque hoc praecipuum est, quod Apostolus ex histcria I Genesis per allegoriam exposita docere voluit.
Non enim haeres erit filiu3 ancillce cum fiHo liberae. Graece: Non enim haereditabit, hoc est, haereditatem accipiet. Nam haeres quispiam dicitur a j;ire succedendi in bona alterius: sive aliquando succedat, sive non. Unde est illud in Evangelic, Hic est haeres; occidamus eum, et nostra erit haereditas. Ea pars, cum filio liberae, apud Ambrosianum et Hieronym. legitur quomodo in Genesi: cum filio meo isaac. Sed Graeca nobiscum faciunt; tametsi nulla in sensu diversitas est, nisi quod in nostra lectione magis elucet antithesis. Indicatur autem quarta congruentia, quod sicut ancillae filius non est admissus in partem haereditatis una cum filio liberae; sic qui sub lege sunt non percipient promissam haereditatem simul cum Christianis, ideoque merito cum lege sua foras mittendi. Terret hac sententia Galatas, ut ini^lligant se excludendos ab haereditate, si legem recipiant.
4:31
31. Itaque, fratres, non sumus ancillae filii, sed liberae. Quamvis hoc recte sequatur ex eo, quod dixit: Quae sursum est Jerusalem, libera est, quae est mater nostra; dictio tamen itaque hoc loco non tam concludentis esse videtur, quam accingentis se ad exhortationem subsequentem. Cujus etiam indicium est, quod fratres, appellet. Igitur, inquit, fiatres, quotcumque in Christum credimus, nonsumus ancillae filii, id est, non pertinemus ad ]egem, significatam per Agar, sed sumus filii liberae, pertinentes ad Jerusalem, quae sursum est, significatam per Saram. Unde scire ac meminisse debemus, nos liberos esse a servitute legis, utpote vocatos in libertatem spiritus, et a jugo ceremoniarum legalium, praefigurantium Christum, liberatos; veritate jam exhibita.
Qua libertate Christus nos liberavit. Id est, in quam Christus per mortem suam nos asseruit; ille nimirum, qui de seipso loquitur: Si vos filius liberaverit, vere liberi eritis, Joan. 8. Hanc partem Graeci connectunt sequentibus, uti videbimus initio proximi capitis.
4:1
1. Dico autem : Quanto tempore haeres parvulus (víswc i. q. infans, ví et £xoc) est, nihil differt a servo, quum sit dominus omnium ,
4:2
2. sed sub tutoribus (Emtzpórouz Vict. A'*" : curatoribus, Aug. : procuratoribus) et actoribus est usque ad praefinitum tempus a patre. Formula dico autem (Mo 9E cfr 3,15; 5,16; 1 Cor. 1,12 etc.) de novo argumento non agi neque novam epistolae partem inchoari (id quod censent TAorm. etc. , Bisp etc.) satis iam insinuat , quia ad explicationem tantum addendam a.Paulo adhibetur; quare vix non omnes hanc pericopen praecedenti argumentationi velut illustrationem et complementum recte adiungunt. Iudaeos enim, ne sese iam ante Domini adventum et sine illius auxilio haereditatem adire potuisse putent, in adeptione promissionum , quae illis utique speciatim dictae erant , a gentibus non differre similitudine quadam edocet. Parvulo nimirum filio familias eos comparat, qui quamvis ad futuram patris sui haereditatem ius habeat ac proin , nondum actu quidem sed iure, bonorum patris dominus sit, tamen in patris sui manu ac potestate ita sit, ut procuratoribus oeconomisque bonorum ab eo constitutis eodem modo, quo servi, obedire teneatur neque a servis, si actuale dominium liberque usus bonorum spectatur, ullo modo differat. tur de haereditate, quae nondum erat aperta, quia mors testatoris nondum intercesserat. Porro cum priore explicatione conciliari nequit, quod puer sub procuratoribus esse dicitur usque ad tempus praefinitum a patre (£y ot vijc xpolicoulac tz« t09 ra p64); legibus enim definitum est, quo tempore haeredes pupilli a tutela liberati bonis reliclis pleno cum iure frui possunt, neque patris est, illud tempus pro arbitrio definire. At quamdiu superstes est, pater, praesertim si ius romanum et ius galaticum spectantur, definire potest quando filium suum emancipare et a suorum procuratorum et oeconomorum auctoritate liberare velit. Iamvero attendatur oportet, in hac libera temporis definitione praecipuam vim comparationis sitam esse : sicut patri pro arbitrio tempus definire licet, quo filii sui à procuratoribus eodem modo, quo servus quidam, dependeant nec a servo distinguantur, ita Deus certum statuerat pro sua sapientia tempus, quo ludaei gentibus assimilati sub elementis servire debebant, ita ut haereditatem promissam antea adire non possent. Haud recte autem iuniores modernique interpretes hanc difficultatem effugere conantur aut Pauli verba quasi corrigentes (« donec tempus testamento praefinitum a patre aut alioquin legibus decretum advenerit » Est. cr Nat. Píc. M Ev. etc.), aut Paulum ad iuridicas rationes non attendisse sed similitudinem suo argumento &ccommodasse ac proin confinxisse asserentes (Wind. Bisp. etc.). Meliorem viam ingrediuntur, quí ad ius galaticum provocant, quod parentibus maiorem, quam romanum, auctoritatem in filios attribuisse dicitur (cr Caes. de bello gall. VI. 19; Gaii Instit. 55. 65. 189); at ex isto iure patribus tempus tutelae pro arbitrio definire licuisse, probari testimoniis superstitibus nequit. Iam alterum comparationis membrum affert :
4:3
3. ita et nos, quum essemus parvuli , sub elementis mundi eramus servientes. Omnia priori membro respondent : haeres parvulus, nos parvuli; non differt a servo, eramus servientes ; sub procuratoribus et actoribus, suó elementis mundi. Sola temporis definitio deest (usque ad praefinitum tempus a patre), sed haec, quia in ea cardo rei vertitur, sequente sententia suppletur (ubi venit plenitudo temporis sc. & Deo praedefiniti). Duabus difficultatibus hoc membrum laborat, quum inde a Patrum aetate in controversia sit positum, quos Paulus pronomine «6 (nos) secum comprehendat, et quid nomine v ctotytix 105 xócpov (elementa mundi) intelligat. Ad priorem quaestionem quod attinet, Aug. quidem solos ethnicos conversos comprehendi putat, « quoniam et eorum personas (Apostolus) decenter sibi potest annectere, quibus ad evangelizandum missus est »; sed neminem invenisse, qui secum consentiret, videtur. Cum Hier. autem et Vict. etiam iuniores ac. moderni quidam (efr Just. Bisp. Schaef. etc. — Mey Sieff. Lightf. Schm. Z. etc.) omnes Christianos, sive Iudaei sive ethnici ante baptismum fuerunt, designatos vident; communior tamen et verior sententia solos Iudaeos conversos, exclusis Ethnicochristianis, a Paulo sibi eadem ratione, qua supra (3,13. 23-25), adiungi tenet (cfr Chrys. Theod. etc., A'er, Prim. etc., Herv. Thom. Lyr. etc., Cai. Salm. Est. Lap. etoc., Wind. Reithm. LR. Palm. etc. — de W. Ead. PA. etic.). Hanc enim explicationem contextus postulat, quem iam exposuimus, eandemque comparationis ipsius ratio confirmat. Nam Aaeredi parvulo, qui domnus omnium sit, sive cum nonnullis orphanum cuius pater sit mortuus, sive nobiscum filium familias in manu ac potestate patris superstitis degentem intelligas, nulla ratione comparari possunt gentiles, qui ante baptismum nullum, ne remotum quidem, ius ad haereditatem habuerunt atque solo baptismo haeredes facti sunt. Optime vero similitudo Iudaeis conversis congruit , qui iam ante conversionem , quum essent naturale semen Abraham et in patribus suis promissiones accepissent, propter fidelitatem Dei ius quoddam ad haereditatem possidebant (cfr Hom. 15,8). Quodsi autem Iudaeochristiani soli hic intelligantur oportet, consequens est, ut nomine clementorum mundi lex caeremonialis designetur, cui quasi procuratoribus et actoribus Iudaei servire tenebantur; neque ulla ratione in isto nomine explicando de cu/tu rebus naturalibus (soli, stellis etc.) ab ethnicis exhibito cogitare licet, quamvis haec sit sententia S. Augustini et illi quoque, qui secundam explicationem sequuntur, cultum istum cum lege caeremoniali ludaeorum coniungere velint, des menses et anni conficiuntur; Lex vero sabbatha et novilunia ct festa annua et annorum hebdomades observari iussit » cfr Chrys. Theoph. Oec.). Arctior tamen est, atque rectius dicemus, Paulum nomine elementorum mundi omnes res externas ^ comprehendisse, a quibus Iudaci in suis ritibus dependebant, quibus igitur quodam modo serviebant. Procul dubio etiam sidera coelestia intelligantur oportet, quibus « dies etmenses et tempora et anni » reguntur (cfr. 10); at si Col. 2,8-20 conferimus, elementa mundi, & quibus cum Christo mortui esse dicimur, etíam reliquae res visibiles, ad quas Iudaei attendere debebant (circumcisionem, distinctionem ciborum etc.), comprehenduntur; quae omnes merito dicuntur « elementa infirma et egena » (v. 9), quia per se ad gratiam dandam nihil conferunt (cfr Caí. Reithm. Palm. etc). - . Sieut igitur puer parvulus, quamvis iure iam sit haeres et dominus - bonorum paternorum, tamen a procuratoribus et dispensatoribus domus paternae dependet servis assimilatus usque ad illud tempus, quo pater eum emancipare libertateque donare decrevit, ita Iudaei quoque, licet ius ad haereditatem Abrahae seminique eius promissam haberent, eam adire non poterant ante tempus a Patre coelesti praedefinitum ,.sed gentilibus assimilati sub iugo legis caeremonialis servire erant coacti.
4:4
&. At ubi venit plenitudo temporis , misit (&xvícva-- Av) Deus Filium suum factum ex muliere , factum sub lege. Aeterno suo consilio Deus certum praedefinierat tempus, quo Lex, propter transgressiones posita et tamquam paedagogus filiis Israel data, finem suum attingeret infirmitatem hominum manifestans redemtorisque desiderium excitans augensque. Quod tempus velut mensura cogitatur, quae decurrentibus annis impleri debuit, et plenitudo temporis definiti (Tó.zAXwpeux 709 j0)vou vel cw x«tóv Eph. 1,10) advenit, quando spatium illud praeparationi assignatum termipabatur. Ad Dei scopum finemque attendens bene Vzcz. (cfr etiam Mopsu. Theoph. elc.) : « quemadmodum Christus, ut plenitudo tota et perfecta sit, colligit membra, quae dispersa sunt, et efficitur plenitudo (EpA. 1,92), ita eodem modo et temporum plenitudo tunc effecta est, quum maturatis ad fidem omnibus ct peccatis usque ad summa surgentibus medicina necessaria ad rerum omnium mortem (avertendam) quaerebatur ». Quae vero antiquiores aliqui in'hac phrasi praeterea inveniunt de plenitudine gratiarum per Christum allatarum aut de impletione figurarum veteris Legis vel promissionum (cfr TAom. etc.), ea nec verbisindicantur nec contextu. Ultimum enim dumtaxat comparationis suae membrum (usque ad praefinitum tempus a patre) applicans Apostolus suis verbis idem tempus designat, quod alibi consummationem saeculorum , fines saeculorum etc. appellat (cfr ad 1 Cor. 10,11). promissae particeps fieri debuit. Quem in finem Deus Pater, ut promissiones, quas ipse dederat, ipse impleret, misit Filium suum unigenitum (Joan. 3,16.). Significantius et pulchrius, quam latinum verbum simplex misit , estdecompositum graecum s&bxzéczeO«v, quod etiam statim (v. 6) : de Spiritus S. missione ponitur. Quamquam enim a Luca aliisque de quacumque missione usurpatur, Paulus tamen, qui illo in. duabus tantum sententiis utitur, ad duas praepositiones (4 et &ó) attendisse : videtur, ut quodammodo una cum duarum personarum missione in tempore etiam aeternam earum a patre processionem insinuaret : ez sese procedentem Filium (loan. 8,542) Pater a coelo in mundum misit (xa*aG£&nxa &mó «o0 ojpxvoo Joan. 6,38), quando nimirum Verbum, . quod in principio apud Deum, in sinu Patris, erat, caro factum est (loan. 1,14) : factum ex multere (svópevov &x. ovauxóc! cfr Rom. 1,3 yevópevog ex omépuxvog Aut x«TX cora). Quibus verbis errores Valentini aliorumque, qui Christum corpus e coelo attulisse dixerunt, et Docetarum, qui ei phantasticum dumtaxat corpus attribuerunt, non minus quam haeresin Nestorii, qui B. Virginem Deiparam esse negavit, Patres iam refutarunt (contra priores cfr Tert. de carne Christi 290; S. Basil. de Spir. S. 5,12; Hier. etc.; contra alterum S. ' Cyr. Alex. adv. nolentes confiteri quod B. Virgo sit Deipara 26; Theod. c. Nestor. M. 83,1160 etc.). Contra Ebionitas quoque aliosque perpetuae virginitatis S. Dei Genitricis detractores Patres monuerunt, Paulum nomine mulieris eodem modo esse usum, quo etíam Evangelistae illo utuntur ; « neque enim necesse erat, inquit Hier. , semper quasi caute et timide virginem dicere, quum mulier sesum magis quam copulam viri significet, et secundum intelligentiam graecitatis tam uxor quam mulier valeat interpretari » (cfr Tert. de vel. virg. 6, Vict. Aug. cte.)..- Proxime quidem Paulus hoc nomine usus est, quia id maxime docere voluit, Filium Dei vere factum esse filium hominis atque vera humana natura assumta in genus humanum intrasse (cfr Job 14,1; MatA. 11,11); tam caute autem locutus est, ut virgineam Domini conceptionem (quam neophytos in sua catechesi docuit, uti ex Lucae Evangelio constat cfr Luc. 1,26 sqq.), non tantum non excluderet, sed insinuaret; recte enim multi cum Pe/ag. : « in eo quod dicit ez muliere, monstrat non more solito ex conventu viri et feminae, sed per Spiritum S. ' ex matre tantum Christum incarnationem hominis suscepisse »; uti enim aliis in Scripturae locis, in quibus de humana Chrisli origine agitur, hic quoque sola mater nominatur, patris humani autem idea studiose arcetur (cfr Knabenb. Comm. in Is. I. p. 175). Sicuti autem ex muliere, ita sub Lege Deus Filium suum nasci voluit : factum sub lege, ut non tantum verus esset homo, sed etiam ab ipso suo in mundum ingressu Legi subiectus. Id quoque in sua catechesi Paulum diligenter exposuisse, iterum ex discipuli eius Evangelio discimus, in quo solo refertur, quam accurate Christus statim & sua nativitate Legem impleverit, circumcisus die octavo, die quadragesimo in templo praesentatus, inde a duodecimo aetalis anno quotannis ad festum paschatis lerosolyma ascendens (Luc. 2,91 sqq.). Ex nostro porro loco apparet, cur Paulus Christi incarnationem et subiectionem sub Lege neophytos tanta cum cura docuerit; fundamenta enim sunt doctrinae illius, quam Evangelium suum vocare solet, de abolitione Legis per Christi mortem et de universalitate salutis per Christum allatae. : Hoc scilicet nunc insinuat duplice exposito fine, quem Deus in illa, quam descripsit, missione Filii sui attingere voluit :
4:5
5. wt eos qui sub lege erant redimeret, ut. adoptionem filiorum reciperemus. Eadem ratione, qua supra (3,13), duae sententiae, quae ab eadem particula finali (iv« t£) inchoantur, inter se sunt parallelae, atque simili quoque modo subiecta differunt, quum in priore de iis solis, qui sub Lege sunt, in altera de omnibus hominibus, sive Judaeis sive gentibus, agatur. Ad duo vero membra quae praecedunt (factum ex muliere, factum sub lege) chiastice referuntur, ut prior ultimo, altera primo membro respondeat. Etenim Deus misit Filium suum factum sub Lege , ut ipse eam implens eiusque maledictionem in se suscipiens eos qui sub Lege erant ab eius quum maledictione (cfr 3,13) tum servitute (v. 3) pretio soluto redimeret!; misit vero Filium suum factum ex muliere , u& per ipsum omnes, qui ad genus humanum , in quod per incarnationem intravit, pertinemus, adoptionem filiorum reciperemus (cfr 3,14). Neque sine ratione Paulus figuram chiasmi adhibuit; accurate nimirum iustum, ut ita dicam, ordinem chronologicum in utraque sententia retinere voluit. Quemadmodum enim incarnatio (factus ex muliere) subiectionem Christi sub Lege (factus sub Lege) praecessit, ita Iudaei prius a servitute Legis erant solvendi , utomnibusliber aditus ad promissiones pateret; neque enim nisi remoto pariete , quo a Iudaeis separabantur, gentes una cum ilis, qui proxime promissiones acceperant, earum participes fieri . potuerunt (cfr ad 3,14; EpA. 2,18 sqq.). Liberatio ergo Iudaeorum a servitute Legis erat intermedius et secundarius tantum finis missionis Christi, ultimus vero et supremus finis incarnationis erat adoptio filiorum. Quo nomine viotscí«; Apostolus omnia bona Abrahae seminique eius promissa intelligit , quia adoptio, utpote omnium beneficiorum divinorum summum ac perfectissimum, reliqua omnia quasi complectitur, alia quodammodo velut conditiones necessarias supponens, alia velut consequentias naturales post se trahens. Nam « non possumus fieri filii adoptivi, nisi conformamur filio naturali Dei » (Thom. cfr Rom. 8,299); sed filio naturali conformamur, si baptismo abluti et sanctificati Christum induimus (3,27), conformati autem insertique Christo efficimur secundum promissionem haeredes (3,99). Hinc Patres quoque, si de fructibus incarnationis loquuntur, ad nostrum locum alludentes frequenter adoptionem pro completo incarnationis fine relate ad nos ponunt!. Adoptionem porro promissionibus contineri CArys. aliique Graeci ex verbo adhibito &roAéGop:sv. (reczperemus) colligunt : « dxo- M6ousv dixit, inquit. Theoph. (cfr Euseb. Em., Oec. etc.), indicans quod iam antea ex promissione ad nos pertinuerit, etiamsi nobis ob infantiam mentis non fuerit data ». Ac revera verbum &xoJayeivew haud raro significat « illud accipere, quod velut merces vel ex promissione debetur », sicut &70919óva: significat « debitam mercedem vel promissionem exsolvere » (Luc. 93,541; Rom, 1,21 etc.). Ad latinum autem verbum attendens Aug. monet : « non dixit accipiamus sed recipiamus, ut significaret hoc nos amisisse in Adamo »; haec quoque cessaverint v. Contextus enim huic explicalioni non favet , quoniam de solis ludacisex servitute Legis redimendis agitur. Eo sensu, quo vult Zier., omnes homines sunt. redemtií, quia omnes in Adamo « de Dei parte » fuerunt. 1. S. [ren. c. haer. III. 16,3 nostrum locum explicans : « Filius Dei hominis filius factus significatio graeco verbo competit (Luc. 6,3«; 15,97 etc.), sed Graecorum explicatio videtur praeferenda, quia contextui conformior est et quia per incarnationem gratiam dignitatemque altiorem illa accepimus, quam in Adamo amisimus!. Galatas porro vere factos esse filios Dei confirmaturus Apostolus eis in memoriam revocat missionem S. Spiritus, qui velut adoptionis sigillum eis sit datus :
4:6
6. quoniam (911) autem estis fili, misit Deus Spiritum Filii sui in corda vestra (lege : nostra cfr VV. LL.) clamantem : Abba, Pater. Cum Graecis omnibus (CArys. Mopsu. Theod. etc.) etiam multi Latini (A*", TÀom. etc., Iust. Est. etc.) et moderni aliqui (M Ev. Palm. etc. — Rück. Ph. etc.) particulam órt (quoniam) causalem esse, qua ratio cur Deus miserit Spiritum afferatur, negantes breviloquentiam vel ellipsin quandam admittunt atque novum quasi argumentum afferri volunt, quo adoptio demonstretur : ósx 8£ ice vloí (952v, i) diantovtoev 6 Orc cà mv60p.z. X7À (« vos esse filios, mani- | festum est quia Deus Spiritum in corda nostra misit » cfr 3,11). Sensus quidem est aptus, sed durissima est constructio neque simile ellipseos vel breviloquentiae exemplum in Scripturis invenitur?. Quare cum Vulg. et plerisque modernis causalem coniunctionis óvt (quoniam) "significationem rectius retinemus, quia sententiae sensus altera constructione admissa haud multum mutatur. Missionem enim Spiritus Paulus velut intime cum adoptione connexam considerat, ita ut ii, qui filii adoptantur, omnes ac soli Spiritum in cordibus suis statim recipiant, missio igitur Spiritus sit divinum sigillum factae adoptionis et arrha futurae haereditatis (cfr Eph. 1,13. 18) ,ac revera Spiriius in cordibus nostris clamans Abba Pater « testimonium reddit spiritui nostro, quod sumus filii Dei » (Rom. 8,16). Hunc in sensum Lap.*« quia estis filii, ideo Deus misit Spiritum suum, non qui vos filios faciat, sed qui vos filios iam factos doceat clamare Abba Pater » (sim. Wind. Bisp. Reithm. L R. Schaef. etc. — Mey Sieff. etc.). Ad singula quod attinet, praeprimis ad mutationem personarum attendatur oportet. A tertia plur. enim, qua Iudaeos sub Lege constitutos designaverat, et a prima plur., qua omnes fideles adoptionem consecutos comprehenderat (v. 5), Apostolus nunc ad secundam plur. (ieví estis) transit, ut Galatas directe alloquens ad eorum experientiam quasi provocet ; etenim sese Spiritum accepisse sciverunt (3,2. 5); iam vero eos ideo eum acce- 1. Cfr S. Cyr. Alex. de recla fide 30 (Scheeben Mysterien des Christenthums p. 366 sqq.). 2. Facilior quidem sed haud &ptior est constructio, ai cutn nonnullis modernis dixeris, * particulam órt positam esse pro ic (xetvo 8v (quod attinet ad id, quod; efr ad 2 Cor. 1,18; cum ad gentes, utriusque tamen verbi eadem significatio ad eiusdem fidei Spiritusque unitatem pertineat ». Alii vero respondere malunt, Paulum duplici illa appellatione usum esse, quia in ecclesiis usitata erat; etenim ethnici quoque conversi illud nomen usurpare consueverant, quo Dominus ipse Patrem suum appellaverat et quo primos suos discipulos Deum orare iusserat (Matth. 6,9); sed huic nomini, quod Dominus usu suo consecrayerat, graecam interpretationem adiecerunt, ut bac repetitione MUN qua Deum precabantur, fiduciam clarius exprimerent. Sua sponte ex ultima hac Pauli expositione consequitur, tempus Legis, utpotetempus infantiae ac servitutis, esse terminatum. Iudaei qui sub Lege fuerant ex parvulorum statu, in quo a servis non differebant, ad adultorum et emancipatorum filiorum statum traducti et a Legis dominio liberati sunt per Christum , qui pro eis illam implevit illiusque maledictionem in se suscepit. Ethnici vero, qui in duriore servitute eousque degerant (cfr v. 8), ad eundem statum filiorum emancipatorum traducti sunt, quando credentes baptismo Christum -induerunt in eoque Legem impleverunt circumcisi circumcisione non manu facta. Utrique demum velut sigillum perfectae adoptionis, qua adulti filii Dei facti sunt, Spiritum S. in cordibus suis inhabitantem habent. Hinc Paulus magna cum vi non tam universos quam singulos fideles, sive ex Iudaeis sive ex ethnicis venerant, alloquens concludit :
4:7
7. itaque iam non est (lege : es €i) servus, sed filius : quodsi filius, et haeres per Deum. Quae conclusio est fere repetitio praecedentis (3,29); omnes fideles eadem ratione Christo, naturali filio Dei, inserti ad filiorum adoptivorum dignitatem elevati sunt et inter sese aequales sunt ac pares; eadem ratione ideo etiam ad Abrahae semen, qui est Christus, pertinent eademque ratione ius babent ad promissiones Abrahae seminique eius dictas. At excelsam hanc dignitatem. praeclarumque hoc ius nemo ex eis, nec gentilis nec Iudaeus conversus, suis viribus Legisque operibus debet, sed omnes ac singuli beneficia ista debent Dei misericordiae Deique gratiae : uti fitus, ita haeres es per Deum , qui solus ad tantam dignitatem creaturam elevare potest. 4. Ezhorlatione secundum argumentum lerminalur (4,8-20). Legis mosaicae observationem omnibus fidelibus, quum circumcisis tum praeputiatis, non tantum non esse necessariam sed etiam plane inutilem, quia fide ac baptismo omnes eadem ratione tamquam membra Christi ac filii Dei ius haereditatis promissae adipiscendae acquisiverint, argumenta allata demonstrant. At hac demonstratione, qua GAL. 4,7. 8. $31 solus intellectus convincitur, non contentus Paulus pro more , quem in omnibus fere epistolis tenet, ad exhortationem transit, ut lectorum quoque voluntates moveat eosque ad veritatem cognitam tenendam 8c sequendam adducat. Itaque praeprimis eos rogat, ne in turpem servitutem , ex qua iam redemti sunt , revertentes suum ipsius laborem apostolicum fructu privent (8-11); deinde eos precatur, ut suum exemplum imitentur pristini amoris, quo ipsum complexi sint, et magni fervoris memores, quo ipsum prima vice eis Evangelium praedicantem exceperint (19-16); ac tandem monens, ut a pseudapostolis sibi caveant, tenerrima deprecatione exhortationem terminat (17-20). Ultimae conclusioni argumentationis suae Paulus exhortationem intime adnectit pristinum servitutis statum, in quo antea degerant, Galatisin memoriam revocans atque turpiorem perniciosioremque fore novam servitutem insinuans, si nimirum postquam Spiritu coeperunt nunc carne consummari velint. Prioris enim servitutis excusationem quandam ignorantia eorum praebet; nova autem plane erit voluntaria, quoniam nullam prorsus excusationem habent :
4:8
8. sed tunc quidem (scilicet in. vestro statu conversionem praecedente) ignorantes Deum iis, qui natura non sint dii, serviebatis. Verbis ignorantes Deum non explicatur particula £wc , ut sensus sit: « eo tempore, quo Deum cum ad gentes, utriusque tamen verbi eadem significatio ad eiusdem fidei Spiritusque unitatem pertineat ». Alii vero respondere malunt, Paulum duplici illa appellatione usum esse, quia in ecclesiis usitata erat; etenim ethnici quoque conversi illud nomen usurpare consueverant, quo Dominus ipse Patrem suum appellaverat et quo primos suos discipulos Deum orare iusserat (Math. 6,9); sed huic nomini, quod Dominus usu suo consecrayerat, graecam interpretationem adiecerunt, ut hac repetitione dialera; qua Deum precabantur, fiduciam clarius exprimerent. Sua sponte ex ultima hac Pauli expositione consequitur, tempus Legis, utpote tempus infantiae ac servitutis, esse terminatum. Iudaei qui sub Lege fuerant ex parvulorum statu, in quo a servis non differebant, ad adultorum et emancipatorum filiorum statum traducti et a Legis dominio liberati sunt per Christum , qui pro eis illam implevit iliusque maledictionem in se suscepit. Ethnici vero, qui in duriore servitute eousque degerant (cfr v. 8), ad eundem statum filiorum emancipatorum traducti sunt, quando credentes baptismo Christum -induerunt in eoque Legem impleverunt circumcisi cireumcisione non manu facta. Utrique demum velut sigillum perfectae adoptionis, qua adulti filii Dei facti sunt, Spiritum S. in cordibus suis inbabitantem habent. Hinc Paulus magna cum vi non tam universos quam singulos fideles, sive ex Iudaeis sive ex ethnicis venerant, alloquens concludit : 7. itaque iam non est (lege : es &) servus, sed filius : quodsi filius, et haeres per Deum. Quae conclusio est fere repetitio praecedentis (3,29); omnes fideles eadem ratione Christo, naturali filio Dei, inserti ad filiorum adoptivorum dignitatem elevati sunt et inter sese aequales sunt ac pares; eadem ratione ideo etiam ad Abrahae semen, qui est Christus, pertinent eademque ratione ius habent ad promissiones Abrahae seminique eius dictas. At excelsam hanc dignitatem, praeclarumque hoc ius nemo ex eis, nec gentilis nec Iudaeus conversus, suis viribus Legisque operibus debet, sed omnes ac singuli beneficia ista debent Dei misericordiae Deique gratiae : uti //tus, ita haeres es per Deum , qui solus ad tantam dignitatem creaturam elevare potest. 4. Exhorlalone secundum argumentum terminatur (4,8-20). Legis mosaicae observationem omnibus fidelibus, quum circumcisis tum praeputiatis, non tantum non esse necessariam sed etiam plane inutilem, quia fide ac baptismo omnes eadem ratione tamquam membra Christi ac filii Dei ius haereditatis promissae adipiscendae acquisiverint, argumenta allata demonstrant. At hac demonstratione, qua GAL. 4,7. 8. 531 solus intellectus convincitur, non contentus Paulus pro more , quem in omnibus fere epistolis tenet, ad exhortationem transit, ut lectorum quoque voluntates moveat eosque ad veritatem cognitam tenendam &c sequendam adducat. Itaque praeprimis eos rogat, ne in turpem servitutem , ex qua iam redemti sunt , revertentes suum ipsius laborem apostolicum fructu privent (8-11); deinde eos precatur, ut suum exemplum imitentur pristini amoris, quo ipsum complexi sint, et magni fervoris memores , quo ipsum prima vice eis Evangelium praedicantem exceperint (12-16); ac tandem monens, ut a pseudapostolis sibi caveant, tenerrima deprecatione exhortationem terminat (17-20). Ultimae conclusioni argumentationis suae Paulus exhortationem intime adnectit pristinum servitutis statum, in quo antea degerant, Galatisin memoriam revocans atque turpiorem perniciosioremque fore novam servitutem insinuans, si nimirum postquam Spiritu coeperunt nunc carne consummari velint. Prioris enim servitutis excusationem quandam ignorantia eorum praebet; nova autem plane erit voluntaria, quoniam nullam prorsus excusationem habent : 8. sed tunc quidem (scilicet in vestro statu. conversionem praecedente) ignorantes Deum iis, qui natura non sint düi, serviebatis. Verbis ignorantes Deum non explicatur particula £c, ut sensus sit: « eo tempore, quo Deum " : $32 INUTILITAS LEGIS IUXTA INDOLEM PROMISSIONUM FACTARUM (3,8-4,90). verum ignorabatis » (Pa/m. etc.), sed fons indicatur, ex quo prior servitus sit exorta et in quo aliquam habeat excusationem. Utrum cum melioribus testibus negationem px cum praedicato coniungamus, an cum aliis eam ad substantivum 95ct (natura) trs&hamus, parum interest; aptior tamen est prior nexus, quia clarius fortiusque turpitudinem prioris servitutis exprimit ac proin etiam Galatas a simili servitute denuo subeunda efficacius absterret. Etenim priore nexu eos, quibus antea servierant, daemonia fuisse insinuatur (voi; oócet pi ooctv Ürotc , &XX Oatuiovíotz cfr 1 Cor. 10,20) ; altero eos putativos dumtaxat deos (Aeydpevot 0o( 1. Cor. 8,5) fuisse innuitur (voiz gà qct, &XX& Mo, oct Üsoic). Turpis igitur quidem fuit etiam prior eorum servitus, sed quanto turpior erit nova , quum non tantum pristinam veri Dei ignorantiam amplius praetendere nequeant, sed etiam filiorum libertate a Deo vero ditati propria sua voluntate in servitutem eorum revertantur, qui nullum eis commodum praestare possunt. Iure merito ergo Apostolus admirabundus interrogat :
4:9
9. nunc autem, quum cognoveritis Deum , immo cogniti sitis a Deo , quomodo convertimini iterum ad infiema et egena. elementa, quibus denuo (ruv dvofitv. Aug. : rursus ut antea) servire vultis? Verum Deum Galatae, siquidem plerique, uti ex praecedente versu apparet, ante conversionem gentiles fuerant, per praedicationem apostolicam cognoverant et in Deum annuntiatum credentes ex priore servitute erant educti ; sese autem revera in libertatem filiorum esse vindicatos, magnis ex beneficiis cognoscere potuerant, quibus a Deo tamquam genuini filii eius erant agniti. Id altero membro Paulus innuit (gtewm cogniti sitis a Deo), quo prius auget. Haud recte vero cum nonnullis Thom. verbo cogniti estis , cui sensu hebr. Hophal attribuit (i. q. cognoscere facti estis, cognitione donati estis), priori membro correctionem addi censet : « sic enim , inquit, Deus dicitur cognoscere , in quantum est causa cognitionis nostrae; et ideo quia supra dixit : quum cognoveritis Deum , statim corrigit et explicat locutionem innuendo, quod non possumus cognoscere Deum ex nobis nisi peripsum v. Quam significationem nec graeco ytyvóoxecüa. nec ipsi hebraico y11» competere, sed verbum vycyvócxev hic , uti saepius, significantiore agnoscendi et approbandi sensu esse usurpatum, alibi iam diximus (cfr ad 1 Cor. 8,3). A Deo cogniti quippe sunt Galatae, quando eis tamquam filiis suis adoptivis misit Spiritum Filii sui; hinc clarum est, quam turpe sit, si nunc iterum convertantur ad infirma et egena elementa. Nomine elementorum eodem modo quo supra (v. 3) ritus iudaicos Paulus designat ; ad eosenim sese Galatae convertere voluerunt et aliqui ex eis v. sequente enumerantur. « Illa autem, inquit CArys., infirma et egena vocat, quia nullam vim habent ad bona promissa acquirenda »; egena erant , quia umbram tantum habebant futurorum bonorum , quae praefigurabant, et zn/irma , quia iustificandi et sanctificandi vi carebant (cfr Hebr. 10,1; 7,18 etc.)!. Difficultas tamen quaedam in eo est, quod Galatae istis elementis denuo ut anteu (nd). dvobsrv) servire velle dicantur. Neque enim recte nonnulli censent, plerosque Galatas ante conversionem suam fuisse proselytos iudai- €os ac proin praecepta caeremonialia ex parte saltem observasse; nam Apostolus neophytos alloquitur, qui verum Deum ignoraverant; iudaici autem proselyti etiam inferioris gradus (proselyti portae), uti Iudaei ipsi, verum Deum cognoscebant et adorabant. Melius respondent alii, Galatas se iterum convertisse ad elementa « non eadem quidem numero vel specie, sed genere; qui enim idolis servierant, servire volebant sub signis et caeremoniis Iudaeorum » (Est. cfr Nat. Pic. Reithm. Palm. etc.). Revera ritus iudaici, postquam Christi morte etiam typicum suum sensum amiserant neque amplius legalem quandam puritatem producebant, a superstitioso cultu ethnicorum vix differebant ; quare etiam 7Aeod. iam explicat : « dum sabbatha et novilunia et alios dies observatis et eorum transgressionem superstitiose timetis, similes iis estis, qui elementa (astra) in deos referunt ». Addatur tamen oportet, Paulum Galatas conversos alloqui, qui, quum Christo essent inserti Christumque induissent, in eo etiam Legem impleverant et cum eo morientes maledictionem Legis sustinucrant, ante conversionem autem servitutem elementorum duriorem quidem sed servituti legalium similem subierant; utroque igilur sensu, si legalibus ritibus se nunc submittere volebant, ad egenorum elementorum servitutem pristinam reverti recte dicuntur (cfr Wind. ctc.). Attamen ut Galatae bene intelligant, quibus de elementis loquatur, haud sine indignatione Paulus exclamat (vel si mavis interrogat) :
4:10
10. dies observatis (722271,2::50: studiose ac superstitiose celebratis) et menses et tempora ct annos! Eos solos enumerari ritus iudaicos, quos Galatae iam receperant (plures alibi enumerat Co/. 2,16), ipsum praesens (zagazageto9s) innuit; caute enim ac lente iudaizantes processerant nequedum neophytos ad circumcisionem adduxerant (cfr 5,2; 6,12 sq.); a festis iudaicis autem introducendis initium videntur fecisse, quia minus molesti ritus illi erant atque primis istis temporibus Christiani eiusmodi communibus festis carebant. Dierum nomine sabbatha , novilunia aliaque festa vel ieiunia, quae quotannis per unum diem celebrabantur, designari clarum est; menses primum et septimum Iudaeis sacros fuisse, Hier. iam adnotat; tempora sacra intelliguntur tria maiora, paschatis, pentecostes, tabernaculorum, festa, quae ab omnibus coram Domino, i. e. in templo, erant celebranda integramque hebdomadem durabant ; anni demum sacri ludaeis erant septimus remissionis (sabbathicus) et quinquagesimus iubilaei !. In tota igitur sua vita,etiamsi pauci tantum ritus eousque erant introducti, Galatae ab elementis iam dependebant et quasi servi facti erant astrorum, quibus festa illa definiebantur?. Mirum ergo non est, quod ob haec novae servitutis initia Apostolus timeat, ne apostolici sui labores fructu caruerint, quum ex una servitute Galatae in alteram sint relapsi :
4:11
11. 4eo vos, ne forte sine causa. (eixsi frustra i. e. sine fructu cfr 3,&; 1 Cor. 15,9) laboraverim fn vobis (xexoniaxa tic oA laboraverim in vestram utilitatem, seu pro vobis). Parum usitata est constructio, qua Paulus utitur, quia qo6s- 0a: *tvx proprie significat « sibi ab aliquo timere », sc. ne sibi ab altero noceatur; dicere autem voluisse videtur se de Galatis timere, ne illis scilicet malum accidat (qo6sic0at msoí 0102) ; quid enim sibi timeat, altero membro exprimitur, quod egregie Chrys. exponit : « Vides viscera apostolica? illi iactantur fluctibus et hic tremit ac metuit; ideo magna cum vi dicit : laboravi in vestram utilitatem, ac si diceret : nolite tantos meos sudores reddere inanes. Quum autem dicit timeo et addit ne forte , simul et metum illis iniicit et in bonam spem illos erigit. Neque enim dicit frustra Jaboravi , sed ne forte; nondum, inquit , accidit naufragium , sed adhuc tempestatem , quae illud producere possit, furere video. Propterea timeo , sed non despero; in vestra enim manu est totum hoc corrigere et ad pristinam reverti tranquillitatem ». 9.) Pristini amoris sui erga eum memores Galatae Apostolum imitentur (&,19-16). Ad hanc pericopen 7Aeod. haud immerito adnotat : « Doloris affectu abreptus frequenter Apostolus orationis formam mutat, nunc increpans nunc exhortans, aliquando conquerens » ; revera concitatum et commotum est dicendi genus in hac parte! neque severus ille ordo logicus reperitur, quem in argumentatione invenimus. Incipit autem & precatione, ut ad suum exemplum Galatae a Legis iugo sese liberent (v. 12), eisque in memoriam revocat, quanto cum amore et fervore ipsum prima vice inter eos Evangelium praedicantem receperint (13-18), ita ut iure sperare possit fore, ut severiorem ipsius admonitionem non respuant (v. 16).
4:12
12. Estote (yivects melius : efficiamini) sicut ego, quia et ego sicut vos; fratres, obsecro vos. Parum recte iuniores nonnulli, maxime inter acath., in his verbis exhortationem ad mutuum amorem deprehendunt :« me quasi alterum. vos complectamini, quemadmodum ego tanta vos caritate prosequor, ac si ego in vosipse paene essem mutatus » (Just. — Luth. Calv. Grot. eic.); contortissima enim haec est explicatio, neque ad eam vindicandam sufficit, ut amicus « alter ego » vocetur. Cum antiquioribus omnibus moderni quoque in priore membro exhortationem vel precationem ad legalium observationem deserendam recte vident : efficiamini sicut ego factus sum , i. e. deserite Legem, quam sequi coepistis, sicut ego eam deserui. Maior est dissensus in altero membro explicando ; quoniam priori membro velut ratio additur, generalis ille sensus, in quo aliqui acquiescunt (« quoniam et ego sum sicut vos, i. e. homo sum ». Aug. cfr A'** etc.), teneri nequit. Aptior est explicatio eorum, qui Paulum pristinum suum zelum iudaicum commemorare censent : « quia et ego olim eram sc. zelator Legis, sicut tos nunc esse coepistis » (cfr CArys. etc.). Attamen praeferimus tertiam, iuxta quam suam ipsius mutationem imitandam esse indicat : « quia et ego factus sum, sc. liber a Lege, sicut vos eratis liberi a Lege ante conversionem vestram » (cfr TAeod. etc.). Facilius enim ex praecedente verbo yivecfis (efficiamini) in hoc membro suppletur verbum yéyova. (factus sum), atque efficacior est iuxta hanc explicationem ratio ipsa : omnia enim, quae antea zelaverat, Paulus reliquerat atque gentibus sese in vivendi modo accommodaverat, ut eos Christo lucrifaceret; quomodo nunc illi ipsi, propter quos Legem reliquerat, eandem Legem amplecti possunt? Praecepti formam monitum istud habet; verum Apostolus nunc praecipere non vult, sed magna cum caritate precatur : fratres , oósecro vos, sc. ut secundum verba mea agatis. Cui precationi ut maiorem vim addat, eos pristinae obedientiae pristinique amoris ac fervoris commonefacit : nz] me laesistis , « iÀmmo vero hucusque summa semper fuit vestra erga, me observantia » (TAheod.); non est igitur, cur timeam, ne vestra inobedientia nunc offendar. Eo minus autem id metuo, quo maiorem iam in primo meo adventu apud vos caritatem expertus sum, quamquam omnia tunc ita esse comparata videbantur, ut a me fugere potius quam ad me allici potueritis :
4:13
13. scitis autem, quia per infirmitatem carnis (€ &clévevxy ^; capxdc) evangelizavi vobis iam pridem (45 xpóttpov prima, vel potius priore vice; bis tantum enim in Galatiam antea venerat), 1&. et tentationem vestram $n carne mea
4:14
1 non sprevistis neque respuistis , sed sicut angelum Dei excepistis me , sicut Christum Iesum. Verba per infirmitatem carnis rectissime Aug. explicat « quum persecutionem paterer », consentientibus omnibus Graecis (Chrys. Theod. Mopsu. Eus Em. Phot. Dam.) et plerisque , Latinis(A'tr, Pel. Hier?. Prim. etc.); quare mirum non est , quod etiam inter antiquiores et iuniores interpretes haec explicatio, quae loquendi usui Pauli congruit (cfr 2 Cor. 11,29; 19,5), communis fuerit. Porro persecutio , quam Paulus priore vice ad Galatas adveniens eisque Evangelium annuntians n carne sua sustinuit, eis haud levis fuerat tentatio , qua ab eius praedicatione facillime absterreri potuissent, nisi eam fortiter et alacriter vicissent. Quae victoria negative (tentationem non sprevistis neque respuistis) et positive (sicut angelum Dei excepistis me, quin etiam sicut Christum Iesum ipsum) ita describitur, ut eximia eorum generositas et caritas eluceat. Spernit tentationem, qui eam dignam non habet, quam vincere studeat, respuit eam, qui ab ea tantopere abhorret, ut eam ne conetur quidem vincere. Sed Galatae tentationem, quam Pauli tribulationes eis creabant, promto animo et magna cum fortitudine superaverant Apostolumque suum, quamvis purgamentum mundi omniumque peripsema esse videretur (cfr 1 Cor. 5,13), tanta cum caritate exceperant, ut ipsum Dominum maiore cum caritate excipere non potuissent. vinciae Galatiae (cfr Proleg. 1,1 p. 360) nobis refert (Act. 13,14-14,22) , evidens est. Sed contra antiquorum explicationem, quam sequimur, moderni interpretes plerique (ctr Wind. Bisp. Reithm. Dr. LR. Palm. Schaef. — Acath. fere omnes) obiiciunt, verba ài* doüévexv non recte verti : per infirmitatem, sed vertenda esse : propter infirmitatem, quia 9t c. accus, non indicet statum, in quo aliquis agit vel patitur, , sed rationem, cur aliquid fiat; a Paulo igitur doceri censent, se morbo quodam (ctr 2 Cor. 12,7) in Galatia, quam transire tantum voluerat, retentum atque fortuito hoc casu occasionem Evangelii Galatis annuntiandi nactum esse. Quibus respondemus, praepositionem $i& c. accus. procul dubio plerumque esse causalem (i. q. propter), sed etiam de témporis duratione aut de conditione perdurante, In qua aliquid fit (i. q. per) interdum adhiberi (5i& vóxza per noctem, 5ik xetuióva per hiemem Xenoph. Anab. I. 7,6, $i qAvxbv Ürvov per dulcem somnum 1. e. dulci somno durante Mosch. efr Pape Griech. Handworterb. s. v.), atque tàm parum hunc praepositionis usum & Graecorum loquendi more abhorrere, ut inter graecos interpretes ne unus quidem inveníatur, qui de causali praepositionis significatione nostro in Ioco cogitaverit; ad unum omnes enim (Chrys. Theod. Mopsu. Eus Em. Dam. Phot. Oec. Theoph.) sententiam ita interpretantur, ut 9€ dsüiviav eis idem fuisse, quod iv doOevsla mut patà daÜsvelac aut Gc 3atcveiac, appareat. Nihil igitur obstat, quominus Vulg. versionem (per infirmitatem) retineamus ; inmo eam retinere debemus, quia hova versio (propter infirmitatem) parum est apta. Neque enim tantum cum Lucae narratione, qui Paulum galaticam regionem pertransiisse refert (Act. 16,6; 18,23), aegre conciliatur, quod ibidem morbo quodam diutius subsistere sit coactus, sed etiam nemo hucusque explicavit, cur Apostolus hoc in contextu docere voluerit, se fortuito tantum casu adductum esse, ut Galatis praedicaret; omnes hac de re si- Jent, stque quod unus alterve (Lightf.j coniecit, bonam voluntatem Galatarum ex eo commendari , quod viro aures praebuissent, qui non nisi invitus inter eos esset commoratus, id ipse longius quaesitum duriusque esse fatetur. : Ad alias explicationes quod attinet, Vict. verba per infirmitatem etiam de morbo quodam interpretatur, quem Paulus ideo commemoraverit, ut se ad Galatarum amorem ius habere ostenderet, quippe propter quos « quum iam infirmus esset, laborem (praedicationis) sibi imposuisset ». Modernorum quidem expositioni haec explicatio, quam Jlier?. quoque aífert, merito praefertur, contextui tamen non plane satisfacit, quia Apostolus non tam suos labores, quam spontaneam neophytorum caritatem commendare vult. Neque contextui Satis consonat Estit coniectura, qui communem interpretationem non respuens probabilius censet, Paulum « humilitatem corporalis suac praesentiae » (efr 1 Cor. 2,1; 2 Cor. 10,10) significare voluisse. Longius vero a contextu Jlier !, aberrat, si Apostolum non do suae, sed de &udientium infirmitate carnis loqui coniicit, « qui non potuerint carnem subiicere verbo Dei, sed quasi carnei nihil intelligentiae susceperunt spiritualis », atque Pel., qui communem interpretationem retinens putat, Paulum increpare Galatas, quod ipsum a persecutoribus non defendcerint. Ad prima illa tempora respiciens cum iisque praesentem Galatarum conditionem comparans moestus interrogat :
4:15
15. wbi ergo est beatitudo vestra (6 ya«a9wuo; 0pàv beatificatio vestra, vel potius : felicitatis vestrae praedicatio)? Antea vosmet ipsos beatos felicesque dicebatis, quod me, licet persecutionibus tribulationibusque oppressum, suscepissetis; sed beata illa tempora transierunt, postquam fidem , quam tunc vobis tradidi, a iudaizantibus quasi fascinati relinquere et ab eo, qui vos vocavit in gratiam Christi, ad castra eorum, qui Evangelium Christi convertere volunt, transire coepistis (1,6 sq.). Atque ut maiorem eis incutiat pudorem, priorem eorum caritatem confirmat, quin etiam exaggerat : testimonium enim perhibeo vobis, quia , si fieri posset , oculos vestros eruissetis et dedissetis mihi. Tanta tunc erat eorum gratitudo ob fidem acceptam, ut pretiosissima quaeque libenter Apostolo suo obtulissent nec ab ullo sacrificio refugissent, quo gratum suum animum caritatemque suam prodere potuerunt. Magnam autem quae nunc in Galatis facta est, mutationem considerans concludere cogitur :
4:16
16. ergo inimicus vobis (iuxta graecum Zéyfpà; tov rectius : £nzmicus vester) factus sum verum dicens vobis. Verum Evangelium, quod olim eis praedicavit quodque iudaizantes corrumpunt, unica potest esse causa inimicitiarum, quae in prioris caritatis amicitiaeque locum successit; ob summum igitur beneficium, quod ab Apostolo acceperunt, eum nunc velut inimicum habent et tractant! Bene Chrys. : « Hic dubitat ac vehementer admiratur cupitque ab eis mutationis causam discere. Quis enim, inquit, vos seduxit vobisque persuasit, ut aliter erga me sitis affecti? Nonne vos estis, qui mihi inserviebatis, qui mei curam gerebatis, qui me oculis cariorem habebatis? Quid igitur accidit? unde inimicitia? unde suspicio? an quia vera locutus sum vobis? Atqui hac de causa par erat, ut me magis in honore haberetis maioreque studio prosequeremini; nunc autem inimicus factus sum , quia verum vobis Evangelium praedicavi ». ewvíjv goo tt dropoUuat confundor ín cobis. [METER Olim Paulus Galatis carissimus fuerat acceptissimusque ; sed animum mutaverant eumque iam pro inimico habebant, postquam aliqui amorem .eorum fiduciamque calumniis suis ei eripuerant. Quinam illi sint, Apostolus non dicit, quia neophytis notissimi erant; perversum autem , quem persequuntur finem, eis patefacit, ut eos ab illis avertat :
4:17
17. aemulantur (5n3oow) vos non bene , sed excludere vos volunt, ut illos aemulemini (CnXovst). Graecum. verbum 552o9v, uti latinum aemulari, e&t in malam partem (i. q. invidia flagrare et ex invidia nocere velle, 1 Cor. 13,8; Act. 7,9 etc.) et in bonam (i. q. studio boni flagrare, aliquid studiose expetere, vel aliquem studiose ad suas partes attrahere; 1 Cor. 129,31; 154,1 etc.) usurpatur; atqui in eadem sententia verbum eandem sive bonam sive malam significationem retinere, manifestum est; quare haud recte nostro in loco multi utramque ei ita attribuunt, ut a principio sententiae sit idem quod invidere , in eius fine idem quod imitari. Aptius sententia explicatur, si in bonam partem sumitur (gratiam favoremque alicuius studiose sibi quaerere ct expetere). Pseudapostoli scilicet Galatarum amicitiam sibi conciliare studebant , id quod per se bonum erat; attamen id faciebant non bene , quia perverso ex fine agebant; ezc/udere enim eos volebant non tam a salute (Theod. Vict. etc. Reithm.) auta vera doctrina (Chrys. Mopsu. Hier. etc.) aut a libertate evangelica (Aug. Saim. Est. etc.), quam ab uniuscuiusque doctoris societate, qui a suis ipsorum partibus non staret, idque ideo; ut neophyti, si alios magistros non amplius haberent, solos suos seductores sectari eorumque partibus sese addicere cogerentur. « Aemulantur vos, sed non bene, quia.non amant bonum vestrum; et hoc apparet, quia volunt vos excludere, ut aemulemini illos, i. e. ut nullum recipiatis nisi illos » (TÀom. cfr Cath. Pic. Wind. Bisp. Paím. etc.). Iuxta Vulg. lectionem monitum quoddam sequitur :.18. óonum autem aemulamini in bono semper et non tantum , quum praesens sum apud vos. Quod duplici modo exponitur; alii enim 6onum pro neutro habentes censent Paulum monere, ut Galatae in virtute exercenda semper excellere studeant, etiamsi ipse inter eos praesens non sit (A*er, Hier. etc.); alii vero bonum pro masculino habent et explicant : « nolite pseudapostolos aemulari, sed bonum quemcumque aemulamini, etiam quum absens sum »; innui autem putant, Galatas debere semper magistrum suum, qui bonam eis doctrinam tradiderit, sectari Sive praesentem sive absentem (cfr Pe/. Prim. Thom. Cai. Est!. Lap. M Ev. etc.). Quae explicatio accuratius quidem , quam prior, contextui consonat , sed teneri nequit , quia lectio ipsa non est genuina (cfr VV. LL.), omnino enim cum Graecis antiquioribusque Latinis legatur oportet : óonum est autem aemulari (xXo3oüt) in. bono semper, et non tantum quum praesens sum apud vos; sed quis huius quoque lectionis sit sensus , in controversia est. Alii enim infinit. $n3o9cfax pro forma media habent, quae sensu ab activo infin. Ux1oov non differat; explicant ergo : « pseudapostoli volunt, ut ipsos sectemini; atqui bonum et laudabile est, ut aemulemini magistros vestros — qualis ego imprimis sum — neque in quibuscumque, sed tantum in re bona; idque semper et non solum me vobis praesente » (Est?., cfr Aug. Erasm. Palm. etc.). Quae explicatio ab altera latinae lectionis interpretatione haud multum discrepat , sed hodie a plerisque iure reiicitur, quia medium genus verbi t23o0v nusquam reperitur neque ulla fuit ratio, cur Paulus, qui in v. 17. activum verbum 0»3ovv bis adhibuit, nunc formam mediam sumeret, quae inusitata est. Rectius igitur cum Graecis omnibus (CArys. Theod. Sev. Dam. Oec. Theoph.) et plerisque modernis (Wind. Reithm. Bisp. Schaef. etc.) infinitivum Unossfat pro passivo sumimus eodemque modo latinum aemtlariinterpretamur, quia deponentia a Vulg. frequentissime sensu passivo usurpantur. Ex variis autem explicationibus , quae propositae sunt, hanc probabiliorem esse propiusque ad Graecorum interpretationem acce- . dere censemus : pseudapostoli amicitiam Galatarum sibi conciliare studuerant, sed eorum aemulationem Apostolus improbavit utpote ex malo fine exortam; bonum vero esse censet, si Galatiae sempec digni habeantur, quorum gratia ab aliis expetatur, dummodo agatur de re bona, ob quam eorum amicitia quaeratur; quamdiu ipse apud eos fuerat, Galatae revera sese aliorum aemulatione dignos reddiderant; addens autem : non tantum quum praesens sum apud vos , innuit eos a bona via recessisse. « Videsne, inquit TAeopA. sententias Theod. et Chrys. quasi complectens, hoc eum indicare, quod digni erant aemulatione apud omnes ob perfectionem, quando apud ipsos praesens fuerat Apostolus? Immo et hoc significat, quod absentia ipsius horum malorum causa fuerit ». Aptissime iuxta hanc explicationem sequens adnectitur sententia, qua Apostolus caritatem indulgentiamque suam blandis verbis manifestans conqueritur, quod neophytos tanto in periculo versantes praesens viva voce exhortari nequeat :
4:19
19. filioli mei, quos iterum parturio, donec formetur Christus in vobis,
4:20
20. vellem autem esse apud vos modo et mutare vocem meam, quoniam confundor in vobis (&xogoopext £v Optv circa vos dubius haereo; nescio quid circa vos consilii capiam vel quomodo vos tractem cfr ad 2 Cor. &,8 aporíamur). Unicus hie est locus, quo Paulus appellatione loanni usitatissima neophytos compellat 7exvía iov (filioli mei); at deminutivum hoc circumstantiis quam maxime est adaptatum , quia Apostolus sese non tam patri , qui filios Christo gignit, quam tenerae blandaeque matri comparat, quae magnis cum doloribus filios parturit (53(vw). Semel quidem eos Christo genuit, quando eos vero Evangelio praedicato ad fidem adduxit; simili autem labore nunc indiget, ut a pseudapostolis seductos ad veram fidem reducat eosque in illa confortet, donec in eis formetur Christus. Clarum est, uti recte Palm. monet, hic non agi de regeneratione (Tit. 3,5), « quae opus est non hominis, sed Spiritus S., quaeque nequit iterari; sed curam suam eos reformandi comparat illi , quam prima vice adhibuit », ut eos ad Christi fidem formaret. Porro « parturitionem hanc, inquit Aug., pro curarum angoribus positam intelligamus, quibus eos parturivit, ut nascerentur in Christo; et iterum parturit propter pericula seductionis, quibus eos conturbari videt. Sollicitudo autem talium de illis curarum, qua se quodammodo parturire dicit, tamdiu esse poterit, donec perveniant in mensuram aetatis Christi , ut iam non moveantur omni vento doctrinae (Ep. 5, 13 sq.); non ergo propter initium fidei, quo iam nali erant, sed propter robur et perfectionem dictum est ». Itaque Christi imago deformata in eis reformanda et perficienda erat, et parturientis dolores patitur Paulus, donec hunc finem attigerit. Hanc ob causam etiam modo , in hoc tempore Galatis tam periculoso, praesens apud eos esse vellet et mutare vocem suam. Quae ultima in verba egregie Hier. : : « Scriptura divina aedificat et lecta; sed multo plus prodest, si de literis vertatur in vocem, ut qui per epistolam docuerat, praesens instruat audientes. Magnam siquidem vim habet vox viva : vox de auctoris sui ore resonans, quae ea pronuntiatione profertur atque distinguitur, qua in hominis sui corde generata est. Sciens itaque Apostolus maiorem vim habere sermonem qui ad praesentes fiat, cupit vocem epistolicam , vocem literis comprehensam , in praesentiam commutare, et quia hoc magis expediebat his, qui in errore fuerant depravati, vivo eos ad veritatem retrahere sermone ». Minus apte alii explicant, eum pro severo modo, quo illos in primo aut secundo adventu allocutus sit, nunc molliore et blandiore modo eos velle alloqui, aut eum velle pro rerum necessitate vel severioribus vel mitioribus verbis uti, aut pro molli sermone, quo antea usus sit, severiore uli etc.; quae omnia temere coniiciuntur. Praesens autem apud eos esse et viva voce eos alloqui desiderat, quia absens nescit, quid et quomodo dicere debeat, ut periculum ab eis avertat : óvt xxopoop.at iv ógiv, i. e. quia absens nescio, quid statuere, agere, dicere me oporteat. Latini interpretes plerique (cfr Vic. A'", Aug. Pel. etc.) explicant : « quia propter vestram levitatem, qua meam doctrinam reliquistis, pudore afficior »; sed nec contextui haec interpretatio consonat, nec graeco verbo (4xopttcÓa:), quod Vulg. in hoc solo loco vertit confundor, alibi rectius Aaesito (Ioan. 13,92; Act. 25,20), aut consternor (Luc. 95). $ 3. Legis inutilitas iuxta. typicum historiae filiorum Abrahae sensum (5,91-31). qua libertate Christus nos liberavit. pla fipac Xpurcbo j)au0ipootv !. Duobus prioribus argumentis Apostolus satis quidem demonstravit, non Legis mosaicae observationem, sed fidem requiri , ut aliquis haereditatis Abrahae seminique eius promissae particeps fieret : Galatae ex auditu fidei benedictiones promissas assecuti erant, antequam de Lege observanda cogitare coeperant (3,1-7); iuxta Scripturae quoque testimonium ii qui ex fide sunt soli cum credente Abraham benedicuntur;*benedictiones vero promissae tam parum a Lege dependent, ut Iudaei ipsi ab eius maledicto ac servitute morte Christi redimi debuerint, antequam promissiones plenum suum effectum sortirentur; mortuo autem Christo omnes, quum Iudaei tum ethnici, eadem via ac ratione per fidem et baptismum Christo inserti adoptionem filiorum proximumque ius ad aeternam haereditatem consequuntur (3,8-^,7). Sed iis non contentus tertium haud minus efficax argumentum addit, quo tantum abesse iterum ostendit, ut ii, qui sub Lege sint, legitimi benedictionum sint haeredes, ut ii soli, qui sub ea non serviant, pro veris Abrahae filiis et haeredibus haberi possint. luxta disertam enim Dei voluntatem ex duobus filiis Abrahae eum solum legitimum haeredem fuisse monet, qui ex matre libera iuxta divinam promissionem natus ipse quoque liber fuit, alterum vero, qui naturali modo ex serva natus ipse quoque servus fuit, ab haereditate esse exclusum. Quae typice explicans non veteris foederis, cuius typus erat Agar serva, filiis, quippe qui sub Lege serviant, sed novi foederis, cuius typus erat Sara, filiis, utpote liberis et supranaturali modo progenitis, haereditatem competere docet. geniosam quandam doctrinae iam demonstratae illustrationem etc. in ea detegunt. Quibus non inhaeremus, qvia quid de typis typicoque sensu . Scripturarum eiusque vi demonstrativa sentiendum sit, alibi iam diximus (cfr /ntrod. gener. in U. T. sacr. libr. p. 530-543; Compend. Introd. p. 131- 133). Divinitus illustratus Paulus perspexit, Deum admirabili sua providentia conditiones duarum mulierum earumque filiorum ita ordinare ac disponere voluisse, ut futuram duorum testamentorum mutuam relationem praeflgurarent ac praesignificarent. Veritas autem , quam Deus eius- . modi typis manifestat, non minus cería est veritate, quam verbis annuntiat; quare huic Pauli argumentationi non minor vis probandi est, quam si eam ex disertis Scripturae verbis desumsisset. Quae igitur Scriptura de diversa duorum filiorum Abrahae condi- ' tione et origine refert, ea Paulus Galatis in memoriam revocat, quia haec narratio typicam significationem habeat (19-24). Quamquam Legis servitutem, in qua ante Christi adventum Iudaei degerant, supra iam libertati christianae opposuerat (v. 1 sqq.), ad novamtamen demonstrationem, quae tota est de hac oppositione, post satis longam exhortationem abrupte admirabunda interrogatione transit :
4:21
91. dicite mihi, qui sub lege vultis esse, legem non legistis (rectius : auditis dxoótzc) ? Galatas alloquitur, qui nondum circumcisi Legem nondum receperant, atque « recte dicit : qui vultis; neque enim id, quod ab eis agebatur, rerum necessitas postulabat, sed importuna eorum contentio efficiebat » (CAhrys.). Iucundo autem verborum lusu utitur, quum eos, qui sub Lege (9x vókov) , i. e. sub mosaicis praeceptis, servire volebant, ad Legem («àv vopov nYina), i. e. ad pentateuchum mosaicum, remittit, qui etiam (una cum propheticis aliisque sacris libris V. T.) in Christianorum coetibus publice praelegi solebat (cfr Act. 15,91) ac proin a Galatis aud?ri potuerat et debuerat. In omnibus suis epistolis, quamvis ecclesiis, quae maximam partem ethnicis conversis constabant, sint scriptae, Paulus Scripturarum haud levem scientiam supponit; in Vet. Test. vero, quod integrum quoque Ler interdum nominabatur (cfr 1 Cor. 185,21; Joan. 10,35 etc.), haud pauca inveniebantur, quae mosaicae Legis futuram abrogationem docebant; quare iure merito mirari potuit, quod sub Lege esse vellent, qui pentateuchum aliosque sacros libros praelegi audiebant. Parum recte igitur nonnulli praeeunte Hier. verbo audiendi hic sensum « intelligendae typicae Scripturarum significationis » attribuunt : « audit Legem, qui iuxta Paulum non superficiem, sed medullam eius introspicit; non audit Legem, qui similis Galatarum exteriorem tantum corticem sequitur »; vix enim ac ne vix quidem Paulus supponere potuit, neophytos typicam illam, quam expositurus est, explicationem cognovisse. Id utique verum est, audire hic non tantum esse auribus, sed etiam mente et intelligentia percipere (cfr ad 1 Cor. 14,2). Quid sua interrogatione voluerit, docet paucis verbis ea proponens, quae explicare vult :
4:22
22. scriptum est enim, quoniam Abraham duos filios habuit , unum de ancilla. (£x «tg vuD(cxnc, de ancilla omnibus cognita Gen. 16,1 sqq.) e£ unum de libera (i« vzc &evÜü£one Gen. 21,1 sqq.). Plures quidem alios quoque habuit filios, qui ei post Sarae mortem ex Cetura nati sunt (Gen. 95,1 sq.); sed Apostolus « hos solos commemorat, inquit Aug., quia solos adhuc habebat Abraham, quum haec significarentur, quae consequenter exponuntur »!; revera ante Sarae mortem ]lsmael haereditate privatus est (Gen. 21, 9 sqq.). Quoniam partus sequitur ventrem, Paulus diserte non dicit, ancillae filium natum esse servum liberaeque filium fuisse liberum, etsi ex hac diversa eorum conditione argumentaturus est, sed alteram differentiam, quae ci non minoris est momenti, studiose addit :
4:23
93. sed qui de ancilla, secundum carnem natus est, qui autem de libera per repromissionem. Prior, servae filius Ismael, secundum carnem (22x o22«x) natus dicitur, non quia ex Abrahae semine (cfr Rom. 1,3; 9,3. 5 etc.) progenitus est (hoc enim alteri quoque competit), sed quia secundum naturae leges ordinario, quo reliqui pueri, modo a parentibus generationi naturaliter idoneis est ortus, atque hac ratione Israelitas, qui naturali generatione per Iacobum et Isaac ab Abrahamo descendentes filii Abrahae secundum carnem sunt, praefigurat. Alter vero, liberae filius Isaac, per promisstonem, l. e. vi ac virtute divinae promissionis (Gen. 17,16,19; 18,10), quae propter Dci fidelitatem non impleri non potuit, aut secundum spiritum (4x7x xve2Ux v. 99), i. e. praeternaturali ac. miraculoso modo ortus est, utpote « non secundum naturae leges neque iuxta coniugiorum morem saíus neque per carnis vires ex aridis corporibus progenitus; neque enim caro conceptum, neque semen partum dedit, siquidem vulva bis erat emortua et propter aetatem et propter sterilitatem (efr Hom. 5,19; Hebr. 11,11 sq. etc.), sed Dei sermo illum efformavit » (CArys.), quum nimirum Deus emortuam generandi facultatem parentum miraculose resuscitaret; hinc Isaac aptus quoque est typus eorum, qui non secundum carnem sed secundum spiritum, fide scilicet, sunt filii Abrahae et tamquam membra Christi ad semen Abrahae pertinent (cfr 3,7. 99). Haec novi argumenti fundamentum constituunt, sed ut argumentationi inserviant, altiore illo sensu intelligantur oportet, quem Deus historico hoc facto praedicere voluit; quare Apostolus monet :
4:24
9&. quae sunt per allegoriam dicta (&XXwyopoóptva) i. e. praeter sensum historicum continent alterum typicum. Improprie (xaraygncevuxdic) nomen a//egoriae hic pro typo sumi, Graeci caute adnotant, ne quis historicam mosaicae narrationis veritatem negari suspicetur (cfr Chrys. Mopsu. Sev. etc.). Allegoria enim, si propria et etymologica sua significatione sumitur (£32o uiv XY ogtóc , &3Xo 9t voío), ad. metaphorae genus pertinet aliudque verbis , aliud sensu ostendit; quare mythologicae narrationes, quibus philosophicas aliasve veritates doceri putabant, grammatici alexandrini allegorias appellabant !, atque Philoni quoque aliisque Iudaeis alexandrinis narrationes mosaicae, in quibus, historica earum veritate aut neglecta aut negata, occultas doctrinas quaerebant, totidem erant allegoriae (cfr Introd. gener. in U. T. libr. sacr. p. 598 sq.). Hoc utique sensu Paulus verbum &JÀ»yo-- ge non adhibet, sed historicam narrationis veritatem supponens significat, Deum providentia sua, qua omnia ac proin liberae quoque hominum actiones reguntur, conditiones duarum illarum mulierum filiorumque earum ita ordinasse ac disposuisse, ut veritatem quandam ad messianicum regnum spectantem praefigurarent. [taque « non aufert historiam, sed docet quae in historia typice continentur » (Theod.), neque altiorem hanc historiae significationem ipse confinxit aut arbitrarie excogitavit, sed a Spiritu S. illustratus omnimoda cum certitudine in illa narratione contineri cognovit; ideo eam etiam sine - ulla haesitatione eadem cum fide ac simplicitate, qua veritates ipsis Scripturarum verbis diserte expressas, proponit. Absolute enim, quia hac de re certissime ei constat, asserit : haec enim sunt duo testamenta. Latinum pronomen Zaec per attractionem substantivo praedic. (testamenta) est conformatum; uti graecum a$1a« enim ad duas matres refertur : Aae duae mulieres, Agar serva et Sara libera, sunt duo testamenta vel foedera (8x0 xax), i. e. eorum typi?. Thesin quasi statuit, quam tamen non tam demonstrat, quam typorum explicatione explanat, primum relationem foederis Legis ad Agar (25. 25), deinde Q3 De vi ac potestate verbi £cxív in eiusmodi sententiis cfr ad 1 Cor. 11,24; 10,4. relationem foederis evangelicae libertatis ad Saram (26-28), demum relationem duorum filiorum ad haereditatem exponens (29-31). A Legis foedere in Agare ancilla praefigurato exorditur : tnum quidem in monte (&x 6;ou; lege : a monte !) Sina in servitutem generans , quae (ict; melius et clarius: qualis?) est Agar. Solitarium positum est unum quidem (sc. testamentum, píx p£v), quia formulam ei respondentem (alterum. autem ixiox 5é) Paulus omisit, ut v. 26. secundum membrum alio modo exponeret. Porro foedus Legis, quod tempore foedus evangelicae libertatis praecessit (uti Ismael ante Isaac natus est) secundum originis locum describit : a monte Sina, in quo Lex data foedusque sancitum est (Exod. 24,1 sqq.), et secundum internam suam indolem : in servitutem generans, i. e. ita comparatum , ut qui ad illud perünent (« filii foederis » Ac/. 3,25) vi originis ac generationis suae sint servi, utpote inde a nativitate Legi subiecti. Utraque autem ratione foedus Agari respondere ac simile esse asserit : qualis (sc. à monte Sina et in servitutem generans) es/ Agar, ut proin foedus Legis in Agare suum habere typum iure dici appareat. Ne quis vero dubitet, quin externa quaedam relatio et internae similitudinis ratio typum inter et antitypum adsint, probationem (vel potius explicationem) adiungit:
4:25
95. Sina enim mons est in Arabia, (qui) coniunctus est (uoto st 9£, lege : coniunctus autem est, vel melius : congruit autem) ei quae nunc est Ierusalem ; (et) servit (Soseón 9£, lege: servit autem) cum filüs suis. Facile aliquis dubitare potuit, num Agari ulla esset ad filios Israel eorumque foedus relatio, quoniam nec eorum erat mater nec per filios suos aut alia ratione cum eis cohaerere videbatur. Ut eam autem adesse ostenderet, Apostolus foedus Legis a monte Sina esse dixit, montem Sina autem in Arabia situm esse. Agar enim est mater Arabum , qui ab Ismaele descendentes (Gen. 95,19 sqq.) regionem circa montem Sina sitam incolunt (Gen. 91,91; 25,18). Deus ergo providentia sua res ea ratione disposuit, ut in terra « filiorum Agar » (Bar. 3,93), qui in patre suo Ismael ab haereditate Abrahae exclusi erant, foedus Legis sanciretur, quod proin loco originis suae quasi indicaret, se ius ad haereditatem filiorum non praebere sed potius servis convenire. Bene antiquus quidam interpres in Cat. graec. : « non sine ratione montem Sina Apostolus commemorat, sed quia Saraceni ab Ismaele progeniti desertum , quod usque ad Sina montem se extendit, occuparant; porro in monte Sina data est Lex in servitutem generans; a Sina monte autem tabulae Legis allatae sunt filiis Israel, quae deinde a loco in locum saepe transportatae tandem in lerusalem stabilem sedem invenerunt; ideo addidit : conzunctus est (vel congruit) autem ei quae nunc est lerusalem », lerusalem sc. terrestri, quae futurae lerusalem coelesti opponitur. Revera foedus sinaiticum non amisisse characterem, quem ex loco originis traxerat, Paulus insinuat; ideo enim montem Sina et lerusalem, quae sedes illius foederis facta est, coniunctos, i. e. in eodem ordine esse sibique respondere atque inter se congruere monet!, ut quod de uno praedicetur, suo modo de altera valeat. Ex eo igitur, quod foedus in terra exhaereditatorum exortum nunc in urbe, quae ad haereditatem Abrahae promissam pertinet, sedem suam fixit, nondum sequi innuit, foedus naturam suam mutasse, ita ut nunc iam filiis sit adaptatum ac ius haereditatis tribuat. Atque haec quidem de externa Agaris relatione ad foedus mosaicum; ad internam autem eorum similitudinem quod attinet , Apostolus id unum adnotat, quod ad finem argumentationis conducit: servit autem (Agar) cum filiis suis; quum serva esset, necessario in servitutem generavit, ut filii eius ab ipsa sua nativitate servi essent. Quodsi vero altera lectio praefertur : SoUós. yàp pietà Tv Téxvov a)75 (servit enim cum filiis suis quae maiore testium auctoritate commendari videtur (cfr VV. LL.), sententiae subiectum erit Ierusalem , quae cum filiis, i. e. incolis suis (Matth. 23,37), servire dicitur, quia Legi subiecta est; sententia autem iuxta hanc lectionem ab Apostolo est addita, ut foedus sede translata eandem, quam antea, naturam retinuisse atque lerusalem, quae nunc est, monti Sina iu terra exhaereditatorum et servorum sito vere congruere confirmaret. Haec verisimilior videtur esse explicalio huius sententiae, quae varietate lectionum satis impedita est; Vulg. lectionem fere secuti sumus, in eo maxime ab illa dissentientes, quod ultimum membrum (ef servit cum filiis $uis) ad subiectum Sina mons non retulimus, quia pronomen suís, quum graeco aà:z« respondeat, subiectum femin. (aut Agar aut lerusalem, aut in graeco à19/x5) postulat ; revera nec graeci codd. nec ulla alia versio per coniunctionem copulativam (et) ultimum membrum prioribus adiungit, sed per discretivam (5£) aut causalem (ydp) coniunctionem. Minor est differentia in secundo membro, quod Vulg. per relativum pronomen introducit (qui coniunctus est), dum codd. graeci et aliae verss. etiam hic coniunctionem &t (autem) exhibent ; sed hac varietate sensus parum mutatur. Cum antiquis enim omnibus interpretibus verbum cvs:eret cum subiecto 39 Ew& $pe (vel «6 "Ayag) connectendum censemus, quamvis moderni haud pauci sententiam Sina mons est in Arabia parenthesi includant, ut verbum evezouget cum praecedente relativo : 7: éeziv "Aya parum apte connectant aut etiam ab hoc verbo novam sententiam inchoent, cuius subiectum sit "Adag. Quibus variis sententiis praetermissis, quum nulla sit ratio, cur ab anliqua et communi recedamus, de altera lectione dicendum est, quam gracci interpretes secuti sunt et moderni satis multi praeferunt; etenim pro «o Jie Sw époc dexiv iv c5 'AgaGia , quam lectionem cum omnibus Latinis (Sina - Gtoryiav schemate quodam proponunt, quod imitatus Lap. satis apte sitnile scheima huius typi proponit (cfr Lightf., qui idem fere repetit : Ismael secundum carnem, [saac per repromissionem, servus, &vttotorya liher, Lex in Sina. Evangelium in lerusalem. lerusalem terrestris , lerusalem coelestis. mater Iudaeorum. maler nostra. Iudaei servi Legis. Christiani liberi per fidein. enim mons est in Arabia) etiam aliqui ex optimis codd. graec. et bonae verss. tuentur (cfr VV. LL.), legerunt : «5 52 (vel 44p) "Avap Zw& 6p deciv iv "Apa6ia (Agar aulem [vel : enim] Sina mons est in Arabia) atque Paulum ex solo nomine 4gar argumentum suum desumere putarunt. Quia "Aqy«p enim praefixum habet articulum neutr. (1ó "Aqap), solum nomen consideratur atque sensus sententiae est : nomine Agar in Arabia (seu ab Arabibus) vocatur mons Sina. « Agar, inquit Chrys., vocabatur ancilla illa; mons Sina eodem nomine appellatur illius gentis lingua » ; iuxta Mopsu. autem « Arabia olim vocabatur non ea tantum regio, quae hodie ita appellatur, sed Agar (nominabatur) omne desertum et partes quae circum illud habitantur, atque etiam pars Aegypti haud exigua ». At montem Sina umquam nomen Agar habuisse incertissimum est; neque recte aliqui moderni addunt, in lingua arabica agar significare lapidem vel rupem , nihil mirum igitur in eo esse, quod mons Sina ab accolis vocatus sit Aagar. Nam Aagar (lapis) per n scribitur (135), nomen mulieris vero, quod per a scribitur (3n) fugam significat; etsi igitur daremus, montem Sina nomen Hagaris (aut Chagar vel potius Chadschar) habuisse, nihil efficeretur; Paulum enim ex mera duorum nominum assonatione similique eorum sono argumentatum esse, vel potius Deum voluisse, ut ancilla et mons similia nomina haberent atque hac similitudine nominum typica eorum relatio significaretur, nobis non persuademus. Quod moderni rationalistae, qui rabbinicum Midrasch in hac pericope vident, eiusmodi sententiam teneant, non miror ; sed quomodo ii moderni interpretes, qui Scripturam inspiratam esse tenent, illam nominum sizulitudinem proferant, non intelligo ; graeci Patres enim non similia, sed eadem esse nomina putarunt et quum antiochenae interpretum scholae principiis inhaererent, argumentum , quod ad nudae allegoriae genus non tam accedit quam pertinet, respuissent. Qui igitur probare potest, nomen ancillae et montis idem fuisse, lectionem illam sequi poterit cum Graecis, sed recte moderni plerique lectionem Vwlg. retinent (cfr Wind. Bisp. M Ev. LR. Sch. Dr. etc. — Goeb. LigMf. Z. etc.), quam ex modernis critic. Bentl. Lachm. Tisch. Treg. receperunt, WH. saltem non reiecerunt, licet eam in marginem relegarent. Si alterum typi membrum eadem ratione, qua prius, explicare voluisset, Paulus pergere potuisset : « alterum autem (foedus) ex monte Sion (cfr Is. 2,2 sqq.) in libertatem generans, quae est Sara; Sion enim est in terra promissionis et respondet coelesti Ierusalem; libera autem est (Sara) cum filiis suis ». Attamen his, quae facile a lectoribus suppleri poterant, praetermissis statim ad antitypum transit :
4:26
26. illa autem , quae sursum est Ierusalem, libera est, quae est mater nostra (vel : mater omnium nostrum vzvrov "pv cfr VV. LL.). Sua quasi sponte praecedenti Jerusalem quae nunc est, qua expressione synagoga Legi serviens designatur, sese opponit Jerusalem quae sursum est, i. e. regnum messianicum s. Ecclesia, Accuratius quidem Ierusalemi praesenti (15; vàv "IeoouczXi.) opponitur Ierusalem futura (Yepoocd. d pf£XXovca) atque lerusalem supernae (75 &ve 'leooucaXiw) lerusalem inferna (4 xxr 'lepovsc)wp); sed non sine ratione Paulus priorem expressionem (futuram lerusalem) non adhibuit, quia ipsa quoque praesens iam aderat, quamvis totam suam perfectionem non habitura esset nisi tempore resurrectionis universalisque iudicii, quando Filius regnum, quod acquisivit sanguine suo, traditurus est Patri (1 Cor. 15,96; cfr Apoc. 21,1 sqq.). De huius enim temporis Ecclesia militante, quae cum triumphante utique intime est connexa nec ab ea separari potest (cfr Hebr. 12,92 sqq.), loquitur eamque supernam vocat, quia, quamquam in terra versatur, secundum originem tamen, indolem finemque suum desursum est; corpus enim est, cuius caput Christus in coelo residet, cuiusque membra, quamdiu in hac terra degunt, non nisi vita, quam a capite suo coelesti accipiunt, viventia conversationem suam in coelis habent eoque tendunt, ut capiti suo glorificato conglorificentur (PAl. 3,20 sq.). lamvero hanc coelestem civitatem et /iberam esse a servitute Legis, cui terrestris lerusalem cum filiis suis servit, asserit et matrem nostram esse , ita. ut omnes , sive ludaei sive ethnici conversi, utpote liberae filii, et ipsi liberi simus filiorumque iure ad haereditatem potiamur!. Utrumque autem duabus sequentibus sententiis demonstrat : libera cnim est Ecclesia, quia Sarae respondet, quatenus ipsa quoque, sicut illa, licct naturaliter sterilis ac deserta sit, divinae tamen promissionis virtute numero filiorum aemulam suam longe superat (v. 27.) ; mater autem nostrum omnium est, quia nos quoque, sicut Isaac, non secundum carnem sed per repromissionem sumus nati ac proin sicut Isaac liberi sumus ac haeredes (v. 928). Priorem probationem ex prophetae verbis (Is. 5*,1) desumit, quae iuxta alexandr. versionem a primigenio textu sensu non dissentientem allegat? :
4:27
97. scriptum est enim : Laetare. sterilis, quae non paris; erumpe (Pr5ov sc. ebgzocóvrv erumpe gaudium i. e. iubila) e£ clama , quae non parturis; quia multi filii desertae , magis quam ctus quae habet virum. Propheta, postquam immediate antea (32,13-53,12) de servi Dei, i. e. Messiae, passionibus locutus fructus earum paucis tantum verbis innuit, inde à 55,1 accuratius illos describere incipiens sub figura urbis lerusalem, quae exsilii tempore sterilis ac deserta iace- 1. Lectionem receptam gx Xávrov f$uov (mater onmium nostrum), quum sufliciente testium auctoritate fulciatur et a S. Polyc. (ad Phil. 3) quoque confirmari videatur, pracferendam ducimus, quia maiorem vim habet atque sequenti sententiae, in qua de inultiludine filiorum agitur, magis congruit. 2. De boc textu cfr Knabenbauer Comment. in Isaiam. II p. 338 sqq. bat sed ad novam splendidioremque vitam resurrectura erat, regnum messianicum morte servi Dei fundatum describit illudque fines suos usquequoque extensurum atque gentes quoque omnes complexurum esse praedicit, ita ut veterem theocratiam longe sit superaturum. At dubium non est, quin propheta in verbis allegatis simul ad Abraham Saramque alluserit, quorum fidem brevi antea Iudaeos, quia eorum essent filii, considerare et imitari iusserat, ut salutem invenirent (Is. 51,1 sqq.); neque immerito etiam iudaici interpretes (cfr ScAoettg. Horae hebr. in Gal. 4,27) duos istos locos connectunt monentque : « sterilitas Abrahae et Sarae figura fuit sterilitatis Sion ». Aptissime ergo Paulus haec verba adhibuit, ut novam Ecclesiam per Saram praefigurari ideoque, sicut illam, liberam esse demonstraret. Sara, quum sterilis atque etiam a viro, postquam ille ad ancillam introierat, deserta esset, filios sese habituram sperare non poterat ; at divinae promissionis virtute laetatur de maximo filiorum numero, quo ancillam, quae foecunda erat et virum habebat, longe superat. Simili modo lerusalem coelestis, quae in prima futuri Salvatoris promissione quasi nata est, toto quidem tempore Legis, quando lerusalem terrestris de sua cum Deo unione gloriabatur multosque filios secundum carnem sibi procreabat, sterilis atque a Deo oblivioni data ac derelicta videbatur; sed post promissi Salvatoris mortem statim foecundam se esse ostendit et de numerosa laetatur prole, quam utique non secundum carnem sed per divinam promissionem parit. Haud pauci quidem Patres inde a primis fidei temporibus et cum eis multi iuniores Isaiae Paulique sententiam de sola gentium Ecclesia interpretari videntur, quae usque ad Christi adventum sterilis fuerit, ab eo autem tempore synagogam numero filiorum superare coeperit (cfr S. Clem Rom. 3 Cor. 2; S. [ust. M. Apol. I. 53; Orig. Comm. in Rom. VI. 7; Euseb. et S. Cyr. Alez. in Is. 55, 15 CArys. Theod. Pel. etc.). At utroque in loco de integra Ecclesia sermonem esse, contextus docet, quum integra Ecclesia sit fructus passionis servi Dei et omnium fidelium mater appelletur, quamquam certum est, prophetam non minus, qui de accessione gentium ad novam lerusalem diserte loquitur (fs. 54,3.), quam Apostolus, qui gentilibus conversis scribit, de gentilium ecclesia maxiine cogitasse. Eodem autem sensu etiam Patres illos, saltem . plerosque, locum intellexisse arbitramur, siquidem non tam gentium ecclesiam ecclesiae ludaeochristianorum, quam Ecclesiam integram, quae, quia maximam partem gentibus conversis constat, ab eis gentium appellatur, antiquae synagogae opponunt. Interroganti autem, ubinam numerosa illa proles inveniatur, Apostolus ita respondet, ut alterum suum assertum, coelestem lerusalem esse nostrum omnium matrem, confirmet :
4:28
28. nos autem, fratres , secundum Isaac promissionis filii sumus. Ad Pauli argumentationem lectio "Apsete... écpév (nos... sumus), quae non minore, quam altera (opseic... £ové vos... estis), auctoritate est munita (cfr VV. LL.), melius quadrat, quia non tantum Galatas aliosque gentiles conversos, sed etiam Paulum ac ludaeochristianos, simili modo quo Isaac a Sara (secundum Isaac), vi divinae promissionis & nova lerusalem generatos esse insinuat. Ceterum bene CArys. : « non sterilis tantum, inquit, erat Ecclesia sicut Sara, neque mater tantum facta est multorum filiorum, sicut illa, sed etiam eadem ratione, qua illa, eos generavit. Quemadmodum illam enim non natura, sed Dei promissio fecit matrem (nam qui dixit : secundum tempus veniam et Sarae erit filius [Gen. 18,10], idem ingressus in uterum infantem formavit), sic et in nostra regeneratione natura nihil efficit, sed verba divina fidelibus cognita in aquae lavacro per sacerdotem pronuntiata , velut in utero quodam, formant et regenerant eum qui baptizatur ». Synagoga ergo, utpote per Agarem praefigurata, serva est cum filiis suis, Ecclesia vero, mater nostra, quoniam Sarae respondet, libera est; unde iam clarum est, neophytos, quia liberae sunt filii, Legi non posse subiici. Quibus non contentus Paulus hostes ipsos aggreditur atque a matrum historia ad filiorum sortem transiens, qui ipsi quoque iypi sint, ostendit solos Ecclesiae filios ius ad haereditatem Abrahae possidere, ab ea autem synagogae filios, i. e. omnes qui Legi serviant, esse exclusos. Tantum igitur iuxta novum hoc argumentum abest, ut neophyti ethnici, si Legi sese subiiciunt, novam perfectionem acquirant ac perfectiores Christiani fiant, ut hac subiectione iura verorum Christianorum amittant. Itaque & vero aberrarunt, qui typicam hanc explicationem prioribus argumentis velut meram illustrationem aut confirmationem quandam, quae per se superflua esset, accedere putarunt; nam novo hoc argumento, quo procul dubio priora etiam confirmat , Paulus adversarios suos plane frangit ac profligat, quandoquidem eos ipsos, qui per Legem alios ad perfectionem adducere velint, nondum veros Christianos esse insinuat, quia tamquam filii ancillae ab haereditate sint exclusi. Probabile est, iudaizantes pseudapostolos, ut Galatas ad suas partes attraherent, eis subiectionem sub Lege ad infidelium Iudaeorum perseculiones avertendas commendasse (cfr 5,11); verum nihil esse , quod de persecutionibus illis, quamvis sint promissionis filii, mirentur aut extimescant, Apostolus monet, quoniam in eis novam suae cum [saaco similitudinis rationem habeant atque ex eis se filios liberae ac proin haeredes esse clarius cognoscant:
4:29
29. sed quomodo tunc is, qui secundum carnem natus fuerat , persequebatur eum , qui secundum spiritum : ita et nunc. Ancillae filius secundum carnem , filius liberae secundum spiritum , utpote vi divinae promissionis, natus est (cfr ad v. 23); maiorem vero persecutum esse fratrem suum natu minorem Apostolus ex Gen. 21,9 sq. colligit. Quo in loco Ismael quidem cum Isaac Zusisse tantum (pny Alex. zaítew) refertur !; verum Patres iam, quum Sara propter istum lusum, ut ancilla cum filio eiiceretur, ab Abrahamo postularet, « lusum illum non fuisse simplicem » (Hier.), « lusionem illam illusionem, et, si illusio, seductionem ac deceptionem fuisse » (S. Aug. serm. 3; in Ioan. tract. 11,12; 19,5 etc.) concluserunt eodemque sensu Iudaei, varias utique fabulas admiscentes, locum interpretati sunt?. Iusto igitur iure Paulus Ismaelem persecutum esse fratrem suum dicit, quum Geneseos contextus persecutionem indicet; neque opus est ad Apostoli expressionem defendendam, ut eum nonnullis continua bella, quibus Ismaelis posteri (Ismaelitae, Agareni etc.) filios Israel.lacessiverunt (1 Par. 5,10. 19; Ps. 82,"1 etc.) huc trahamus. Porro filios lerusalem terrestris, qui per Ismaelem praefigurati sunt, i. e. ludaeos Legi servientes, simili modo filios lerusalem coelestis , i. c. Christianos, vexasse ac persecutos esse, integri Apostolorum Actus testantur, ex quibus manifestum quoque est, quam infesto odio ludaei et per se ipsos et per ethnicos , quos instigarunt, in meridionalibus provinciae Galatiae partibus Apostolum neophytosque insectati sint (Act. 13. 14). Sese igitur hac ratione filio liberae assimilatos esse, Galatae experientia edocti erant; quodsi vero antitypi erant Isaaci persecutione oppressi, etiam antitypi esse debebant Isaaci ad haereditatem admissi, dum eorum persecutoribus sors Ismaelis exhaereditati remanebat. Quam conclusionem Paulus innuit pergens :
4:30
30 sed quid dicit Scriptura? Eiice ancillam et filium eius; non enim haeres erit filius ancillae cum filio liberae. Verba haec a Sara quidem sunt dicta, at quia Deus ea approbavit, quum Abrabamum ea exsecutioni mandare iuberet (Gen. 21, 10. 12), Apostolus ea Scripturae seu Deo loquenti iuremerito attribuit; levi tamen mutatione, quam subiecti loquentis mutatio necessariam reddidit, argumento ea suo accommodavit pro /i/jo meo Isaac ponens filio liberae. Recte monet Chrys. « non ob temporariam persecutionem poenam hane de Ismaele sumi »; haereditate privatus est non ob persecutionem, sed quia tamquam servae filius ac servus ius ad haereditatem non habuit; id Paulus innuit diserte servae filio filium Jiberae op- . ponens. Minus recte alii verba haec exhortationis (Vict. etc.) aut consolationis gratia (Theod. etc.) addita esse censent ; exhortationem quidem simul continent, ut « christianismum solum legemque Christi atque Evangelium suscipiant nihilque quasi ex ancillae filio habeant », atque etiam consolatoria sunt, quum praemium ostendant, quod persecutione non obstante sint percepturi; at Paulus ea ad argumentum suum complendum addidit. Ex omnibus enim, quae in typica hac explicatione proposuit, simul sumtis nunc conclusionem ultimam deducit :
4:31
31. itaque (96 quapropter, quae quum ita sint), fratres, non sumus ancillae filii, sed liberae (qua libertate nos Christus liberavit). Ecclesia ipsa libera est, quia Sarae liberae respondet (v. 26), nos autem liberae filii sumus, quia sicut Isaac non secundum carnem sed secundum spiritum vi promissionis ab Ecclesia generamur (v. 28) et quia hac ratione generati iterum sicut Isaac, liberae filius, a servae filiis persecutionem sustinemus et cum eo ius ad haereditatem possidemus (v. 30 sq.). Apte quidem ultima verba qua libertate nos Christus liberavit (i. e. liberae filii sumus ac liberi ea libertate, in quam Christus nos morte sua asseruit) a Vulg. adduntur, sed aptius pro initio sequentis exhortationis sumuntur (cfr infra p. 559). Argumentis propositis, quibus auctoritatis doctrinaeque suae originem et indolem ab adversariorum calumniis vindicavit et sophismata, quae illi ad errorem suum de Legis necessitate neophytis persuadendum congesserant, omni ex parte confutavit ac revicit, Paulus ad exhortationem revertitur, quain in fine secundi argumenti (4,8-90) iam inchoarat sed abruperat, ut ultima sua demonstratione iudaizantes ipsos in periculo versari ostenderet, ne ab haereditate, quam neophytis non circumcisis negabant, suis ritibus observatis excluderentur. Simili igitur modo, quo in priore exhortatione ex doctrina proposita conclusiones quasdam practicas derivat (5,19-5) praeprimis neophytos monens, ne Legis servituti sese subiicientes gratiis Christi 'se privent (5,1-6) , deinde eorum seductoribus gravem poenam comminans (5,7-12), demum prohibens, ne libertatem a Lege male interpretantes carni servire incipiant (5,13-25). Ad finem autem epistolae transiturus specialia quaedam monita addit, quae cum doctrina de Legis abolitione intimiore quidem nexu non cohaerent, sed ecclesiis illis, ut videtur, necessaria fuerunt (5,6-6,10). Exhortationis igitur duae sunt sectiones, quarum prior est tripartita. $ 1. Doctrinae propositae consectaria practica. (5,1-23). 1. Caveant Galalae, ne Legi sese subücientes gratiam. Christi Praecedenti sententiae, qua Christianos omnes liberae filios ideoque liberos ac haeredes esse ex argumento proposito collegit, aptissime nunc adnectit exhortationem, ut in libertate Galatae persistant, quum Christus eam nobis acquisiverit : qua libertate (7; Quvüepía. lege : in libertatem) Christus nos liberavit;
4:1
Λέγω δέ (comme v, 16; cf. mm, 17: 1 Cor. 1, 12, mais non Rom. xv, 8 [λέγω γάρ]) n'indique pas seulement une explication complémentaire de ce qui précède. Par l'union δὰ Christ, les fidèles sont vraiment les héritiers de la promesse, c'est-à-dire: des biens messianiques, Durant l'intervalle entre [ἃ δούλου κύριος πάντων ὦν, Ξἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους promesse et l'entrée en possession, la Loi a été ajoutée comme un intermède dont le but a été déterminé. Il n’y ἃ pas à revenir là-dessus pour expliquer encore la raison d'être de la Loi, mais pour fixer les traits généraux de cette époque pour toute l'humanité, en contraste avec le temps présent. C'était une époque de sujétion et d’esclavage. Eh quoi? même pour ceux qui étaient appelés à l’hérédité? Oui, comme il arrive aux fils de famille mineurs. La comparaison cloche, comme toujours, parce que les fidèles contemporains do Paul ne sont pas les mêmes iadividus qui ont été en tutelle aux siècles précédents ; aussi n'est-ce pas une allégorie, mais encore une sorte de parabole. De même que les fils de famille n'arrivent à jouir des biens de leur père qu'au temps marqué par lui après leur enfance; de mème l'humanité, quoique la promesse lui ait assuré la bénédiction, est demeurée dans l'esclavage jusqu'à la venue du Christ. Il ny a ici aucune allusion spéciale aux Juifs comme fils de Dieu, puisque tout dépend de la promesse qui a été aussi adressée aux gentils dans la bénédiction d'Abraham. — ἐφ᾽ ὅσον χοόνον, comme Rom. vu, 4; 1 Cor. vi, 39. — ὁ xAngovéuos, d'après Chrys., Théoderet, Jér. etc. est l'héritier au sens propre, non pas seulement (comme dans Mt. χχι, 38) « l'héritier présomptif », car si ce dernier aïdait son père dans l'administration, il n'était pas le maître de tout; on ne dirait jamais d'un fils du vivant de son père qu'il est χύριος πάντων. Si le père de Le. xv1, 81 dit à son fils omnia mea tua sunt, c'est une forinule affectueuse qui ne change pas la situation du fils, tenu dans une dépendance étroite vis-à-vis de son père, et même longtemps après sa majorité. L’héritier, au sens propre, est encore νήπιος « enfant » et c'est pourquoi il n'entre pas en possession. Le terme correspond au latin énfans et n’a rien de technique juridiquement, car l’infantia romaine cessait avec la septième année, longtemps avant la fin de la minorité. Cet enfant ne diffère pas d'un esclave, non pas d’après son statut légal, bien supérieur, mais quant au droit de disposer des biens, et par conséquent d'en jouir pleinement {utendi, fruendi, abutendi), ce qui répond à la situation des hommes par rapport aux biens messianiques.
4:2
οἰκονόμος ne peut désigner qu'une personne chargée de l'administration des biens, un intendant, un régisseur, un administrateur quelconque d'une fortune privée. Donc ἐπίτροπος ne doit pas avoir ici ce même sens, encore qu'il l'ait dans d'autres cas (Mt. xx, 8; Le. vin, 8; Xénoph. Aristote etc.). Cornely suppose sans la moindre preuve que dans notre cas l'ixirooros se distingue de l'oxovéuos comme son supérieur. Il est plus simple de mettre à côté de celui qui s'occupe des biens celui qui s'occupe de la personne. Et ἐπίτροπος ἃ certainement le sens de tutor (que lui donne ici la Vulgate) ou de tuteur d'enfants mineurs (cf. II Mach. x1, 1; xin, 2; ἐπίτροπος ὀρῳφάνων Pia. Legg. VI, Ὁ. 766 C., etc.). Si Paul avait pensé à un pédagogue, il se serait servi de ce mot qu'il a déjà employé. On voit donc autour de l'enfant qui ne peut ni ester en justice, ni administrer ses biens, des tuteurs et des intendants. En soi, οἰκονόμος pourrait signifier « curateur » d'un pupille, et il est certain qu'à Rome : « pour faciliter l'administration de la tutelle, on adjoint parfois un curateur au tuteur » (Cuo, Manuel des Institutions juridiques des Fomains, Paris, 1917, Ὁ. 219). Mais le pére lui-même pouvait nommer plusieurs tuteurs. Le préteur cherchait à foire prévaloir un tuteur unique, pourtant, « si les tuteurs n'occeptent pas cette solution et qu'ils demandent soit à administrer en contmun, soit à diviser entre eux l'administration, le magistrat le leur permet » (πο, d. lp. 213). Dans ce cas on ne voit pas ce que feraient encore des curateurs. Les οἰχονόμοι de Paul sont donc plutôt des intendonts nommés por le pére ou par les futeurs. — ἡ προθεσμία, c'est-àdire fuées, le jour marqué d'avance, Le temps fixé préalablement. Ce terme prouve clairement que le pére n'est plus là, ét que l'héritier est bien le maitre de tout au sens propre. Si le pére n'était point mort, il serait toujours le maître de faire sortir son fils dé la sujétion à des officiers domestiques. C'est en prévision de sa mort qu'il avait dû prévoir l'avenir dans son testament. Il est étrange que Cornely fasse de ce terme une preuve que le pére n'a pas réglé par testament l'émancipation de son fils en effet, dit-il, d'après le droit, la rninorité cessait à l'âge fixé par la loi, non d'aprés les dispositions du pére. Mais sait-on exactement si Paul s'est référé à un droit positif déterminé? Peut-être aussi Paul a tout laissé à Ja libre disposition du père, parce qu'il pensait au Père céleste qui avait réglé tous les temps. Pourtant il semble bien que Paul avait en vue un droit positif. Si c'était celui des Galates, il était au moins aussi favorable à la puissance paternelle que celui des Romains; Gaïus (1, 55) dit en effet que les Galates pratiquaient la patria potestas non à la grecque, mais comme Îles Romains, et à la gauloise. Or César (8. ὦ. VI, 19) dit des Gaulois : Viri in uxores, sicuti in liberos, vue necisque habent potestatem. Maïs il est plus probable que Paul se réfère au droit romain, que les Galates ne pouvaient ignorer, et qui s'imposait de plus en plus aux provinces. Ne pouvant tirer au clair un point trs controversé, j'ai consulté la plus haute autorité sur la matière, M. Cuq a bien voulu me répondre : « Le passage de l’épître aux Galates que vous me signalez est conforme aux usages des Romains au temps où $. Paul l'a écrite. L'héritier, tant qu’il est impubère, ne diffère en rien d'un esclave, bien qu'il soit ls maître de tous [65 biens. I est soumis à des tuteurs et à des curateurs jusqu'à l'époque fixée par son père. Ces deux propositions sont exactes. 1° L'impubère sui Juris est maître de son patrimoine; maïs il ne peut exercer ses droits sans l'auctoritas de son tuteur. La capacité partielle de l'impubère sorti de l'infantia, pour les actes qui rendent sa condition meilleure, n'apparaît qu'au n° siècle. 2° Le père, en nommant un tuteur à son fils impubére, peut fixer la durée de la tutelle. Il eut d'abord ce droit lorsqu'il instituait héritier son fils, On l'admit ensuite quand il instituait un de ses amis en le chargeant de restituer l’hérédité à son fils lorsque l'enfant atteindra un âge déterminé. Au milieu du 1er siècle, il n’y ἃ pas d'âge fixé par la loi pour la fin de la tutelle. La tutelle cesse lorsque l'enfant devient pubère, donc à ur âge variable selon les personnes. D’après la ἄχρι τῆς ποοθεσμίας 500 74 g. οὕτως χαὶ ἡμεῖς, ÔTE ἡμὲν νγπίον, ὑπὸ doctrine des jurisconsultes contemporains de 5. Paul, notamment de Cassius, le chef de l'école Sabinienne qui fut légat de Syrie en 49, la puberté s'apprécie ex habitu corporis. Les Proculiens ont proposé de renoncer à l'examen corporel et de fixer uniformément la fin de la tutelle à 14 ans pour les garçons, à 12 ans pour les filles. L'accord s'est fait entre les deux écoles, mais seulement pour les filles. Pour les garçons, le maître de Julien, Javelenus Priseus, qui fut lègat de Numidie en 83, fit une concession aux Proculiens ; il exige l'âge de 14 ans et l'examen corporel (Ulpien. XF. 28} C'est dire que l'âge de 14 ans est un minimum au-dessous duquel on ne peut descendre même si l'habius corporis permet de dire que l'enfant est puhère. Cela posé, le père qui ἃ qualité pour décider quand son fils doit être considéré comme pubère et revètir la toge virile, peut en nommant un tuteur testamentaire le charger de gérer la tutelle jasqu'à l'époque où le père estime que l'enfant sera pubère et en état d'administrer ses biens. D'après [88 exemples fournis par les textes du τὴ siècle, cet âge varie entre 4 et 16 ans, 14. ans si l'enfant peut trouver dans sa mère un guide éclairé: tel était Le fils de Marcia d'après Sénèque txxrv. Li, 46 ans d'après un texte de Javolenus {Pig. XAXVI, 4, 46): Seius Saturninus.., testamento fiduciariwm reliquit heredem Valerium Maxtmum trierarcham, a quo petit, ut filio suo Seio Oceano, cum ad annos sedecim persenisset, hereditatem restitueret. Dans l'espèce il s'agit d’une hérédité fidéicommissaire. Javolenus fait observer qu'en prorogeant la date de la restitution le père a voulu charger le fiduciaire d'administrer ses biens comme un tuteur, L'usage romain devait ètre d'autant mieux compris par les Galates que la puissance paternelle avait chez eux yae organisation analogne à celle des Romains, et que la tutelle testamentaire était usitée dans presque toutes les cités de l'Empire 1Gaius. |. 53. 1894 » Cette lettre dont je ne saurais assez remercier M. Cuq dirime très clairement la question. On n'est pas obligé de recourir à l'échappatoire que le père fixe le terme en assignant le terme légal comme c'est le cas dans le paprrus BGU I, 86. 180, pour l' Égvpte. Le testateur désigne pour ses deux fils encore impubères (4p4kxs) son véritable ami Pabus comme ἐπίτροπον χαὶ ἐπιτροπεύονται!) αὐτῶν, μέγοι ἐὰν ἐν τῇ νόμῳ (c'est-à-dire ἐν τῇ ἐννόμῳ) Far Ζαλπ, p. 193, note).
4:3
C'est l'application de la comparaison. — ἡμεῖς, l'Apôtre et les seuls gentils convertis d'après Augustin : goniam et eorum personas docentes ἫΝ potest annectere, quibus ad evangelisandum missus est. Cette opiron est demeurée isolée, mais il est à noter qu Augustin a exclu ies Juifs de ve ttc D'après Chrrs.. Théodorel, Ambrosiaster, Thomas, ete. Cornely, Zahn, ἡμεῖς désigne ee et les Juifs convertis seuls. Cornelx distingue nettement entre les gentils qui n'avaient aucun droit à l'hérédité, et les Juifs, qui, avant la conversion, προς descendants d'Abraham, y avaient un certain droit, d'après Rom. xv, 8. Mais cela parait tout à fait contraire à la doctrine de Paul. La so ts charnelle d'Abraham ne donnait absolument aucun droit à l'hérédité qui est l'héritage du Seigneur promis à la foi (nr, 14, 22), Dans Rom. xv, 8, 1 n'est pus question du droit des Juifs comme descendants d'Abrokan, mois de leur prioriié atauce des promesses faites à leurs peres, Gi par lesquelles Je gneur 8 € : seulement δ four proposer Je suit avant tous autres. Et ΟἹ Le contexte prouve nettement 4 }} s'agit des Juifs et des gentils convenis Lér. etc. Au ρα, de parle de ls Loi, δα] ersploie un terme qui peut con aux denx cafégories, anis: αὶ τοῦ κόσμου; 11 montre l'effet de Jincarnation sur Jes lus d'abord, puis sur fes deux groupes iv, 5 au moyen dé deux frs; aux ve. 7 et 8 où ἢ parle de Ja servie comme au v. 3, 1} lemtend posnir sterment de l'ancien cat des gentilé :Zwght. Sicffert, Lipsius, Rousset, οί. — nues Ὑέπιοι vépete, à propos de Ja siiustion que la comparaison devait rendre plus claire. wa des terres de cette corparsison τ σα qui est cantre fa loi du genre Kiiérsire de la parobole. Mais cette 18: ἐώργπον l'humanité avant Je Christ comme étant dons un éist d'enfopee est à noter pour le sens des —mI qui doivent donc étre en rapport avec l'enfance, — τὰ στο aus : le mot revient ou v. 9 sans 262 uns, cc qui montre que J'acrent eet sur στο εῖα, quoiqu'il faille tenir compte de la qualification : τοῦ χόσμου, CAVE] de πτοΐχος, « lignée, rangée, série 2. désigne le prermier élément dont 55. compose un ensemble, ainsi 4° Jes lettres, non pas 65 tant qu'écrites, mais en tunt qu'elles sont parties d'uns articulation complete ou d'un mot Agusrore, Poét. xx. Tertullien à vu ici ce sens Ado. Mare, NV, 4: qui est exelu par lodéiion de τοῦ κόπρου, Un élérnent peui étre aussi 20) une partie du monde visible, ce en quoi il se résout, d'apres les anciens : l'eau, la terre, de feu et Poir Dioe, Lasrcr, Zeno, 63. 1571. Cest le sens dns Sap. var, 17; vx, 18; II Pet. πὶ, 20, 12. Ce sens parait indiqué ici par l'ad'onctjon dé τοῦ ajout Victor. Zahn, Toussaint, 1nais on ne voit pas cormmient les Juifs et Jes gentils étaient sous a sujétion de ces Gémenis: leur pure nature physique est hors de cause, el 5.115. représentaient ici, à la façon stoïcienne, des divinités, comme Zeus pour l'air, Poseidon pour l'esn etc., cela ne conviendrait pas nux Juifs. — Mais no éliment peut étre aussi 3% entendu, dans l'ordre inoral, du rudiment, dés notions élémentaires qu'on donne aux enfants. C'est je sens de [léb. x, 12, awant dans lé contexte comme ici νήπιος 19. et 1} conviendrait ici 51 l'on pouvait expliquer τοῦ χύσουν. or l'alliance ὅδ mots reparait dans Col. 4, 8 ur τὰ στοῦ εἴα τοῦ χόσαου vai αὐ τατὰ Noé et ol. τῷ 26 οἱ rires 70 "πὰ ἄτι τοῦ été Set ἘΞ hrs. Dans ces deux passages, les éléments da monde sont des principes de conduite noturels, fort inférieurs à La vie dans le Christ, ce qui convient parfaitement à notre passoge pour qualiier l'état religieux du monde avant lui. Et sil s'agit bien de Fétat religieux. comme le prouve lé conteste, on s'explique la servitude “δεδουλομένοι, à ces éléments, car les principes et les lois religieuses dans l'antiquité, même chez les Juifs, inspiraient la crainte et la servitude, une servitude exigeante, plutôt qu'un amour spontané. Cette solution qui est celle de Jérôme, Gennadius, pseudo-Primasius, Lightfoot, Sieffert, Schaefer, parait certaine. Cornely obijecte que la Loi ne peut étre dénommée rudimenia mundi. Sans doute ce terme n’eût pas été choisi pour désigner la [οἱ seule; il n'y avait qu'à la nommer, si Paul n'avait parlé que des Juifs. Mais il a cherché une expression qui pouvait convenir aux principes religieux, aux pratiques des Juifs et des gentils, et l'expression « rudiments du monde », par opposition au christianisme, pouvait très bien comprendre une loi, même d’origine divine, qui était provisoire et qui venait d'être comparée à un pédagogue. S. Thomas : Lex vetus dicitur elementum, quia sicut pueris, qui sunt instituendi ad scientiam, primum proponuntur elementa tllius scientiae, per quae manuducuntur ad illam, ita Lex vetus proposita est Tudaeis, per quam manuducerentur ad fidem et iustitiam. Quant à cette qualification de rudiments du monde, elle s'explique aussi par le caractère de la Loi. Ne s'adressant qu'à une nation, mais s'adressant à toute la nation comme formant le peuple de Dieu, elle ne contenait pas de promesses de salut individuel éternel, mais de récompenses temporelles pour la nation. Elle était engagée dans un cycle de temps sacrés qui dépendaient du cours de la nature, comme Paul le notera plus loin (ιν, 10), Evidemment le paganisme était beaucoup plus ancré dans les cultes de la nature, avec des divinités qui s'y résorbaient plus ou moins. Paul ne manquera pas de faire ressortir la différence entre ceux qui connaissaient Dieu et ceux qui adoraient des non-dieux (ιν, 8). Il ne prétend pas établir une parité entre la religion des Juifs et celle des païens, mais il pouvait considérer toute cette époque antérieure au Christ comme l'assujettissement à des formes qui devaient être périmées : d'un côté les religions nationales qui inspiraient la crainte, promettaient des avantages temporels, et maintenaient la division, avec une certaine dépendance de la nature; désormais l'union dans le Christ de tous les hommes, devenus fils de Dieu et appelés à partager son héritage, Il reste à dire un mot de ceux qui ont entendu les στοιχεῖα τοῦ χόσμου des corps célestes (Lipsius, Bousset) ou des esprits qui les dirigent (Lietz. Loisy). Les premiers ne semblent pas s'être appuyés sur un usage profane de ce mot: bien plutôt c'est l'exégèse de notre passage qui a conduit à attribuer aux στοιχεῖα le sens de corps célestes. Les patrons anciens de cette exégèse, qui ne voyaient dans cet endroit que les Juifs, ont commenté 165 στοιχεῖα d’après le contexte des vv. 9 et 10; revenir aux στοιχεῖα, c'était d'observer les mois, les temps, les années, qui sont réglés par le cours des astres. De cette façon les astres sont comme les éléments du temps : Théoph. d'Ant. à Autolycus, 1, 4 ἥλιος χαὶ σελήνη καὶ ἀστέρες στοιχεῖα αὐτοῦ εἰσίν, εἰς σημεῖα καὶ εἰς καιροὺς καὶ εἰς ἡμέρας καὶ εἰς ἐνιαυτοὺς γεγονότα, οἵ. Ep. ad Diog. vu, 2; Justin, Apol. I, ὅ τὰ οὐράνια στοιχεῖα, Clem. Rom. x, 9. 25, Hilaire, Pélage, Chrys.,Théod. de Mops., Théodoret. Paul aurait très bien pu caractériser le culte des Juifs comme réglé par les corps célestes dans ce sens, et Les désigner comme στοιχεῖα, mais il oût été indispensable d’indiquer que ces éléments du monde appartenaient à la région du ciel, sans cela στοιχεῖα ne peut prendre ce sens spécial. En effet, lorsque Justin emploie στοιχεῖα seul, il n’est pas clair qu'il l'entende des astres (C. 7ryph. XXIIT ὁρᾶτε ὅτι τὰ στοιχεῖα οὐχ ἀργεῖ οὐδὲ σαδδαte) et en tout cas pour Philon les στοιχεῖα ne sont pas le même terme d’adoration que les astres; cf. De vit. contempl. I, p. 472 M. τοὺς τὰ στοιχεῖα τιμῶντας γῆν, ὕδωρ, ἀέρα, πῦρ, et De Dec. 53, p. 189 M. ἐκτεθειώχασι γὰρ οἱ μὲν τὰς τέσσαρας ἀρχάς, γῆν καὶ ὕδωρ χαὶ ἀέρα καὶ πῦρ, οἱ δ᾽ ἥλιον καὶ σελήνην καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους πλανήτας χαὶ ἀπλανεῖς ἀστέρας, οἱ δὲ μόνον τὸν οὐρανόν, οἱ δὲ τὸν σύμπαντα χόσμον, οἵ, Sap. XII, 1-7. À côté de cette exégèse que nous croyons inexacte, mais qui ne prêtait pas à Paul une énormité, d'autres lui ont fait dire que les Juifs adoraient les esprits célestes présidant au cours des astres. Cette opinion hostile au judaïsme remonte à la Praedicatio Petri : λατρεύοντες ἀγγέλοις χαὶ ἀρχαγγέλοις, μηνὶ καὶ σελήνῃ (cité par CLém. ALex. Strom. vi, 41; Onic. in Joann. 1v, 22). Augustin ἃ cru pouvoir interpréter ainsi les στοιχεῖα parce que, dans son système, Paul parlait ici des gentils; mais comment Paul eùt-il prêté aux Juifs et à lui-même une erreur aussi grossière? D'ailleurs si les στοιχεῖα peuvent désigner les corps célestes au moyen d'une épithète, absolument rien n'autorise à les traduire par les anges comme ont fait Lietzmann et M. Loisy : « Paul voit partout des observances de culte qui se ressemblent ct qu'il dit avoir été réglées par les puissances astrales »; « les « princes de ce monde » ne constituent pas un corps à part des « anges » qui ont donné la Loi, les anges étant comptés parmi ces princes et leur étant plus ou moins identifiés ». D'après M. Toussaint (Res. arch., Ve série, t. IV, p. 192), cette explication résulte « de l'étude des religions orientales, des mystères et des écrits hermétiques » (ἢ). Dans son commentaire, M. Loisy argumente plus simplement : les « éléments » sont personnifiés, puisqu'ils correspondent dans la comparaison aux « tuteurs et administrateurs », — comme si la comparaison exigeait cette ressemblance de terme à terme! et quand la Loi, qui n'est pas une personne, a été comparée plus directement à un pédagogue! M. Loisy ajoute que Paul ailleurs les appellera « princes de ce monde » (I Cor. τι, 6. 8), — comme si ces princes étaient des « éléments »! Lietzmann déduit de Col. 11, 16-20 un culte des anges des astres dans certains cercles juifs; en tout cas ces Juifs plus ou moins gnostiques ne représentaient pas le judaïsme officiel. Rappelons que dans ses invectives contre le Judaïsme, Paul n’a pas été assez injuste pour lui reprocher d'avoir adoré la créature de préférence au Créateur; ce grief est propre aux païens (Rom. 1, 25), tandis que le Juif se glorifie en Dieu et connaît la volonté divine (Rom. u, 17 s.), lors même qu'il ne la pratique pas.
4:4
Voici la péripétie; tout va changer. Les temps sont révolus. Ce moment correspond dans la comparaison au temps fixé par le père pour mettre un terme à la minorité de son fils. Dieu n'agit point par caprice. Les choses elles-mêmes étaient arrivées, avec le temps, au point voulu. Paul ne dit pas que l'humanité fût devenue meilleure et plus digne de recevoir le Christ; sa pensée est au contraire que le péché avait de plus en plus débordé (Rom. 1et πὴ. Il n'exclut pas que le péché ait été pour la grâce l'occasion d'une préparation plus directe, mais il n'en parle pas non plus. — τὸ πλήρωμα indique seulement que la somme des jours est complète; c’est le complément, ce qui est nécessaire pour qu'une chose soit remplie (ef. Rom. x1, 12). Ce n'est pas l'état parfait, mais le moment où il ne manque rien. — ἐξαπέστειλεν, dans Paul seulement ici οἱ τν, 6, donc seulement d'une mission surnaturelle, mais fréquemment dans les Actes (v, 12; xt, 22; VU, 14) dans ἰῷ sens .de détacher d'auprès de soi quelqu'un pour une mission (ἐξ οἱ ἀπό). C'est Dieu qui envoya son l'ils, qui manifestement élail donc préexistant ne αἰς lui comme son Fils (cf. Jtom. 1, 3). La préexistence est clairement affirmée, mais on ne saurait dire avec Cornely que le verbe indique la procession éternelle: elle est bien plutôt indiquée par le mot « son Fils », demeurant auprès du Pére, sans que, du verbe employé, on puisse conclure qu'il ne faisait qu'un avec lui. Le Père l'envoie donc pour une mission dont le premier acte est de devenir fils de la femme. Paul évite avec intention le mot de naissance, ici, Rom. 1, 8 et Phil. π, 7, en tant qu'il indiquerait le passage du non-être à l'être, tandis que γενόμενον marque un mode nouveau revêtu par celui qui était déjà le Fils. En réalité ce mode nouveau est bien la naissance dans la nature humaine, comme l'indique ἐκ γυναικός, selon une formule très claire, Job, κιν, 1; Mt. χι, 11 (que quelques mss. ont cru devoir rendre plus nette en lisant γεννώμενον, au présent, par un véritable contresens|. De sorte que l'incarnation du Christ, homme comme nous, n'est pas marquée moins fortement que sa préexistence. Tertullion (De carne Christè xx) : oc quidem impressius, quod factum potius dicii quam natum; sim plicius enim enuntiasset natum; factum autem dicendo et Verbum caro factum est consignavit et carnis veriatem ex Virgine factae asseperapit. 11 est tout à fait certain que le mot de « femme », employé pour désigner que l'enfant se rattache à la nature humaine, ne prouve rien contre la conception virginale : neque enim necesse erat, semper quasi caute et timide virginem dicere (Jér.}, mais nous ne voyons pas non plus que cette conception virginale soit insinuée dans ce passage. Le but de Paul n'était pas ici de relever les prérogatives de Jésus de Nazareth, mais de montrer l'abaissement du Fils de Dieu, jusqu'à notre nature, jusqu’à se soumettre à la Loi. — γενόμενος ὑπὸ νόμον, le choix de γενόμενος pour indiquer la naissance permettait de continuer par le même verbe pour marquer le Christ entrant sous l'obédience de la Loi, comme elle-même était entrée dans le monde (in, 17: ef. ru, 14). Quoique νόμον soil sans article, c'est bien la Loi mosaïque {qui n'a pas toujours l’article; 11, 21; 11, 11. 18. 23), comme au v. suivant.
4:5
IL serait trop étrange que la loi, qui ἃ toujours été jusqu’à présent la Loi mosaïque, soit ici synonyme des « éléments » du monde, une règle religieuse imposée à toute l'humanité. Dans l'Épître aux Romains où la situation morale des gentils est traitée avec ampleur, Paul pouvait les regarder comme étant eux-mêmes leur propre loi; encore est-il qu'ils sont τὰ υὴ νόμον ἔχοντα (Rom. τι, 14). Sans doute si Paul avait tenu à balancer exactement sa Comparaison, ou plutôt à en faire une allégorie, il n’eût pas dû distinguer ici entre Juifs et gentils. Mais il s'est sûrement écarté un moment de son thème simplement humain, puisqu'il va dire que Juifs et gentils reçoivent l'adoption. Donc dans la première partie du verset, gouvernée par le premier ἵνα, il ne parle que des Juifs, qui sont par excellence sous la Loi (μι, 25; iv, 21; v, 48; Rom. vi, 14), mais aussi il n’emploie plus la première personne du pluriel, qui va reparaître à la clause suivante, c'est-à-dire au moment où l'apôtre se mêle à tous les fidèles, Juifs ou gentils d'origine, comme précédemment. — ἐξαγοράση indique la délivrance de la Loi comme opérée par un rachat. Pas d'explication ici, car l'incarnalion à elle seule ne peut être la rédemption. Il faut se reporter au rachat (ἐξηγόρασεν) de la malédiction, opéré par la suspension au gibet, et à lout ce que Paul a dit précédemment (Η, 49 ss.) des effets de la mort du Christ. — Le second ἵνα n’est pas précisément subordonné au premier, puisque les gentils pouvaient être adoptés sans avoir été auparavant délivrés de la Loi, mais le premier résultat était en quelque manière préalable, en rompant la barrière qui séparait les Juifs ct les gentils (Corn. cilant Eph, πὶ, 14}. Ge résultat était limité et négatif; maintenant l'horizon s'ouvre vers le but suprême de l'action du Christ, conférer l'adoption, υἱοθεσία, par l'union des fidéles au Fils naturel de Dieu (Rom. vit, 10-15}. — ἀπολάδωμεν comprend les gentils, comme le prouve ἔστε au v. 6. C'est plus que λάδωμεν sans être tout à fait « recevoir de nouveau » comme le pensait Augustin : non dixit accipiamus sed recipiamus, ut significaret hoc nos amisisse in Adamo, car Paul 4 en vue une grâce plus haute que celle du premier homme qu'il ne qualifie pas de fils adoptif de Dieu. C'est, comme l'ont compris les Grecs (Chrys. T'héoph. etc.), recevoir ce qui avait été promis (Le. vi, 34; xxu1, 41; Rom. 1, 27; Col. ur, 24). Les hommes n'étaient point fils de Dieu avant l'incarnation, différant en cela de l'héritier, fils légitime du testateur, mais la promesse, au moins depuis Abraham, leur assurait la bénédiction et Fhéritage, héritage de Dieu, el non d'Abraham; l'adoption leur était donc aussi promise, leur conférant des droits dont l'exercice était suspendu. On ne saurait objecter que les Juifs possédaient déjà réellement l'adoption. Paul leur accorde ce privilège (Rom. 1x, 4), avec les textes de l'A. T. (Ex. iv, 22; DE. xiv, 1; cf. RB. 1908, p. 481 ss.), mais comme nation, et par conséquent dans un sens extérieur, tandis que désormais l'adoplion est individuelle et intime, en même temps que reconnue au grand jour. On a noté que ce verset répond au précédent : (1) Fils de Dieu incarné — (ἢ) adoption des enfants de Dieu; — (2) sous La Loi — (3) pour racheter ceux qui étaient sous la Loi, avec l’interversion que les anciens nommaient chiasme. Mais cette interversion est si conforme à l’ordre naturel, que l'écrivain n'a sans doute pas songé à la figure de rhétorique.
4:6
ὅτι a été pris par les Grecs dans son sens ordinaire de « que »; ils supposaient une ellipse : « que vous soyez fils de Dieu (cela ressort de ce fait que) Dieu a envoyé l'Esprit » ete. Cette ellipse a paru’ si dure aux modernes qu'ils donnent à ὅτι le sens causal (avec la Vg. quoniam); mais on ne cite guère d'exemples où ὅτι, tout à fait en tête d'une phrase, signifie « parce que ». Sieffert compare 1 Cor. χα, 15; Jo. xv, 19; xx, 29 qui ne sont pas Concluants. De cette facon Dieu enverrait l'Esprit parce que les fidèles sont déjà fils de Dieu, tandis que dans Rom. vin, 14 ss. le don de l'Esprit constitue la filiation. — En réalité les deux sont simultanés, l'Esprit rendant ensuite témoignage de cet état des choses. Nous revenons donc au sens des Grecs (Lietz.); c'est un des cas où la concision extrême de Galates doit être expliquée par Romains. Rappelons le texte de Rom. vu, 45 où γὰρ ἐλάδετε πνεῦμα δουλείας πάλιν εἰς φόδον, ἀλλὰ ἐλάδετε πνεῦμα υἱοθεσίας, ἐν ᾧ xpdtouev ᾿λδόᾶ ὁ πατήρ. Là comme dans notre verset 6, Paul passe de la deuxième personne à la première (ici ἡμῶν); ἐστε (Gal.), comme ἐλάδετε (Rom.}, doit s'entendre de tous les fidèles d'où qu'ils soient venus à la foi. — ἐξαπέστειλεν, le même verbe que pour désigner la mission du Fils de Dieu sur la terre (iv, 4). L'Esprit est donc de la même façon distinct du Père qui l'envoie, non plus pour naître d'une femme comme le Fils, mais pour agir dans les cœurs (Rom. vin, 14), et y habiter (Rom. vi, 11). Dans l'Épître aux Romains, Paul dira indifféremment l'Esprit de Dieu, et l'Esprit du Christ (Rom. vu, 9). Ici il dit l'Esprit de son l'ils {de Dieu), ce qui rapproche encore notre passage de 1v, 4, où le Fils préexiste avant d'être envoyé. C'est donc à ce Fils aussi qu'appartient en quelque sorte l'Esprit qui est envoyé. La théologie catholique s'appuie avec raison sur ces texies pour établir que le Saint-Esprit procède du Père et du Fils. — χρᾶζον, plus fort que ἐν & χκράζομεν, attribue à l'Esprit lui-même le cri qui s'élève dans les cœurs. Ce cri de l'Esprit du Fils, c'est « Abba, père prière proférée par le Fils lui-même avant sa passion (Mc. χιν, 36). En tant que prononcé par nous, il procède de l'Esprit d'adoption, de l'intime conviction que nous sommes enfants de Dieu, comme le dit l'Épître aux Romains {vin, 15), mais combien plus belle et plus profonde encore est la forme de notre verset 6, où l'Esprit du Fils pousse un cri vers le Père, cri qui est le nôtre, puisqu'il retentit dans nos cœurs, et nous unissant à Lui dans la même prière, montre que nous sommes aussi des fils! 66%, ὁ πατήρ. On ne peut guère supposer que cette formule ἃ élé créée par Paul luimême, soit pour gloser le mot araméen par un mot grec, soit pour la raison que donne 5. Augustin : non frustra duarum linguarum verba eum posuisse idem significantia propter universum populum, qui de Tudaeis et de gentibus in unitatem fidei vocatus sit; ut hebraeum verbum ad Iudaeos, graecum ad gentes, utriusque tamen verbi eadem significatio ad eiusdem fidei Spiritusque unitatem pertinent (de même Luther). L'explication de Abba par ὁ πατήρ est plus ancienne que Paul, et se trouve même dans la prière de Jésus à Gethsémani. On peut expliquer ce fait de deux manières. Sachant que Jésus aimait à dire Abba, Père, les chrétiens hellénisants auraient consacré l'usage de ce mot araméen, en y ajoutant la traduction littérale : ὁ πατήρ, qui de la sorte devenait un vocatif, comme dans Le. var, 54 ἡ παῖς, ἔγειρε. C'est d’après cet usage que Marc aurait mis sur les lèvres du Sauveur la même prière (cf. Comm. de Marc, sur xiv, 36). Mais les Juifs de Palestine eux-mêmes savaient assez de grec pour faire cette combinaisop, et pour redoubler une invocation en deux langues. A l'exemple 11 ND (cité sur Mc. xiv, 36), comme qui dirait : « mon seigneur, signor mio on peut ajouter Tin 13 5} (Chemoth rabb. p. 140, 2): « mon seigneur, mon maître, mon père ». Ce phénomène est assez naturel dans une population bilingue, et le Sauveur a pu très bien employer ce mode de prière. C’est en souvenir du Christ qu'il aurait été assez traditionnel pour que Paul le ramène deux fois, comme type, non d'une prière officielle, mais d'une prière ardente. Et cela ajoute encore à la beauté expressive de ce passage. Ce que le Sauveur a dit au Père dans l'intime effusion de Gethsémani est ce que son Esprit dit encore dans le cœur des fidèles, devenus par lui enfants de Dieu. Pour obtenir un effet d'intensité, il suffisait de dire πάτερ, πάτερ, et les chrétiens grecs s’en seraient tenus là s'ils n'avaient tenu à conserver une formule qui porfait en elle sa marque d'origine. D'ailleurs Paul n'avait pas à prouver aux Galates les effets produits dans les cœurs par l'Esprit; il avait déjà fait appel à leur expérience ur, 2). Il en conclut seulement ici à la dignité de fils de Dieu qu'ils avaient obtenue et qui n'avait pu être communiquée que lorsque le Fils avait racheté d'abord les Juifs de la Loi. On était entré dans une nouvelle période de relations intimes entre Dieu et les hommes; ils étaient devenus des fils.
4:7
Le. v. 7 tire la conclusion (ὥστε) de ce qui précède depuis ιν, 1, mais spécialement du v. 6. — οὐκέτι, au sens du temps; désormais vous n'êtes plus des esclaves; cf. Rom. vu, 45. — πνεῦμα δουλείας, l'esprit de servage qui était celui des religions officielles antiques; on voit que Paul ne tient pas à balancer exactement l’apologue et la réalité. Il n’est plus question de fiis dans la situation des esclaves, mais simplement d'esclaves. — εἶ « iu es », devient plus intime; de la religion nationale on a passé à une religion qui prend chaque âme. La fin du v. presque textuellement dans Rom. vu, 17 εἰ δὲ τέκνα, καὶ κληρονόμοι, La variante τέκνα (cf. Comm. de Rom.) a quelque chose de plus tendre que υἱοί et indique plus la filiation naturelle. Elle prouve que Paul n’a pas entendu s’en tenir trop rigoureusement à la formule juridique romaine de l'adoption. Evidemment aucun homme n’est comme le Christ le Fils naturel de Dieu; le titre de fils adoptif est déjà plus qu’il ne pouvait prétendre, et ce qui marque mieux sa situation. Mais par l'Esprit du Fils qui vit en lui, le chrétien .est avec Dieu dans des rapports de tendresse ct d'intimité qu! rappellent ceux des enfants selon la nature avec ieur père. Lors donc que Paul conclut : « si tu es fils, tu es héritier », il ne se réclame pas du droit romain qui mettait vraiment les adoptés sur le même rang que les fils; il sa ert d'une formule de droit naturel : partout, les fils sont les héritiers de leur père. Cette hérédité est διὰ θεοῦ, par la faveur de Dieu qui nous a introduits dans la dignité de fils. Ce n'est pas simplement la répétition de la conclusion de τι, 29 (contre Corn.). Alors il fallait démontrer que par la foi les gentils avaient droit à la promesse faile à Abraham; c'est comme fils d'Abraham qu'ils étaient héritiers, quoique à la vérité selon la promesse, et admis à l'héritage de Dieu. Ici Abraham a disparu de La scène. 1] n’est plus question pour les gentils de prendre place parmi ses descendants; ce sont tous les fidèles, Juifs ou gentils d’origine, qui sont arrivés à ce point sublime de l'histoire d’où l’on ne peut redescendre en arrière sans apostasie.
4:8
ἀλλά marque une opposition très nelte entre le point où l’on est arrivé et ce qui menace de se produire; il s'applique donc non pas à ἐδουλεύσατε, mais plutôt à πῶς ἐπιστ ὅτε (ν. 9). — τότε, dans celte situation antérieure où se trouvaient les Galates comme les autres gentils. — L'ignorance du vrai Dieu, non précisément du dieu d'Israël révélateur, mais du Dieu créateur, était, d'après l'Épître aux Romains, une ignorance coupañle ; elle obscurcit à ce point leur intelligence qu'ils tombèrent dans l’idolâtrie (Rom. 1, 18-23), On pourrait donc dire que oz εἰδότες θεόν est la cause de la servitude envers des non-dieux. Mais l'ignorance, quoique coupable à l’origine chez ceux qui ont égaré les autres, peut devenir une excuse relative dans le cas d’une erreur traditionnelle; c'est le cas ici, d’après l'opposition du v. 9. — ἐδουλεύσατε (aoriste pour une série d'actes passés) caractérise l’ancien état comme δοῦλος au v. 7. — τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσιν θεοῖς est la lecon authentique, corrigée dans le texte reçu en τοῖς μὴ φύσει οὖσιν θεοῖς, qui semble nier plus énergiquement l'existence des dieux. D'ailleurs la bonne leçon n’affirme pas positivement que les dieux existent sans être vraiment dieux; elle leur refuse seulement la nature divine. La pensée de Paul est que les dieux-idoles ne sont rien, c’està-dire ne sont pas ce qu'on prétend qu'ils sont (1 Cor. var, 4 οὐδὲν εἴδωλον ἐν κόσμῳ... οὐδεὶς θεὸς εἰ μὴ εἷς), mais un démon se cache derrière l'idole (1 Cor. x, 19. 20). C'est l'interprétation que suppose la traduction par les Septante de Ps. ΧΟΡ (xovi), omnes dii gentium daemonia, Paul n'esquisse même pas ici un enseignement positif sur la nature des dieux: il suffisait de rappeler aux Galates que ceux qu'ils avaient adorés ne méritaient pas de l'être.
4:9
νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν, désormais, depuis leur conversion, les Galates ont appris à connaître Dieu. On ne peut opposer γνόντες à εἰδότες (iv, 8) comme si le premier mot désignait une connaissance plus approfondie; cf. Jo. vin, 55 καὶ οὐκ ἐγνώχατε αὐτόν, ἐγὼ δὲ οἶδα αὐτόν, où εἰδέναι semble indiquer une connaissance intuitive. La distinction de Lightloot est plus subtile οὐ plus solide οἷδα sc dif de la simple connaissance des faits, γινώσκω marque plus la participalion de celui qui connaît. Quoi qu'il en soit, la connaissance que l’homme peut avoir de Dieu est toujours très imparfaite. Aussi Paul ajoute μᾶλλον, non pour corriger ce qu'il ἃ avancé, mais par une gradation (οἵ. Rom. vin, 34); c'est plus d'avoir été connus de Dieu que de le connaître, car une simple connaissance spéculalive ne mène pas très loin, tandis que, être connu de lui, c'est être regardé par lui d'un œil favorable. C'est déjà le sens de y dans ΤΑ. T. (of. Am. πα, 2; Ps. 1, 6), car Dieu n'arrête pas ses regards sur un objet déplaisant; cf. 1 Cor. vi, 2 5. D'ailleurs ici Paul semble rappeler par ce mot aux Galates les bienfaits qu'ils ont reçus de Dieu : il les a traités comme des personnes connues ct des intimes, car la connaissance en Dieu est toujours approfondie (1 (ον. χπὶ, 12). — πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε indique un retour en arrière; le verbe est au présent : les Galates sont déjà sur la mauvaise voie; πάλιν fortifie l'idée d'un recommencement. Ils vont vers ces rudiments, ici qualifiés, la Loi comprise, de ἀσθενῆ (cf. Rom. vin, 3 τὸ ἀδύνατον τοῦ νόμου, Heb. vu, 18 τὸ ἀσθενὲς χαὶ ἀνωφελές), parce qu'ils ne peuvent pas opérer ce qu'ils prétendent, conduire les hommes au salut, et de rtwyä, parce qu'ils sont vides de cette justice qui est donnée par Dieu à la foi. C'est à ces rudiments que les Galates veulent cette fois, avec une volonté plus consciente (θέλετε), s’asservir de nouveau (πάλιν ἄνωθεν), en reprenant les choses par le commencement, en faisant une seconde fois tout entier ce chemin de servitude. D'autres voient dans πάλιν ἄνωθεν la combinaison de deux synonymes; mais sont-ce bien des synonymes ? On peut le dire de πάλιν αὖτις Hom. α, 59, mais ἄνωθεν a son sens propre (cf. Le. τ, 3), et La locution répond plutôt ici à πάλιν ἐξ ἀρχῆς Barx. Ep. xvi (Sieffert). — Il s’agit donc bien d'une rechute des Galates, et cette rechute consiste à embrasser la Loi mosaïque, parce qu’elle était comprise dans ces rudiments du monde qui sont ici qualiliés de faibles et d'indigents. Car les Galaies étaient païens avant leur conversion, Paul vient de le dire, et il n’a pas supposé le moindre intervalle de prosélytisme entre les deux états, entre τότε οἱ νῦν. II y ἃ là une preuve évidente que les gentils étaient compris parmi ceux qui servaient les rudiments du monde. Cornely, qui ne l'admet pas, est dans l'impossibilité d'expliquer le retour; il lui faut supposer que par leur conversion, et en revêtant 16 Christ, ils avaient par là même rempli la Loi. ils y retournaient donc! mais, dans ce sens, ils ne devaient même pas la quitter! Nous avons dit comment les gentils et les Juifs suivaient parallèlement deux voies qui, comparées au christianisme, étaient des chemins de servitude; ce qui ne veut pas dire que ces cultes se valaient! mais quitter la liberté des enfants de Dieu pour accepter la Loi juive, c'était bien retomber, sinon dans la même servitude, du moins dans la servitude, reprise au point où étaient les Juifs, en s’astreignant de nouveau à des rudiments impuissants.
4:10
La phrase est affirmative, c'est un reproche, non une question (avec παρατηρεῖσθε, de l'observance minutieuse d'un précepte, à l'actif : τὴν τῶν σαδδάτων ἡμέραν (Jos. Ant. XIV, x, 25), ἑόδομάδας (id. IIT, v, 5); au moyen : τὰ ete βρῶσιν οὐ νενομισμένα (Jos. Ap. 11, xxxix, 2); sabbats, semaines, aliments sont de l’ordre religieux; pour les lois civiles, Dion Cass. Lui, 10; ὅσα προστάττουσιν οἱ νόμοι, Les Galates se croyaient donc obligés à ces observances. L'attention se portait sur les jours, ce qui indique la distinction du sabbat; sur les mois, à cause des cérémonies de la nouvelle lune; sur les temps (καιρούς), à cause des fêtes : Pâques, Pentecôte, Tabernacles, et sans doute aussi le grand jour de l'expiation, nommé le jeûne (Act. xxvnr, 9); sur les années, ce qui doit s'entendre de la fête du premier jour de l'an et sans doute aussi des années sabbatiques, quoique, en dehors de Palestine, l'observation en ait été plus rare; Philon les suppose en usage : ἵνα τὴν ἑδδομάδα τιμήσῃ χατὰ πάντας χρόνους ἡμερῶν καὶ μηνῶν xal ἐνιαυτῶν (De septenario, τι, p. 286 M.). La piété juive ajoutait encore à ce qui était prescrit par la Loi; cf. Judith, vinr, 6 χωρὶς προσαθδάτων καὶ σαδδάτων χαὶ προνουμηνιῶν καὶ ἑορτῶν καὶ χαρμοσυγῶν οἴχου Ἰσραήλ, Il n'est pas douteux que les observances juives aient été imposées aux Galates par les judaïsants. Le texte de l’Epître aux Colossiens (x, 16) est plus clair dans ce sens : ἐν βρώσει χαὶ ἐν πόσει ἢ ἐν μέρει ἑορτῆς ἢ νεομηνίας ἢ σαθδάτων, employant des expressions techniques sacrées : fête, néoménie, sabbat, au lieu des termes vagues et profanes : temps, mois, jours. Mais si Col. τι, 16 sert ainsi de commentaire autorisé, la différence des termes employés a aussi sa signification. On ne peut se soustraire à l'impression que Paul a choisi des termes qui pouvaient s'appliquer au paganisme comme au judaïsme, de façon à prouver que l'adoption du judaïsme était bien un retour à des usages analogues, l'observation des temps sacrés, années, mois, semaines οὐ jours. Ambrosiaster n'avait peut-être pas tort d'écrire : Znducti enim vel aversi in Legem, facile declinarant ad observantiam dierum et mensium; sab. bati enim observatio et neomeniarum attraxerunt illos ad haec. 1] supposait donc un véritable syncrétisme, glissant vers les superstitions païennes Hodie veris initium est, festivitas est, post cras Vulcanalia sunt. Annos sic colunt, cum dicunt : Kalendis Januariis novus est annus, quasi non quotidie anni impleantur, Et c'est probablement pour s’en tenir à des termes vagues qu'il ne parle ici ni de la circoncision, ni de la distinction des aliments qui n'existait point dans le paganisme officiel en dehors des sanctuaires. Les commentateurs concluent plutôt que les judaïsants n'avaient pas encore imposé aux Galates ces points importants. Ils auraient commencé par un cycle de fêtes qu'il paraissait plus aisé de faire accepter. Cela peut se soutenir par opposition à la circoncision à laquelle les gentils répugnaient spécialement, mais il était plus aisé, d'après le mouvement des idées religieuses, de prêcher la distinction des aliments que d'établir des fêtes très spécialement juives (cf. Comm. de Rem., p. 338). Les admonestations de Paul aux Colossiens (Col. 11, 16) et aux Romains (Rom. xiv, 2 ss.) prouvent que la propagande juive mettait à profit les scrupules orphiques et pythagoriciens pour certains aliments, ou que ces scrupules avaient pénétré dans certaines sectes juives. Et le chap. n de l'Épître aux Galates montre la susceptibilité des judaïsants sur le point des aliments. L’énumération des observances n’est donc pas complète; elle est volontairement réduite à des termes généraux qui rentrent dans les rudiments du monde. Citer par leurs noms les fêtes et le sabbat, c'eût été rappeler en même temps l'Écriture qui rattachait leur institution à des actes de Dieu, tandis que l’alternance des saisons ne rappelle que le cours des astres. C'était le point par où les fêtes juives gardaient quelque chose du naturalisme des religions anciennes, tandis que les chrétiens pouvaient commémorer la mort du Sauveur chaque jour. Avec le temps, des fêtes furent instituées par les chrétiens, — comme le culte des images prévalut, — lorsqu'il n'y eut plus aucun risque de tomber dans l'idolâtrie ou de croire que le culte de Dieu était réglé par le soleil ou par la lune. La vénération des Esséniens pour le soleil prouve que même dans le judaïsme il y avait danger de verser dans un certain naturalisme. L'opiniâtreté des quartodécimans dans la question de la Pâque est une dernière manifestation de cet attachement aux jours, mois et années. Sur la différence entre les fêtes juives et chrétiennes, cf. Onic. C. Cels. VIII, 21-23 et Jér. ad À. l. : qui vero oppositae quaestioni acutius respondere conatur, illud affirmat, omnes dies aequales esse, nec per parasceven tantum Christum crucifigi et die dominica resurgere, sed semper sanctam esse resurrectionis diem et semper nos vesci carne dominica... itaque sicut nobis licet vel ieiunare semper vel orare et diem dominicam accepto Domini corpore indesinenter celebrare gaudentibus, non ita et ludaeis fas est omni tempore immolare agnum, pentecosten agere, tabernacula figere, ieiunare quotidie.
4:11
φοθοῦμαί τινα signifie ordinairement craindre quelqu'un, mais ce peut être aussi craindre pour quelqu'un; cf. PLAT. Phacdr. p. 239 D τοιοῦτον σῶμα οἱ φίλοι... φοδοῦνται. En grec on emploie souvent φοδοῦμαί τινα μήπως, mais si la phrase est très liée, celui pour lequel on craint est le sujet du verbe suivant; ici ce serait : « je crains que vous ne fassiez telle chose » (Sieffert). IL y ἃ donc une pause après ὑμᾶς (Vg.-Clém.). Ce que Paul craint pour eux, c'est que lui-même n'ait travaillé en vain, non qu'il plaigne sa peine, mais parce qu'il n'aurait pas été utile à leur salut. L'indicatif (κεκοπίακα) après μή πως s'emploie quand on a sujet de craindre que la chose ne se vérifie. L'Apôtre sait que sa crainte ne vient point d'une sollicitude exagérée. — Sur εἰκῇ cf. πὶ, 4,
4:12
Τίνεσῦε ὡς ἐγώ, ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς est fort elliptique. L'apôtre disant « devenez ce que je suis » (εἰν), on peut en conclure que la suite signifie « puisque j'étais devenu (ἐγενόμην) ce que vous étiez » (ἦτε). Ce parallélisme qui paraît exigé exclut pour la seconde partie : « puisque je suis ce que vous êtes » (Bousset). On conçoit que Paul exhorte les Galates à se rapprocher de lui, puisqu'il s'est rapproché d'eux; mais comment deviendraient-ils ce qu'est Paul, s'il est déjà ce qu'ils sont? Dire : « puisque j'étais ce que vous êtes reviendrait seulement à dire : « imitez mon changement », tandis que les paroles : « frères, je vous en prie », indiquent moins un raisonnement qu'un désir passionné d'union par une bonne volonté réciproque. Paul a fait les premiers pas : que les Galates en fassent autant! Ce point acquis, on se demande ce que Paul est, et ce qu'il était devenu. Il est libre de la Loi, suivant les mouvements de l'Esprit. Que les Galates deviennent comme lui de vrais fils de Dieu, sans se soucier des observances mosaïques! Qu'étaitil devenu ? Ce qu'ils étaient. Or ils étaient païens, et ce n’est pas ce que Paul pouvait être. Mais ils étaient en même temps libres de la Loi, et c'est ce que Paul est devenu comme eux. Cette explication (Corn. Light. Sieffert) souffre cependant des difficultés. Paul ne s'est pas affranchi de la Loi en vue du salut des Galates; il est vrai qu'il se fait tout à tous (1 Cor. 1x, 21); mais dans l'épitre la question de la Loi est traitée.selon les principes, et non selon l'usage qu'on en peut faire pour le bien de l'évangile; Paul détruirait la portée de ses arguments en disant qu'il s'est affranchi de la Loi dans l'intérêt des gentils à convertir. Lt il ne peut non plus pas dire : « je suis devenu libre, comme vous étiez libres », car eux aussi étaient esclaves, quoique d'une autre facon que les Juifs. Si l'on dit : soyez libres comme moi, car moi aussi j'ai élé juif comme vous essayez de l'être, et j'ai reconnu mon erreur (Chrys. Jér. elc.), cette explication est contraire au sens que donnent les mots complétés comme nous l'avons fait. De sorte que les spécialisations de l’exégèse échouent, et qu'il vaut mieux laïsser dans un certain vague ce que Paul n'a pas déterminé. Nous entrons dans le domaine du sentiment, d’un sentiment éclairé, maïs où le besoin d'union est au premier rang. Ne cherchez pas à être autrement que moi, devenez ce que je suis moi-même (1 Cor. iv, 16), tout au Christ, vivant de sa vie, comme moi je me suis fait tout à vous; je suis devenu ce que vous étiez me reconnaissant pécheur (11, 17) comme vous l'étiez, et à plus forte raison devenant l’un de vous dans tout ce qui était permis. Nous étions si unis alors! Ne suivez pas une autre voie que la mienne ἰ — ἀδελφοί, δέομαι budy se rapporte à ce qui précède, car ce qui suit n'est pas une prière. — οὐδέν μὲ ἡδιχήσατε n'est pas moins obscur que le début du verset. D'après l'opinion commune, au moment de parler aux Galates de leur ancienne vénération pour lui, Paul déclare qu'alors ils ne lui firent aucun tort; et en tout cas l’aoriste ne saurait équivaloir à un présent. On prétend que c'était déjà un bon procédé de n'en avoir point de mauvais pour un étranger qui se présentait dans l'état où était l'Apôtre. Si souvent mal reçu et mal traité, il reconnaît d’abord que les Galates n'ont rien commis de semblable à son égard. Mais pourquoi cet éloge si froidement négatif, comparé à ce qui va être dit plus loin? [1 nous semble donc bien plutôt que Paul fait allusion à un mauvais procédé récent, quoique passé, dont nous ne savons absolument rien, mais qui est ici sous-entendu. En dire plus eût été envenimer la plaie. Ramsay suppose avec esprit que Paul reprend une expression employée par les Galates lui mandant : nous ne vous avons pas fait tort... les nouveaux Apôtres ont beaucoup de zèle pour nous, etc.
4:13
Dans οἴδατε δέ l'opposition de δέ se rapporte à celte offense inconnue; elle disparaît au souvenir de l’ancien accueil; cf. οἴδαμεν δέ (Rom, τ, 2; ΠῚ, 49; vur, 28 que nous avons traduit or). Paul explique quelles furent les circonstances, les Galates doivent se les rappeler. -- De ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρχός ne peut avoir qu'un sens : « à cause d'une maladie de la chair »; οἵ. P. Oxy. IV, 726, 10 (135 ap. J.-C.) οὐ δυνάμενος δι’ ἀσθένειαν πλεῦσαι (MM.); Oxy. XII, p. 240, lettre de Théonas du commencement du ne siècle : « si je n'ai pas écrit, c’est que je suis dans un camp, non pour cause de maladie : οὐ δι᾽ ἀσθένε[]αν », et Thucyd. VI, 102. Paul a donc évangélisé les Galates sans en avoir conçu le dessein; s'étant trouvé malade et son voyage étant interrompu, il ἃ pu néanmoins prêcher, et peut-être, voyant dans cette situation une disposition de la Providence, a-t-il prêché encore après avoir été rétabli. Ce sens est confirmé par ἐν τῇ σαρχί pou (1v, 14). Il ne dit pas d'ailleurs que cela ait duré très longtemps, et s’il se réfère à un épisode qui nous est inconnu, ce n’est pas du moins en contradiction avec le terme de « traverser le pays des Galates » de Act. xvr, 6. Nous savons par un autre passage que Paul avait à se plaindre d'une infirmité propre à l'humilier (11 Cor. xu, 7), ce qui paraît aussi le cas ici. C'est à propos de IE Cor. xu, 7 que se pose la question de la nature de ce mal, sur lequel, on peut le dire en passant, on n’est arrivé à aucune précision médicale. L'hypothèse de l'épilepsie, qui sourit à Lightfoot, et on en fait volontiers la maladie des grands hommes, a été soutenue par Krenkel, Der Dorn im Fleische, mais combattue par Seelgmüller : War Paulus Epileptiker? Erwägung eines Nervenartises, qui incline vers une malaria ou une migraine affectant les yeux. Une fièvre intermittente est assez indiquée par les textes de Paul et par les textes anciens qui parlent de ce mal endémique dans l'Asie antérieure et attribué à un démon. — Cornely tient beaucoup à traduire non pas propter infirmitatem, comme l'exige διά avec l’accusatif, mais per infirmitatem qu'il explique « lors des persécutions que j'ai endurées », persécutions qu'il retrouve dans la mission de Paul en Pisidie et en Lycaonie (Act. xur, 14-x1v, 22). Mais la référence est assez mal choisie. A prendre la Lycaonie et la Pisidie pour la Galatie, on voit que les Juifs ne mirent qu’une seule fois à exécution leurs sinistres desseins contre l'Apôtre, et ce fut après avoir entraîné les foules, c'est-à-dire la partie païenne de la population (Act. x1v, 49). Mais déjà de nombreux gentils avaient été convertis, que Paul et Barnabé confirmèrent dans la foi malgré ces tribulations. D'autant qu'une ἀσθένεια peut bien être la suite d’une persécution, mais ne peut pas signifier une persécution, encore moins διὰ ἀσθένειαν « durant une persécution ». Cornely cite des exemples bien connus de διά avec l'accusatif pour signifier la durée, maïs avec un nom qui lui-même est relatif au temps, διὰ νύχτα, διὰ χειμῶνα, Les passages allégués IT Cor. x1, 29; x11, 5 peuvent signifier une faiblesse de l'âme en présence des persécutions, des dangers, des souffrances; mais ici Paul qualifie cette faiblesse comme située dans sa chair, c’est-à-dire comme une infirmité corporelle. Lietzmann reconnaît que ἀσθένεια est bien une maladie, mais il admet que διά signifie ici la circonstance, et cite Rom. ir, 25; vin, 20 où en réalité διά marque la cause plutôt que le temps. L'analogie de διὰ πᾶσαν ἀφορμήν BGU 11, 632, 11 n'est pas plus décisive, car ce n’est pas « en toute circonstance » (temps), mais « en toute occasion », « sous quelque prétexte que ce soit », où l'idée de cause domine celle de temps. — τὸ πρότερον en soi pourrait signifier « précédemment », iam pridem (Vg.), mais aussi « la première fois » (Heb. IV, 6; vir, 27), dans la première des deux fois où nous nous sommes vus. Dans le premier sens, τὸ πρότερον serait insignifiant et superflu; dans le second sens, c'est une allusion à une première visite, suivie d’une seconde, Comme l'apôtre rappelle ici des circonstances caractéristiques, on peut s’appuyer sur ce τὸ ποότερον pour conclure à deux prédications en Galatie, indiquées aussi par les Actes (xvi, 6; xvinr, 23), et antérieures au moment où cette lettre fut écrite. 1%) La construction est concise à l'excès, pour dire : vous ne vous êtes pas arrêtés à la tentation qui résultait pour vous de ma maladie et vous ne m'avez pas méprisé. Pour obtenir ce sens sans rien sous-entendre, Sieffert joint le début du v. 14 au v. 13, met un point après μον, et suppose que ἐζουθενήσατε et ἐξεπτύσατε ont pour régime με, qui se trouve après ἐδέξασθε, C'est ve qu'indique la Vg.-Clém. en commençant le v. 4% à non sprevistis. Mais il est par trop dur de donner à οἴδατε comme suite d'abord ὅτι et ensuite τὸν πειράσμόν : « VOUS Savez que je vous ai évangélisés..….et votre tentation etc. et de commencer une phrase avec οὐχ ἐξουθενήσατε, qui devrait du moins être suivi de son régime. Si la phrase est trop pleine, on voit du moins ce qu'elle veut dire. — τὸν retpaoudy suivi de buäv (texte critique) et non pas de μου {texte reçu). C'était une épreuve pour la foi des Galates que celui qui venait leur prêcher le Christ ressuscité se trouvât infirme dans sa chair; les développements oratoires pouvaient en souffrir, on devait s'étonner que 16 Christ n'ait pas fortifié son Apôtre contre de pareils accidents, conceptions très païennes auxquelles les Galates ne se sont pas arrêtés. L'idée est claire, mais comment résulte-t-elle de : vous n'avez ni dédaigné ni méprisé votre tentation? D'après Cornely, mépriser la tentation c'est juger qu'elle ne mérite pas d’être combattue, la rejeter, c'est en avoir tant d'horreur qu'on ne s'efforce même pas de la vaincre; en d'autres termes, c'est y succomber d'avance. Au contraire les Galates en ne méprisant pas la tentation, en ont triomphé. Subtilités bien étranges. Il semble plutôt que Paul ne fait qu'un bloc de τὸν πειρασμὸν δμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρχί μου, car il ne répète pas τόν devant ἐν τῇ σαρχί, et, s’attachant à la chose plutôt qu'aux mots, il entend par là sa faiblesse résultant de l'infirmité dans la chair; donc : vous n'avez pas dédaigné ma faiblesse (qui était pour vous une tentation), en d'autres termes : ce qui était pour vous une tentation, à savoir ma faiblesse dans la chair... C’est ce sens que voulait atteindre celui qui a remplacé ὑμῶν par μοῦ. — ἐξουθενήσατε et ἐξεπτύσατε complètent l'idée du mépris d'abord négatif, qui tient pour nul et qui dédaigne, puis positif, qui traite une personne au moral comme si elle méritait des crachats. Dans ce sens métaphorique, les Grecs disaient καταπτύειν, προσπτύειν, πτύειν, tandis que ἐχπτόειν n'est employé qu'au sens littéral de cracher. Maïs l’Apôtre a pu l’entendre au moral et le choisir de préférence à cause du voisinage d’un verbe commençant par ἐχ, d'autant qu'il aime à mettre à la suite des verbes commençant par la même préposition (cf. π, 4. 13; Rom. πι, 17; χι, 7etc.). Au sens métaphorique les deux verbes ont naturellement le même régime. — D'autres (Lipsius, Bousset etc.) l'entendent au sens littéral, à cause de la coutume superstitieuse de cracher devant certains malades, particulièrement les épileptiques, pour chasser le démon (plutôt que par crainte de la contagion). Mais dans ce cas il faudrait prendre οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε comme intransitif sans régime : « et vous n'avez pas craché ». Rien n'autorise M. Loisy à traduire « ni rejeté en crachant dessus », car τὸν πειρασμόν n6 peut être le régime si le verbe est pris au sens littéral: la confusion est révélée par la glose : ils « n'ont point « craché sur » lui, — comme on faisait devant certains malades », — comme si « sur » et « devant » étaient synonymes. La tournure « et vous n’avez pas craché » est d'ailleurs trop abrupte pour être intelligible au sens littéral : il fallait au moins ajouter « devant moi De sorte que le mieux est d'entendre le verbe au sens métaphorique, le choix du mot étant peut-être déterminé par l'usage antique indiqué, — ἀλλά ». t. À. Lorsque les Galates eurent compris ce que leur preposait Paul, ils le reçurent comme un ange de Dieu, bien plus, comme ils auraient reçu le Christ qu'il venait de leur précher.
4:15
ποῦ οὖν ἃ 165 témoins les plus sûrs et les plus nombreux; τίς οὖν du texte reçu ne s'appuie guère que sur des cursifs et des autorités syriennes et latinisantes; mais c'est une leçon difficile qui a des chances d’être primitive .(Zahn). On l'expliquerait d’ailleurs presque dans le même sens : « qu'est-ce donc, quelle est donc la valeur de? »... Avec ποῦ c'est plus simple : « qu'est donc devenu? » — μαχαρισμός (Rom. 1v, 6) est « félicitation »; ici ὑμῶν est un gén. subj.; les Galates se félicitaient eux-mêmes de leur bonheur, d'autant plus inattendu que l'Apôtre s'était arrêté chez eux par une circonstance fortuite. Paul ἃ su, sans faire une description de son arrivée, tracer une image très vive des faits. D'abord étonnés, mais évitant de témoigner de l’éloignement ou du mépris pour un prédicateur éprouvé dans sa chair, puis devenus enthousiastes, le recevant comme un ange, bien plus, comme le Christ, les Galates se disaient les uns aux autres leur bonheur. I1 serait étonnant que cette attitude aitété commune parini les peuples anciens. Mais voici le comble ils se seraient arraché les yeux pour lui, témoignage d'affection qui touche à la prodigalité de l'amour le plus désintéressé. Ce sont les traits permanents du peuple des Gaules. L'Apôtre met cette restriction : εἰ δυνατόν, « si c'eût été possible ». Il est toujours possible de s’arracher les veux: mais ce sacrifice devait avoir un but, c’est-à-dire que les Galates l’auraient fait s’il eût été possible de guérir ainsi sa maladie. Cela ne prouve pas absolument que cette maladie était une ophtalmie, car les yeux sont souvent le synonyme de ce qu'on ἃ de plus cher. Les Galates auraient donné pour lui même leurs yeux. Pourtant le sens serait encore plus expressif si l'Apôtre voulait dire : vous auriez donné vos yeux à la place des miens empêchés par la maladie. Le texte reçu a ajouté ἄν avant ἐδώχατε, ce qui atténuerait plutôt la force
4:16
En rappelant l’ancienne amitié, Paul sait bien qu’elle a fait place à la défiance. Pourquoi cette défiance? Est-ce donc qu'on vous a fait accroire que j'étais votre ennemi parce que je vous ai dit la vérité? La phrase est beaucoup plus engageante comme interrogation que comme affirmation; le reproche est suspendu et appelle pour ainsi dire la protestation. — ὥστε, conclusion qu'on voudrait ne pas tirer : « alors »? — ἐχθρός ennemi au sens actif, avec le génitif de la personne qu'on haït. Naturellement Paul n’est pas devenu l'ennemi des Galates, mais on le donne comme tel. — ἀληθεύων, au présent, mais au présent contemporain de γέγονα, c'est-à-dire au passé par rapport au moment où Paul écrit, peut-être très peu de temps après avoir appris ces rumeurs. Loisy (après Chrys. Corn. etc.) interprète ἀληθεύων de la simple prédication de l'évangile : « les Galates semblent faire grief à Paul de ne leur avoir point prêché la nécessité des observances, comme s’il les avait.en cela privés d'une grande bénédiction ». Mais ce sens va contre l'union de γέγονα avec ἀληθεύων. D'abord aimé des Galates, Paul est devenu leur ennemi en leur disant la vérité; donc par un fait distinct de la première prédication, mais qui pouvait très bien être Ia prédication plus instante de la vérité. fl a pu aussi leur dire quelques bonnes vérités, probablement dans sa seconde visite, Donc, disaient les judaïsants, vous voyez comment il répond à votre tendresse, par des mauvais procédés! On cite volontiers Tér. Andr. 1, τ, 41 : obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit. Maïs ce n’est pas ad rem, à moïns qu’on n'entende ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν « j'ai gagné votre inimitié comme dans la Vg. inimieus vobis qui devrait être inimicus vester.
4:17
Si nous avons bien compris le v. 16, il laissait entendre qu’on avait dépeint Paul aux Galates comme leur ennemi. Qui? les judaïsants, sans doute, qu'il ne veut même pas nommer, non pour les épargner, mais parce qu'il ne veut pas engager de lutte personnelle. Il se contente d'attribuer leurs manœuvres au désir de gagner la faveur des convertis de Paul, qui fomberont facilement sous leur joug, une fois détachés de Iui. — ζηλοῦν (comme ζῆλος) peut être pris dans un bon et dans un mauvais sens : « être animé de zèle ou d'envie ». Mais de plus le zèle pour quelqu'un peut commencer par chercher sa faveur (Prov. xxnr, 17; xx1v, 1; Ps. xxxvi [xxxvii], 4); c'est le cas ici, d’après l'opinion commune. De la part des personnes visées par Paul, ce désir de se faire bien voir n’est pas sain dans ses motifs; elles ζηλοῦτε. '"καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε, καὶ μὴ μόνον ἐν τῷ ἵναί ὃς ὑμᾶς, 9 τεχνία. μου, οὃς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς, ᾿" τεκνία μου, οὺς πά ὑέχρ μορφωθῇ ne - “͵΄ ΨΚ Χριστὸς ἐν ὑμῖν" "ὁ ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι, καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου, ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν. se montrent empressées pour provoquer le même empressement à leur égard, etpour cela commencent par exclure (ἐκχλεῖσαι) ceux qu'elles veulent circonvenir. ἐχχλεῖσαι indique donc une manœuvre préliminaire, qui consisterait à les éloigner de ceux qui pourraient les soutenir, à les isoler de leurs vrais amis, Paul et ses partisans. — Peut-être cependant les judaïsants, affectant le zèle, menacaient-ils les Galates de les exclure de la vraie communauté chrétienne, la leur, afin qu'ils deviennent leurs émules dans la pratique de la Loi. De cette façon ἐχχλεῖσαι et ζηλοῦν seraient pris dans leur sens propre. — ἵνα est bien causal et devrait être suivi du subjonctif; ζηλοῦτε qui ne peut être que l'indicatif présent est donc presque un solécisme, plus ou moins justifié par l'usage de la basse époque, cf. I Cor. 1v, 6 ἵνα μὴ φυσιοῦσθε,
4:18
À la Renaissance (Érasme, Luther, Calvin etc.) ζηλοῦσθαι passait pour un moyen, probablement sous l'influence de la Vg.; les modernes y voient un passif, le moyen n’existant pas en grec, et on ne voit pas pourquoi Paul aurait employé le moyen pour signifier ce qu’il venait de dire à l'actif. ἢ faut supposer le même sens que précédemment, mais au passif, car rien ne suggère que Paul joue sur les divers sens de ζηλοῦν, Ceci posé, les uns (Corn. d'après les Grecs) l'entendent comme une maxime générale : « Certes je ne bläme point toute recherche, pourvu que ce soit pour le bien, et que vous le méritiez, et toujours, étant tels que vous étiez durant ma présence Paul voudrait dire qu'il ne songe pas à s'imposer, et qu'il ne serait pas jaloux d’une recherche des autres envers eux pour le bien, si les Galates la méritaient. L'idée serait digne de Paul, mais exprimée d'une manière obscure par cette allusion à sa présence. C’est cette allusion personnelle qui donne la clef. Comme dans tout ce passage où il ne peut ni dépouiller son titre de père, — ou plutôt de mère! — ni à plus forte raison ls céder à d'autres, il oppose aux tentatives intéressées des judaïsants le soin qu'il a eu de chercher lamitié des Galates, mais ἐν χαλῷ, dans la sphère de leur salut; oui, soyez sûrs que cela vous est bon, d’être recherchés de la sorte, mes enfants etc. L'allure générale du début, formule trop conventionnelle, se transforme en une explosion de tendresse. Dans χαλὸν δέ, l'opposition est relative à οὐ καλῶς. — πάντοτε, même en ce moment où je vous écris des choses pénibles, mais qui en réalité sont une poursuite de mon affection. — La Vg. ἃ traduit ζηλοῦσθε (qui pouvait être une écriture assez habituelle pour ζηλοῦσθαι) par aemulamint, car l'impératif suggérait La voix moyenne. Il en résulte une maxime très juste : bonum autem aemulamini in bono semper : el non tanium cum praesens sum apud vos. « Ayez toujours du zèle pour le bien dans le bien, et non pas seulement quand je suis présent parmi vous », mais cette exhortation était tout à fait en dehors du contexte. On essayait de l'y ramener en prenant £onum pour un masculin : « ne recherchez pas les faux apôtres, mais suivez un maître sûr pendant que je suis absent ». £i l’on veut sortir de l'arbitraire et du contresens, une correction s'impose : il suffirait de lire aemulari, qu'on prendrait au sens passif.
4:19
D'après l'interprétation que nous avons donnée du v. précédent, celuici doit s'y joindre immédiatement, après une simple virgule, et la difficulté de commencer ici une phrase confirme aussi le sens personnel du v. 18. Dans la 79. ce v. 19 est isolé par un point de ce qui précède et de ce qui suit, comme une simple interpeliation. — τεχνία μου (WF Æ., Soden, Ve.), contre Nestle qui lit τέχνα avec la majorité des éditions critiques, d’après NBDFG etc. Mais l'attestation τέχνα est surtout d’ancienne latine, οὐ B latinise parfois dans Paul, ce qui est tout à fait le cas de DFG. Nous préférons l'attestation plus étendue de τεχνία, d'autant que c'est la seule fois où ce mot paraît dans Paul, raison pour les copistes de le changer en τέκνα. — τεχνία, terme très tendre, convient bien au moment où l'apôtre va se comparer à une mère. Et les Galates ne se conduisaient-ils pas comme des enfants ? — οὕς, construction ad sensum. — πάλιν ὠδίνω signilerait au sens littéral : pour lesquels j'éprouve de nouveau les douleurs de l'enfantement; mais la comparaison ne peut être serrée de près, car, dans la nature, les douleurs, précédant la naissance, suivent la formation complète de l'enfant dans le sein de sa mère. C’est donc ici une métaphore. De même qu’une mère ne peut avoir d'enfants sans douleurs, Paul a entrepris de faire des Galates l’image du Christ, de former le Christ en eux, et il lui en a coûté un pénible travail. Maintenant leur mobilité, leur légèreté, l'obligent à reprendre de nouveau ce travail et cette peine. Même pour un chrétien fidèle il y ἃ toujours à faire pour devenir l'homme parfait, εἰς μέτρον ἡλικίας τοῦ πληρώματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ (Eph. τν, 13); mais les Galates en adoptant, du moins en partie el pour une partie d’entre eux, la loi juive, avaient perdu la vraie forme du christianisme; ne comptant plus uniquement sur le Christ, ils ne le regardaient plus comme le principe de leur vie intérieure; tout était à recommencer. On voit encore ici combien ia situation était grave. Et les soulfrances de l’Apôtre viennent en partie de son éloignement.
4:20
Ce verset se soude encore assez étroitement à ce qui précède, et l’enchaînement paraît désormais très clair avec un va-et-vient expressif : il est bon d'être recherché par quelqu'un que vous connaissez bien, et non pas seulement pendant que je suis présent, chers petits enfants, mais maintenant encore où loin de vous je souffre encore pour vous; et combien pourtant je voudrais être présent, ce serait bien plus avantageux! — δέ répond par une opposition à la situation présente qui est l'absence. Loin des Galates, Paul essaie encore de les enfanter à Jésus-Christ. Mais quel ton prendre? Le sens de ἀλλάξαι est très controversé. Changer de voix, peut être passer du discours écrit à la parole, plus efficace (/ér. Corn. Zahn, Bousset), ou passer du ton sévère de la seconde visite (Sie/feri) ou de cette lettre à un ton plus doux (Zight.), ou de ce ton si tendre à un ton plus sévère (Lips.), cesser de se plaindre pour s'occuper de les instruire {Loisy) etc.; toutes les combinaisons ont été proposées: aucune n'a de fondement solide. Il nous semble que la signification de ἀλλάξαι dépend de ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν qui signifie : car (et non « et » Loisy) je suis embarrassé à votre endroit (ἐν ὑμῖν, comme dans θαῤῥῶ ἐν buiv, II Cor. vu, 16). Paul est dans l'embarras parce qu'il ne connaît pas assez exactement la situation; ce qui conviendrait aux uns pourrait faire du mal aux autres. Sur place il prendrait le ton, et dirait les paroles opportunes : il changerait sa voix selon les circonstances. Les derniers mots peuvent être sous-entendus ; l'embarras où est Paul suppose qu'il devra tenir compte des circonstances. ἵν, 21-30. LE CHRISTIANISME EST UNE NOUVELLE DISPOSITION QUI REMPLACE L'AN- Il est incontesté qu’en cet endroit Paul reprend son argumentation, un moment interrompue par une effusion de son cœur. Mais il n'est pas aussi aisé de s'entendre sur l'objet précis de cette argumentation et sur la méthode employée. D'ailleurs les commentateurs, absorbés dans l'analyse du détail, se préoccupent rarement de fixer les grandes lignes. Plusieurs semblent indiquer comme but de l'Apôtre de prouver que les chrétiens sont libres et ne doivent pas se soumettre aux observances légales. Cette interprétation de notre péricope est assez naturelle pour ceux qui la prolongent jusqu'au v. 31 ou même jusqu'à v, 1. Dans ces versets la conclusion serait exprimée par Paul lui-même. Or ce point est bien en effet la conclusion ultime de toute l'épître et sa raison d'être, et il figure aux versets IV, 81-ν, 1, comme le résultat de toute l'argumentation, mais s'il esi nuancé dans sa formule par les termes de notre péricope, ce n’en est pas l’objet propre. En effet ce point était acquis déjà (ιν, 7). De plus si Paul s'était proposé par J'allégorie de Sara et d'Agar de prouver que les chrétiens sont libres ct les juifs esclaves, outre qu'il serait revenu sur une position déjà acquise, il aurait manifestement commis un cercle vicieux dans l'explication de F'allégorie. Il eût procédé ainsi : les Juifs sont fils de l’esclave et done esclaves, parce qu'ils sont fils d'Agar. Or ils sont bien fils d'Agar, puisqu'ils sont esclaves, soit comme astreints à une alliance d'esclaves, soit comme servant encore dans l'ancienne Jérusalem. De même pour Sara. Les chrétiens sont libres parce qu'ils sont fils de Sara la libre. Mais qui prouve qu'ils sont fils de Sara? C’est qu'ils sont fils d'une mère libre, la Jérusalem d'en haut. IL serait trop aisé de montrer que Paul se serait ainsi mû dans un cercle, et le recours à l’allégorie n'y changerait rien. Mais tel n’est pas l'objet prochain qu'il se propose. L'argument Le plus puissant des Juifs, celui qui paraissait s'appuyer sur l'Écriture elle-même, c'était la perpétuité de la Loi. Paul y avait répondu en la comparant au pédagogue, à une instilution temporaire mise en jeu par le père de famille et qui devait disparaître à l'arrivée du Fils de Dieu. L’argument était décisif pour des chrétiens. Mais l’apôtre ἃ pensé qu'il serait à propos de chercher un point d'appui contre la Loi dans l'Écriture elle-même. Il demande donc à l'Écriture de prouver qu'il y a, dans les desseins de Dieu, non pas une disposition unique et perpétuelle, mais deux dispositions : la première est imparfaite, c'est celle des serviteurs; la seconde est celle des fils. Dans ces termes la solution s'impose : [ἃ moins parfaite doit céder la place à l’autre. La situation réciproque des serviteurs et des fils résulte de ce qui a été dit (ar et 1v); elle sert de base à la nouvelle argumentation qui tranche 18 question des deux alliances, contrairement à l'argument le plus grave des On verra par l’exvlication du détail que c’est là vraiment le point principal que Paul a em vue. Secondairement, il a pu se proposer de ruiner plus complètement les prétentions des Israclites à des droits résultant de la race. Paul avait déjà montré comment les chrétiens sont les vrais fils d'Abraham. Fiers avant tout de descendre d'Abraham, les Juifs l’élaient aussi de descendre de Sara. Nous ne connaissons 16 menu de leurs privilèges à ce titre que par un document d'assez basse époque. Pour les Israélites de naissance, aucune difficulté. Mais on se préoccupait d'établir un lien matériel entre Sara et les prosélytes eux-mêmes. On supposait que leurs ancèlres avaient été allaités par Sara, et telle était l'efficacité de ce lait que ceux-là mêmes qui avaient eu recours à elle de mauvaise foi en retiraient un avantage temporel. Ceux qui avaient été allaités de bonne foi devenaient fils d'Israël (cf. Le messianisme chez les Juifs, p. 283). Nous ignorons si ces spéculations étaient connues de Paul. Mais il n’est pas douteux que dès un temps fort ancien les Juifs se vantaient de la pureté de leur race grâce à Sara, et un écrivain sacré (Is. τι, 2) partait de là pour leur conseiller d'imiter la vertu des grands ancétres. C’est à lui que Paul paraît faire allusion en citant Is. rv, 1. Mais il va beaucoup plus loin. Etre descendu de Sara selon la chair, ce n’est pas plus que de descendre d'Abraham. Les vrais fils d'Abraham sont les fils de la promesse, et de même en est-il pour les vrais fils de Sara. Cette conclusion secondaire avait aussi sa valeur pour compléter l'argumentation tirée de l'Ecriture à propos d'Abraham. Mais il ne faut pas oublier que l'objet propre de notre péricope est l'existence de deux ailiances et leur rapport nécessaire. En quoi consiste l'argument, et comment conclut-il? D'après M. Loïsy « Parce qu'Isaac est né d'une femme libre, les Galates ne sont pas tenus aux observances mosaïques : c'est à quoi se réduit pour nous l’argumentation de l'Apôtre, qui ne se trouble pas de ce que, dans la Bible, Sara est par Isaac la mère des Juifs, et Agar par Ismaël la mère des Arabes païens Et en effet, l'Apôtre ne se trouble pas de cette descendance charnelle, C'est même parce que les Juifs en sont glorieux et s’arrogent pour cela des privilèges surnaturels que Paul renverse l’ordre des valeurs, prouve que, d’après l'Écriture, ce qui compte, ce n'est pas la chair, ou l'ordre de la nature, maïs les desseins de Dieu. Les critiques indépendants affectent en genéral un ton moins léger. C'est ainsi que Bousset, par exemple, admire le génie de l'Apôtre, pleinement con fiant dans les destinées du christianisme, et qui ose comparer les petites communautés naissantes à la nouvelle Jérusalem, féconde et dilatée. Mais si l'on rend hommage à l'instinct religieux de Paul, on s'accorde, parmi ces critiques, à condamner le mode de l'argumentation; on prononce le mot de « rabbinique » et l'on passe condamnation. Ceux qui le ménagent le plus allèguent pour sa défense qu'on trouve des allégories encore plus étranges dans Philon. Tout autre naturellement est l'opinion du P. Cornely. D'après lui, l’allégorie est une leçon que l'Esprit-Saint nous donne. Paul n'a pas à démontrer le sens allégorique du passage qu'il cite, il le suppose connu ou le propose comme une vérité de foi. C'est un principe certain dont il n'a qu'à déduire la conclusion. Par l’allégorie, Dieu affirme que Sara est le type de la nouvelle alliance ou de l'Église; or elle était libre. Donc l'Église est libre et ne doit pas se soumettre à la Loi : libera enim est Ecclesia quia Sarae respondet (Ρ. 553). Ainsi Paul n'a pas à établir le sens iypique, mais seulement à en faire l'application. Comme écrivain inspiré, il a le droît de le prer.dre comme point de départ de sa démonstration, qui est aussi rigoureuse que s’il argumentait du sens littéral. Nous ne songeons nullement à nier ce droit qui résulte bien de la mission de Paul, et comme apôtre et comme écrivain inspiré, interprète autorisé du sens spirituel que l’Esprit-Saint a pu disposer dans la Bible. Mais avant de poser la question de droit, il faut résoudre ce point de fait : écrivant aux Galates, Paul ne suppose pas qu'ils connaissaient ce sens typique. Le leur a-t-il imposé, afin d'en tirer des conséquences, ou bien a-t-il donné de bonnes raisons pour établir une interprétation spirituelle dont il aurait à faire l'application dernière ? Nous croyons que la seconde manière répond seule, soit à sa situation, soit à son texte. Les Galates en effet n'élaient pas en présence du texte inspiré dans la situation du théologien catholique pour lequel l'interprétation de Paul fait loi. L'autorité de leur apôtre avait été fortement battue en brèche auprès d'eux. 1] F'affirme avec force, mais il ne sait pas encore au juste quel sera l'effet de sa lettre. Il avoue qu'il est embarrassé (iv, 20). Était-ce précisément le moment de hasarder un argument qui eût été sans valeur pour qui ne voyait pas en lui un interprète infaillible de l’Écriture? Les Galates avaient appris, et de leur Apôtre, et des docteurs juifs, que l'Écriture, outre le sens littéral, ἃ un sens plus profond, que les réalités de l'histoire juive étaient une image ou un symbole de réalités spirituelles à venir. Paul pouvait tabler sur cette croyance, mais à la condition d'établir son sens typique, de manière à obtenir leur assentiment, Or il suffit de lire son texte pour se convaincre qu'il ἃ procédé de la sorte. Et je ne crains pas d'ajouter, avec une intuition et une maîtrise qui ont dû faire la plus vive impression sur ses correspondants. Le principe admis est que certaines situations de l'histoire écrite par Dieu, et envisagées à la fois dans leur réalité et sous l'angle où elles apparaissent dans l'Écriture, sont un indice de la façon dont Dieu procède à propos de faits spirituels... On peut donc appliquer aux seconds la conclusion qui est proférée divinement à propos des premiers. De plus, il ne s'agit pas de dégager des événements anciens seuls une esquisse de ce que Dieu fera dans l'avenir pour l'ordre spirituel. Non! les réalités spirituelles existent; celles sont comprises par les chrétiens d'une certaine manière, qui permet déjà un rapprochement solidement fondé. Et même, pour Paul, la conclusion qui se dégage des faits spirituels est déjà certaine et évidente. Maïs pour ceux qui ne sauraient pas la déduire, ou à l'encontre de résistances qui s'appuient sur l'Écriture, il propose de conclure dans le domaine spirituel d'après l'analogie de la conclusion scripturaire. Si les situations concordent jusqu'à un certain point, les voies de Dieu étant réglées par sa Sagesse, on peut et on doit étendre l’analogie jusqu'au bout. Voyons maintenant les faits anciens. Abraham eut deux femmes, l’une libre et l’autre esclave. Il eut un fils de chacune d'elles, l'un selon la promesse, c'est-à-dire par une action surnaturelle, l’autre selon les lois ordinaires de la nature. Ces femmes sont, c'est-à-dire représentent deux alliances, ou deux manières d'être des hommes envers Dieu. L'ancienne alliance est bien connue. Les chrétiens croient qu'il en existe une nouvelle. Quel rapport y a-t-il entre des femmes et des alliances? On ne le demandait pas dans un milieu où l’on disait les fils de l'alliance, οἱ υἱοί... τῆς διαθήχης (Act. τι, 25), les fils de la Thora, de l’alliance (les Juifs) ou, comme les Syriens, « les fils du pacte », pour signifier les religieux (ΝΣ 13, Aphraate, Hom. 6, cité par Zahn). Ce qui rendait la comparaison plausible, c'est qu'une des alliances avait des fils esclaves, puisqu'elle imposait la crainte, tandis que Pautre se fondait sur la liberté des fils. Dès lors la première était l’esclave Agar — d'autant qu’elle avait été donnée au Sinaï, patrie des fils d'Agar. La seconde était Sara, mère selon la promesse et selon la foi. Or, que se passa-t-il à propos des mères et de leurs fils? La Providence de Dieu décréta-t-elle de partager l'héritage paternel, de laisser les enfants vivre côte à côte? Non, l'Écriture est formelle. En pareil cas, la cohabitation tourneraïit contre le fils légitime. Pour le maintenir dans tous ses droits, il faut chasser le fils de l’esclave. Paul ne dit pas : puisque Sara représente la nouvelle alliance, vous êtes donc libres. Il dit plutôt : entre Sara et l'Église il y a cette ressemblance qu'elles sont mères de fils libres. Même l'Eglise, longtemps stérile, est aujourd'hui féconde et assurée des bénédictions. Le judaïsme est une religion de crainte, une religion d'esclaves. Il est bien évident qu’il doit céder la place à la religion des fils. Maïs vous voulez une preuve tirée de l’Ecriture? Regardez comment Dieu a traité l’esclave, fils de l'esclave. C'est ce qu'il faut conclure des Juifs. Ils n’hériteront pas. La nouvelle alliance est la seule qui compte auprès de Dieu. On serait curieux de trouver chez les Rabbins quelque chose qui ait cette allure. Si l’on veut dire que ce n'est pas là argumenter du sens littéral historique de l'Écriture, c’est entendu. Et il paraît difficile de contester que, pour les Galates, ce n'était pas une démonstration rigoureuse. Le genre typique, qui procède par analogies, ne la comporte pas en lui-même. La vraie raison de la supériorité et de l'indépendance de la nouvelle alliance, Paul l'avait déjà tirée des entrailles du sujet, de la personne de Jésus-Christ qui avait remplacé la religion de crainte par celle de l'Esprit, et qui, Fils de τὴς ἐλευθέρας" "ἢ ἀλλ᾽ ὃ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ σάρκα γεγέννηται, ὁ δὲ δὶ ; N ᾿ me v— ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέοας δι᾿ ἐπαγγελίας. 24 χτινᾷ ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμενα- αὗται γάρ Dieu. Ταὶ donnait des fils unis en lui par la foi. Mais Dieu était aussi l'auteur de l'Écriture, Et si l'on admetiait que ses voies étaient déjà tracées dans l'Ancien Testament, Paul ἃ vraiment fourni, en interprétant l'histoire de Sara et d'Agar comme représentant les deux alliances, une solide raison de conclure que le même Dieu qui avait ordonné de chasser Ismaël, ne voulait pas que les Juifs abusassent des droits de la chair pour prévaloir contre les héritiers de son choix, cohéritiers de son Fils. Rameay prétend que Paul n'a fait que rétorquer un argument des judaïsants que les Galates lui auraient fait connaître par une lettre. Il se peut, mais nous n’en avons pas même d'indice.
4:21
L'argumentation reprend ses droits. mais débute sous la forme vive de l'allocution qui précède, λέγετέ or. — ὑπὸ νόμον désigne bien la Loi ntosaïque, mais comme loi: l'article est moins nécessaire que dans τὸν νύμον, la loi écrite. La Loi pourrait être toute l'Écriture, mais ici le tour ingénieux donné à la pensée n'atteint son effet que si le Pentateuque lui-même est contraire à ceux qui veulent vivre sous la Loi. La plus grande partie des Galates ne l'a point encore adoptée, en fait, mais on va daus ce sens, il v ἃ plus qu'une velicité: déjà la résolution est prise (θέλοντες) ou peu s'en faut. — οὐχ ἀκούετε, Quelques-uns : ne l'entendez-vous pas lire? On la lisait en effet dans les synagogues (Le. 1v, 16: Act. χα, 51; Rom. π, 13\, et prohablement aussi dans les réunions chrétiennes dès cetie haute époque. Mais la question n'est pas de savoir si les Galates connaissent un texte; il s'agit de son sens : ne comprenez-vous pas? (cf. 1 Cor. x1v, 2) et même de son sens profond, qui n'est pas accessible à tout le monde. Les docteurs judaïsants n'auront sans doute pas manqué de meitre leurs néophytes au courant des mystères de l'Ecriture. L'ironie que la phrase contient de toute façon est ainsi plus pénétrante, et l'argument prend en quelque manière l'allure d'an raisonnement ad hominem. 5. Jér. a très bien vu qu'il s'agissait de la signification typique des Ecritures : audit Legem, qui iuxta Paulum non superficiem, sed medullam eius inirospicit; non audit Legem, qui sümilis Galatarum exteriorem tantum corticem sequitur.
4:22
γάρ répond à l'idée sous-entendue : vous devriez savoir ce qu'il en est, car il est écrit... — yéyssseat γάρ emplové ordinairement d'une citation formelle, est ici un renvoi à l'histoire de Sara et d'Agar (Gen. xvi-xxI). — τῆς παιδίσκης, Agar, dans Gen. xvi, 1. Le mot, qui signifiait une jeune fille chez les classiques, se dit toujours d'une servante dans le N. T. La femme libre n'est pas nommée plus que l'esclave; ce sont des types de conditions sociales.
4:23
La condition de la mère ne décidait pas tout sous le régime de la polygamie. Les deux fils étaient enfants d'Abraham. Mais voici une différence plus importante, marquée par ἀλλά, Le fils de la servante est né χατὰ σάοχα, selon les lois ordinaires de la nature: le fils de la femme libre est né διὰ τῆς ἐπαγγελίας, « en vertu de la promesse », et sans doute par l'union naturelle des parents, mais union qui n’eût été ni possible à cause de l'âge d'Abraham, ni féconde à cause de l’âge de Sara, d’ailleurs stérile, si Dieu n'était pis venu par un miracle pour tenir sa promesse; cf. Gen. xvir, 46-19; xvinr, 40 5. ΧΧΙ, 1 55, commentés par Paul dans Rom. 1v, 17 ss. ; 1x, 9. — γεγέννηται, au parfait, peut-être parce que le fait, consigné dans Écriture, se prolonge ainsi dans la durée.
4:24
ἀλληγορούμενα. Il est certain que ce mot a souvent été employé des explications allégoriques, données surtout par les Stoïciens, et que Philon employait dans l'exégèse biblique. On peut l'entendre soit de la façon que l'auteur du De vita contempl. $ 8 (dans Philon, 11, p. 475 M.) prête aux thérapeutes : ἐντυγγάνοντες γὰρ τοῖς ἱεροῖς γράμμασι φιλοσοφοῦσ: τὴν πάτριον φιλοσοφίαν ἀλληγοροῦντες, ἐπειδὴ σύμδολα τὰ τῆς δητῆς ἑρμηνείας νομίζουσι φύσεως ἀποχεχουμμένης 2% ὑπονοίαις δηλουμένης, c'est-à-dire en dépouillant les faits de leur réalité pour en faire des symboles, soit en sauvegardant la réalité des faits, mais en annonçant qu'on va leur donner une interprétation allégorique. Paul voudrait dire : ces choses, très réelles, doivent être entendues comme des allégories, mais il n'affirmerait pas que ce sens a été voulu par l'Esprit-Saint. C'est l'opinion de Lightfoot. Mais le sens naturel est : ces choses contiennent une allégorie, ont été dites pour signifier autre chose que le sens littéral; quae sunt allegorica, id est aliud portendentia (Terr. Ado. Marc. V, 4). De même, JosÈPñE, Ant. praem. ἃ τὰ μὲν αἰνιττομένου τοῦ νομοθέτου δεξιῶς τὰ δὲ ἀλληγοοοῦντος 2.7.1, C'est au fond ce que dit Paul (1 Cor. x, 11) : ταῦτα δὲ τυπικῶς συνέδαινεν, Sans doute il y a une grande différence entre le type et l'allégorie. L'allésorie emploie un mot pour suggérer autre chose que le sens propre du mot; c’est une série de métaphores qui ne suppose pas, qui exclut plutôt la réalité du tableau dont les traits sont combinés pour suggérer d'autres images. Le type au contraire est une personne, une chose, ou un événement qui esquisse d'avance certains traits d'une autre personne, d'un autre événement. Ici, comme Chry sostome l'a bien vu, le mot de type serait plus juste : καταχρηστικῶς τὸν τύπον ἐχάλεσεν ἀλληγορίαν. Mais, en tant qu'ils suggèrent plus qu'ils ne contiennent, les types rentrent dans le genre général de l'allégorie. Sévérien dans les Catenae νῦν οὖν τὴν δι᾿ ἔργων προφητείαν, ἀλληγορίαν ὠνόμασεν. Paul a donc pu employer ce terme. Il est évidemment convaineu que l'Écriture elle-même contient des sens profonds, et c'était aussi l'opinion des docteurs d'Israël, conservée par 18 théologie catholique, car il appartient à Dieu qui connaît l'avenir de disposer les choses de façon à en faire présager d'autres, et l'Esprit-Saint, en inspirant à l'auteur sacré d'écrire ces premières choses, pouvait avoir en vue les secondes. Α la vérité nous ne le savons avec certitude que lorsque l Écriture est commentée sous l'influence du même Esprit, comme c'est le cas de Paul et des autres écrivains inspirés, et ici Paul a pris soin d'établir les rapprochements qui permettent de reconnaître le sens typique. — αὗται les deux femmes, εἰσιν « sont », c'est-à-dire représentent ( Cor. x, 4) deux διαθῆκαι, Précédemment διαθήχη ὙΠ « testament »; ici le sens d'alliance est suggéré par la tradition hébraïque, les Septante ayant rendu bertth par διαθήκη : nous avons employé dans les deux cas la traduction « disposition », mot qui marque le rôle souverain de Dieu dans l'alliance; cf, sur πι, 15. Paul suppose donc ici deux alliances quoiqu'il ne parle que de la première; μία μέν n’a pas de correspondant direct; la phrase prendra un autre tour au v. 26, mais cette seconde alliance est constamment dans la pensée. D'ailleurs elle se rapproche plus que la première de la notion de testament d'après 1 Cor. xt, 25 et surtout Ifeb. 1x, 15 5. La première alliance vient donc du mont Sinaï, où elle a été contractée entre Dieu et Israël; étant comparée à une mère (cf. Act. ur, 25), elle enfante (γεννῶσα), mais pour la servitude, c'est-à-dire pour l’obéissance à la Loi. — ἥτις, quippe quae, d'autant qu’elle est, selon le sens typique, l'antitype de ce qu'était Agar dans l’histoire d'Abraham. Cornely rend ἥτις par qualis, « comme Agar qui était du mont Sinaï et qui enfantait pour la servitude », et la raison de cette traduction étrange c'est de ne pas imputer une répétition à l’Apôtre qui vient déjà de parler des deux femmes. Il y a cependant un élément nouveau, le nom d'Agar.
4:25
Le début du verset, quelle que 501} la leçon adoptée, a sûrement pour objet d'indiquer un rapport entre Agar et le Sinaï, qui confirme le sens allégorique d'Agar pour désigner l’ancienne alliance. D'ailleurs le texte est assez incertain. Deux points paraissent établis. 1) IL faut lire τὸ γάρ (Soden) plutôt que τὸ δέ (Nestle), car si la lecon τὸ δέ s'appuie sur ABD memph., elle a contre elle toutes les autres autorités, qu'elles omettent où non Ἄγαρ. D'autant que l’on s'explique aisément qu'un copiste a mis δέ au lieu de γάρ afin d'éviter la consonance τὸ γὰρ Ἄγαρ, et en effet δέ ne se trouve jamais où Ἅγαρ fait défaut. Dans ces conditions préférer δέ c'est accorder trop d'autorité à B. Mais ce point n'a pas de conséquence pour le sens, car ceux qui retiennent δέ l’entendent au sens explicatif (Zips.). 2) L'omission de Σινᾶ ne s'appuie que sur deux mss. de l’ancienne latine (ὦ οἷ 6). La leçon obtenue ainsi est assez coulante et est préférée pour cela par certains auteurs (Zips. Bousset); maïs c'est la négation de toute critique textuelle. Ces points fixés, il reste le doute sur la question principale : faut-il lire τὸ γὰρ Ἅγαρ Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραδίαᾳ {Soden), ou omettre Ἅγαρ I. Pour l'omission : RCFG, 17 ou selon la notation de Soden Πδὲ 5 548*2 78. 16 1. 10%, c'est-à-dire des mss. qu’il classe comme hésychiens et palestiniens; les versions sah., anc.lat. en majorité, vg., arm., goth.; parmi les Pères, Origène fdu moins en latin}, Épiphane, Cyrille d'AL., les latins : Vict., Ambrst., Jér. qui ne mentionne aucune lecon divergente. Il. Pour l'addition de Ἅγαρ ABDKLP, la masse des cursifs, les deux versions syr., le memph., Ephrem et les Pères de l'école d'Antioche. Sur la version copte-memphitique, M. Horner note qu'aucun ms. n’a traduit τό mais tous ont Ayap : But Agar is (the) mountain Sina, being in (the) Arabia. Zahn croit pouvoir conclure que 18 lecon sans Ἄγαρ est la plus ancienne; l'autre, d'origine syrienne, aurait pénétré en Égypte vers 250. Ce n'est là qu'une conjecture. Ce qui résulte des faits c’est que la leçon I régnait en Occident presque autant que la leçon II en Syrie, et que l'Égypte est partagée. 11 est donc impossible de résoudre la question d'après les témoignages manuscrits; la solution doit se trouver ailleurs. La variante I se traduit naturellement : « car le mont Sina est en Arabie après avoir parlé du mont Sina, il serait étrange de dire : « car le Sina est une montagne en Arabie ». L'interprétation est aisée. L'Apôtre fonde son raisonnement principal relativement au sens typique sur la condition des deux femmes. C’est pour cela que sans hésiter il fait de l'esclave le type de l'alliance du Sinaï qui suppose la sujétion. Maïs cette servante était Agar, la mère d’'Ismaël, l'ancêtre de la principale tribu des Arabes. Paul la nomme maintenant pour rappeler que le mont Sinaï, étant situé en Arabie, se trouvait très opportunément rattaché à l'allégorie d'Agar, mère des Arabes. D'ailleurs son nom était celui-là même de tribus arabes importantes nommées dans la Bible (Ps. Lxxxinr, 6, 0993, Ayapnvoi et 1 Chr. v, 19 ON934, Ayaoaïot), et, dans sa fuite (Gen. xv1, 7. 14), elle s'était rendue dans le désert qui conduit au Sinaï. Ces faits expliquent parfaitement comment Paul a marqué un lien entre Agar et le mont Sinaï; sans rien changer au rythme de son allégorie, il a vu dans cette coïncidence une harmonie à noter. Ce n’est pas la preuve principale, mais une confirmation; la phrase est même conçue comme une parenthèse, et reprend à συνστοιχεῖ δέ dont le sujet est la femme Agar. Et c’est ce que semblent avoir compris des exégètes anonymes cités dans les Catenae oùx ἁπλῶς (ce n'est pas saus dessein) ἐμνημόνευσε τοῦ Σινᾷ ὄρους, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπειδὴ 0 Σαρακηνοὶ οἱ ἀπὸ τοῦ ᾿Ισμαὴλ τὴν ἔρημον ἔχουσι τὴν παρατείνουσαν ἕως τοῦ Σινᾶ ὄρους. τ Au contraire la leçon II est inexplicable, et c’est pour cela que des critiques distingués qui gardent Ἅγαρ éliminent Σινᾶ, Le plus grand nombre se satisfait de cette traduction : car le Agar, c'est-à-dire le mot Agar, est, c’est-àdire signifie, en Arabie, c'est-à-dire chez les Arabes ou dans la langue arabe, le mont Sinaï. Paul aurait confirmé le rapprochement entre Agar et l’ancienne alliance en affirmant que le nom même d’Agar est celui du Sinaï chez les Arabes. Pour en venir là, il faut, comme on voit, donner à chaque parole du texte un sens qui n'est pas son sens naturel. Chrysostome a passé sur cette difficulté : τὸ δὲ Σινᾶ ὄρος οὕτω μεθερμηνεύεται τῇ ἐπιχωρίῳ αὐτῶν γλώττῃ, mais on ne comprend pas comment un critique moderne peut traduire ἐν τῇ ᾿Αραδίᾳ « dans la langue des Arabes », à propos d'une montagne dont il était naturel d'indiquer la situation, comme l'ont compris les latins ὦ et e et le copte, même avec la lecon Agar. Si le Sinaï se dit Agar en arabe, à quelle langue appartient donc le mot Sinaï? Paul s'est-il imaginé que c'était un nom hébreu donné par ses ancêtres à la montagne? Et comment a-t-il su que le Sinaï se nommait Agar en arabe? Très vraisemblablement ce ne fut jamais un nom bien usité. On ne cite qu'un voyageur, Harant, originaire de Bohême, dont l'ouvrage ἃ été traduit en allemand en 1678. D'après lui : « les païens arabes et maures nomment le Sinaï Agar ou Tour » (ap. Lighr.). S'il n'a pas puisé son renseignement dans l'épitre, il a pu en effet entendre fréquemment dans la péninsule le nom de Æadjar donné à certains sommets, comme Hadjar Bint (la pierre de la fille) etc. Paul aurait pu recueillir cette appellation en Arabie, et rapprocher ;=® hadjar « pierre », soit en écriture hébraïque “an, de 31. Le rapprochement repose sur une phonétique hasardeuse. Mais les anciens n'étaient point scrupuleux sur ce point, et les Grecs qui distinguaient assurément le x du y expliquaient le dieu Kpdvos par χρόνος {le temps). Ge n’est point pour si peu qu’on devrait déclarer avec Cornely que la variante Ἄγαρ est inacceptable du point de vue de l'inspiration. En pareil cas les usages font loi. Le rapprochement entre Agar et le mont Sina serait-il plus démonstratif parce que les consonnes auraient exactement la même prononciation ? Mais l'obstacle décisif à toute cette construction, c'est que Paul aurait bâti son allégorie sur deux bases non coordonnées. Il a pu dire : Agar est l’ancienné alliance, d'autant que la montagne de l’alliance est en Arabie, patrie d'Agar. Mais comment accorder ces deux propositions : Agar est l'ancienne alliance, Agar est le mont Sinaï? Et cet inconvénient n’est que plus sensible si l'on traduit comme le copte : Agar est le mont Sina, ou comme d, e : Ager est une montagne θη Arabie, ou comme Théodore de Mopsueste qui fat d'Agar toute une région. D'autant que, d’après tous les principes, le sens allégorique doit être tiré de l'Écriture, et non d'un terme emprunté à des païens. Paul aurait pu dire, s'il eût raisonné en rabbin : Agar, le nom de la servante, a le même nombie de lettres que Sina, ou aboutit au même chiffre; mais il n'avait pas à spéculer sur le nom que les Arabes donnent ou ne donnent pas au Sinaï; cela serait en dehors de la perspective scripturaire, cela reléguerait même le nom biblique au-dessous du nom arabe qui eût été, chose étrange, destiné par Dieu à servir de base à une allégorie, plutôt que le nom biblique. Une leçon difficile doit être maintenue si on lui trouve un sens satisfaisant qui n'apparaît pas à la surface; mais quand on n’en peut rien tirer qui soit en harmonie avec le contexte et avec les habitudes de l’auteur, cette leçon doit être regardée comme l'œuvre d’un scribe inattentif (τὸ γὰρ devenu vo «yop et ensuite τὸ γὰρ æyap), ou trop savant qui aura voulu corser l'allégoric. Même ainsi elle a paru trop vague à M. Loisy . « La traduction exacte du passage serait : Agar ou Agar Sina équivaut en lettres (sunstoigei) à la Jérusalem d'à présent... Sans chercher à refaire le calcul de Paul, on peut voir sur quelle base repose son argumentation. Ce qui prouve que le peuple juif est le peuple esclave de la Loi, c'est qu'Agar en arabe signifie montagne; Agar est donc le Sinaï, c'est-à-dire l'alliance mosaïque; et d'ailleurs Agar Sinaï fait en chiffres le nombre de Jérusalem. » Cette traduction dite exacte suppose plusieurs combinaisons : Agar signifie en Arabie le mont Sinaï, Agar signifie montagne, Agar Sina sont deux mots unis pour signifier Jérusalem. Est-ce des paroles de Paul ou de ces savantes notes qu'il faut écrire qu'elles « n'ont rien à envier, quant à l’enfantillage de leurs combinaisons, aux fantaisies. des hommes incultes »? Qu'on relise 16 texte, on n'y verra pas que le peuple juif est esclave parce qu'Agar signifie montagne, mais que Agar signifie l'alliance du Sinaï parce que toutes deux enfantent pour la servitude, fait prouvé en outre par l'esclavage actuel de Jérusalem et de ses enfants. . D'ailleurs M. Loïsy 8. eu le tact — et la prudence! — de ne pas proposer un calcul de gematria pour l’équivalence en chiffres d'Agar Sina et de Jérusaiem. À le lire on croirait que c’est limpide; or toutes les combinaisons proposées ont été rejetées comme arbitraires. IL est clair que plusieurs sont possibles, mais encore plus évident qu'aucune ne satisfait. Comment peut-on estimer que l’Apôtre si grave, si pressant, si passionné, si désireux de convaincre les Galates, leur ait proposé un pareil rébus? Voici, pour la curiosité, la tentative de Lipsius : « La mère du mont Sinaï qui enfante pour la servitude », soit ΠΤ NN ND ὙΠ NA ON Ξ- 41 16 + 245 + 139 + 450 - 117 τες 999, répond à « Agar est une montagne en Arabie », sait 29920 ΝῚΠ 97 937 == 208 + 205 + 12 + 300 (le relatif w) + 274 999; mais l’hébreu de cette dernière phrase n’est guëre correct et le nom de Sina y est omis. Si l'on objecte que les Galates ne savaient pas l’hébreu, voici ce que propese Lietzmann : ξερουσαλημ, — 86%, νυν — 500, soit 1364; Ayap sie == 1865. Mais il faudrait bien au moins ἡ νυν, ἱερουσαλημ, et enfin tout échoue pour un point! Lietzmann abandonne la partie d'assez bonne grâce. D'autant que tous ces jeux d'esprit pèchent par la base : συνστοιχεῖ n'est pas l'équivalent de ἰσοφηφεῖ et on ne cite aucun exemple où ce mot signifierait « qui ἃ le même nombre en lettres — συνστοιχεῖ d'après les anciens et quelques modernes (Corn.) a pour sujet le mont Sina. C'est ce qu'il y aurait de plus naturel avec la leçon τὸ γὰρ “ἀγαρ x.7.À. Il serait en effet impossible de prendre τὸ “γὰρ pour «le mont Agar», et de revenir à la femme Agar du v. 24 pour être le sujet de συνστοιχεῖ (contre Sief.). Avec la leçon τὸ γὰρ Σινᾶ, 258 est comme une parenthèse, et le sujet de συνστοιχ εἴ est naturellement Agar. Elle était en relation avec l’ancienne alliance, toutes deux ayant pour enfants des esclaves; pour la même raison elle appartient à la même catégorie que Jérusalem. Le sens premier de συνστοιχεῖ est en effet « appartenir à la même file » (Pozve. X, 21, 7); d'où « appartenir au même groupement, à la même catégorie », Les Pythagoriciens avaient fait deux listes de principes opposés qu'on pouvait mettre sur deux colonnes, constituant des συστοιχίαι (Aristote, Æth. Nic. T, 6; Metaph. 1, 5); dans l'ane : le bou, le fini, l’un, le permanent, etc., dans l’autre : le mauvais, l'indé. fini, 16 plural, le changeant. De même on pourrait placer ici dans une colonne Agar la servante, Ismaël, né selon la chair, l’alliance du Sinaï enfantant dans la servitude, Jérusalem qui est esclave; dans l’autre : la femme libre, Isaac, fils de la promesse, la nouvelle alliance, la Jérusalem d’en haut (Zight. d'après Corn. a Lap.). — τῇ νῦν Ἰεοουσαλήμ, non par opposition entre la Jérusalem soumise aux Romains et la glorieuse cité de David, mais vôv, « du temps présent » par opposition à la Jérusalem d'en haut (v. 26), qui appartient au monde à venir. Le trait commun entre l'alliance du Sinaï et Jérusalem, c'est la servitude imposée par la Loi; δουλεύει n'a donc pas rapport à la domination romaine, mais à l'esclavage par rapport à la Loi, et Jérusalem est le sujet de δουλεύει, car l'alliance peut enfanter pour la servitude, mais non la subir; les enfants sont ceux de la cité sainte, Dans la Ve. συνστοιγεῖ δέ est traduit qui coniuncius est, comme si le mont Sinaï était joint à Jérusalem (par une chaîne de montagnes?), ce qui n’a aucune vraisemblance. Ce serait encore la montagne qui serait sujet de et servit. Il faudrait : congruit autem, servit enim.
4:26
Paul passe à l’autre colonne des συστοιχίαι. Régulièrement il devrait parler de la seconde alliance, en opposition avec μία μέν du v. 24. Mais il prend la comparaison à son terme, n'ayant pas à opposer au mont Sina le lieu où fut donnée la nouvelle alliance, puisque c'était Jérusalem; ce qui était important, c'était de distinguer les deux Jérusalem, celle de maintenant et celle d'en haut. L'opposition eût été plus nette entre la Jérusalem d'en bas et celle d’en haut, ou entre celle de maintenant et celle de l'avenir. Mais Paul n’a pas voulu balancer exactement ces oppositions, car la Jérusalem d'en haut ἃ aussi sa demeure en bas, et elle n’est pas non plus tout à fait à venir. La Jérusalem des Juifs est connue de tout le monde, elle est celle de maintenant. L'autre Jérusalem est surtout une cité du ciel (Heb. χη, 22; Apoc. im, 12; xx1, 2), mais elle est aussi déjà installée sur la terre, puisqu'elle est la mère des chrétiens. La thèse de la Jérusalem d'en haut a été développée par les Rabbins come le plan d’une cité céleste qui devait descendre sur la terre aux temps messianiques (IV Esdr, vu, 26; Bar. Apoc, syr. 1v, 4-6): mais les anciens Rabbins concevaient ..xssi pour ces temps l'embellissement miraculeux de la Jérusalem de la terre (Le Messianisme chez les Juifs, p. 199). Paul croit que le Messie est venu, mais il ne s’est pas encore manifesté dans toute sa gloire. En attendant, la cité des chrétiens est dans le ciel ἡμῶν γὰρ τὸ πολίτευμα ἐν οὐρανοῖς ὑπάρχει (Phil. ur, 20), de sorte que leur cité de Jérusalem est celle d'en haut. Pourtant Paul la regarde comme la mère de ceux qui sont encore sur la terre. Il serait faux de dire avec Luther qu'il a en vue seulement l’ecclesia triumphans, trop précis de dire avec Cornely que c'est l’ecclesia militans. Ces distinctions n'étaient point encore en usage. Mais on peut dire que Paul a caractérisé en deux mots une Église qui est à la fois dans le ciel et sur la terre. Cette Jérusalem, et cela est admirable d'une ville qui porte le même nom que la cité juive, est libre, libre du joug de la Loi. — ἥτις n'est pas facile à expliquer. Ce n’est pas, comme souvent, quippe quae, comme si elle était libre, en tant que notre mère. Sa liberté appartient à sa constitution propre, comme royaume de Dieu, régi par son Esprit; mais la liberté lui convient aussi comme mère des libres enfants de Dieu (ιν, 7) la cité est donc libre, « elle qui » est notre mère. — ἡμῶν désigne tous les; chrétiens; c'est la bonne leçon; πάντων (Soden [παντων])} ἡμῶν ἃ pu venir soit du désir d’être plus formellement universaliste, soit du texte de s. Polycarpe $ 3 τὴν δοθεῖσαν ὑμῖν πίστιν ἥτις ἐστὶ μήτηρ πάντων ἡμῶν, soit de Rom. 1v, 16 {Light., contre Corn. qui croit le texte reçu confirmé par 5. Polycarpe).
4:27
Ce verset est manifestement une confirmation ou une illustration du pré» cédent. D'après Cornely, Paul y démontre que la Jérusalem d’en haut ou l'Église est libre. Le raisonnement serait celui-ci : l'Eglise est libre parce qu'elle est représentée par Sara, et elle est représentée par Sara, parce que, étant naturellement stérile, elle ἃ eu, en vertu de la promesse divine, plus d'enfants que sa rivale. Maïs comment Sara entre-t-elle en scène ? parce que le prophète Isaïe, parlant à Jérusalem (τιν, 4), faisait en même temps allusion à Abraham et à Sara, comme le prouve, et la proximité du ch. zr, 1, et un texte d'époque assez basse (27 Gibborim, fol. 49, 2, cité par Schoetigen) : Sterilitas Abrahae et Sarae figura fuit sterilitatis Sion. — Mais ne serait-il pas étrange que Paul ait cru fournir aux Galates une véritable démonstration de la liberté de l’Église, en supposant tant de combinaisons qui leur étaient peu familières ? Nous avons plutôt ici la preuve scripturaire que la fécondité de la Jérusalem d'en haut a été prédite et miraculeusement ordonnée par Dieu. La citation est donc d’Is. iv, 1, d’après les Septante, qui rendent fidèlement l'hébreu. Le prophète s’adressait à Sion, longtemps délaissée par son Die, qui était son époux. Dieu reviendra à elle, et elle sera plus peuplée qu'aux temps anciens. Ce tableau de la félicité messianique convenait admirablement à la Jérusalem d’en haut, qui était la Jérusalem messianique; cela seul suffit à justifier la citation dans ce contexte. La fécondité de l'Eglise chrétienne prouve qu'elle est bien la Jérusalem nouvelle prédite par le prophète. Paul n'a pas dû être insensible à ce rapprochement. Dans tout autre contexte on ne conclurait rien de plus, et ce serait un précieux résultat. Ici il faut noter la ressemblance entre la situation de Sion et celle de Sara, non qu'elle serve de preuve pour la liberté de l'Église chrétienne, mais parce qu'elle concorde avec l’allégorie. La nouvelle Jérusalem a été longtemps stérile. I] ne faudrait pas y voir la gentilité, avec plusieurs Pères, car ses fils sont tous les chrétiens, quelle que soit leur origine. À vrai dire elle n'existait pas avant la mort du Christ, sinon dans les desseins de Dieu, d'où son nom de Jérusalem d'en haut. Peut-être Paul lui a-t-il reconnu une sorte d'existence à partir de la promesse faite à Abraham (Corn.). On voit ici la difficulté de serrer de trop près, sous prétexte d'aboutir à une démonstration rigoureuse, des suggestions très impressionnantes, et même décisives contre les prétentions des judaïgants. Ils veulent absolument que la nouvelle communauté accepte le joug de l’ancienne, Mais le prophète reconnaît à la nouvelle Jérusalem comme une personnalité distincte. C'est à cette Jérusalem que Dieu donnera, par son intervention miraculeuse, une postérité plus nombreuse qu'autrefois. En fait, — car il ne faut jamais oublier que Paul table sur le fait chrétien, — les deux communautés des Juifs et des chrétiens sont distinctes. Où est désormais la fécondité? Et si l’on reproche à la nouvelle communauté de n'avoir pas de racines dans Le passé, ce n'est pas qu’elle ait été inconnue de Dieu : elle était stérile, tout comme Sara, avant de devenir mère par une faveur de Dieu. — ἣ où τίχτουσα, non pas dans le présent, mais au moment où elle était stérile. — ῥῆξον, sous-entendu probablement εὐφροσύνην, censé sous-entendu dans εὐφράνθητι; Cf. 15. xLix, 13; LIT, 9. — πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα... μᾶλλον ἤ (pour πλείονα ἢ) traduction littérale de l'hébreu. — τῆς ἐρήμου s'entend très bien de Sion, abandonnée par son Dieu; ce n'était pas précisément le cas de Sara, qui a offert d'elle-même sa servante à Abraham.
4:28
On s’est efforcé de faire de ce verset la conclusion de ce qui précède. Cornely : il démontre que l'Église est notre mère à tous; en effet, nous sommes, comme Isaac, les enfants de la promesse, et par conséquent libres et héritiers. Sieffert : le v. 28 complète l'argumentation du v. 27 : « Vous êtes ces fils selon Isaac promis à la Jérusalem céleste »; celle-ci correspond donc bien à Sara et est notre mère, libre comme Sara. Lipsius : « Vous êtes, selon Isaac, fils de la promesse, donc vous êtes aussi fils de la femme libre ». Tout cela est beaucoup trop subtil et restreint le sens principal de l'allégorie à ce point que les chrétiens sont fils de la promesse, point déjà dépassé, puisqu'ils sont même héritiers (nr, 29). Π faut donc voir simplement dans notre verset.le point de départ de ce qui suit, Pour l'analogie entre la situation actuelle et Gen. ΧΧΙ, 10. 42, il fallait rappeler, ce qui résulte d'ailleurs aussi de l’allégorie, que les chrétiens sont représentés par Isaac, comme fils de la promesse. La leçon ὑμεῖς et ἐστέ, critiquement certaine (Vg. nos — sumus), est aussi beaucoup plus en situation. Paul s'adresse aux Galates, tentés de méconnaître leur noblesse comme chrétiens, et semble leur dire : cette conclusion vous regarde, voyez ce que vous avez à faire!
4:29
L'opposition marquée par ἀλλά suppose ici un lien assez étroit entre les versets 28 οἱ 29. Vous êtes fils de la promesse, et pourtant on vous cherche noise! Faut-il s’en étonner? les choses se sont passées de la sorte dans l'histoire allégorique! — τότε lorsque les faits se sont passés réellement. L'opposition entre les enfants est sans doute colorée par celle qui existe entre les chrétiens et les Juifs ou les judaïsants. Ismaël était déjà au v. 23 κατὰ σάρχα, comme le système judaïsant est une chute de l'esprit dans la chair (im, 8); Isaac était διὰ τῆς ἐπαγγελίας (1v, 28); ici il est γεννηθεὶς κατὰ πνεῦμα, expression que Paul n’eût peut-être pas employée s'il ne représentait les chrétiens. Mais de même qu'eux sont avant tout fils de Dieu animés par l'Esprit, et aussi fils de la promesse, on peut dire de celui qui était par excellence fils de la promesse qu'il était né selon l'Esprit, par l’action de l'Esprit de Dieu qui devait intervenir spécialement pour opérer un miracle. — Le fils selon la chair persécutait l'autre; on ne peut donner un autre sens à ἐδίωχε, ni trouver ce sens précis dans Gen. χχι, 9, auquei l’Apôtre fait allusion, puisqu'il va citer le v. 10. L'hébreu ἃ pnx et les LXX παίζοντα μετὰ "sax τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτῆς. D'après l'hébreu, Sara aurait vu rire Ismaël, ce qui n'a guère de sens; le texte des LXX plus complet, sûrement avec raison, suppose qu'Ismaël jouait avec Isaac, ce qu'une mère pouvait regarder comme déplacé de la part du fils d'une esclave, et peut-être comme une source de dangers pour l'avenir. L'inquiétude jalouse de Sara ayant été approuvée par Dieu, Paul ἃ pu caractériser le jeu d’Ismaël comme une persécution, terme qui répondait bien à la conduite des Juifs vis-à-vis des chrétiens. La tradition juive ἃ donné d’ailleurs elle aussi une interprétation sinistre au « jeu » d’Ismaël. S. Jérôme en a recueilli deux traits (ÆZebr. quaest. in Gen.) : Dupliciter hoc ab Hebraeis exponitur : sive quod idola ludo fecerit ([smael) iuxta tllud, quod alibi scriptum est : sedit populus comedere et surrexerunt ludere, sive quod adversum Isaac, quasi maioris aetatis, ioco sibi et ludo primogenita vindicaret. On remarquera que Paul s'abstient, pour justifier la force de son expression, de s'appuyer sur de pareilles subtilités verbales, et cela est à noter pour apprécier le sens du v. 25. On notera que chez les Sémites où le même nom est celui du peuple et de son ancêtre, il était plus facile de regarder les faits et gestes des descendants comme contenus dans ceux de l'ancêtre éponyme; cf. Rom. 1x, 13. Or les Arabes et spécialement les flagaréniens avaient plus d'une fois eu maille à partir avec Israël (I Chron. v, 10. 19), et s'étaient unis à ses pires ennemis (Ps. Lxxxinr, 6). — οὕτως χαὶ νῦν, allusion peut-être aux persécutions des Juifs contre les chrétiens (? Thess. 11, 14), maïs plutôt, pour rester dans le thème, aux persécutions des judaïsants contre Paul et ceux qui pensaient comme Jui; cf. v, 41 : τί ἔτι διώχομαι, On voit que ces judaïsants, d'après lui, étaient au fond des Juifs, des faux frères, et malgré leur affectation de christianisme, beaucoup plus χατὰ σάρχα que χατὰ πνεῦμα.
4:30
Citation de Gen. χχι, 10, d’après les Septante conformes ἃ l’hébreu. Dans la Genèse, c'est Sara qui parle; elle disait donc : « Le fils de cette servante n’héritera pas avec mon fils Isaac. » Mais Paul citant ces paroles comme Écriture, semble les attribuer à Dieu même, qui d'ailleurs avait ordonné à Abraham de suivre l'avis de Sara; au lieu de τῆς παιδίσκης ταύτης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ pou Ἰσαάχ, il a donc écrit : τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας, ce qui ramène les deux termes importants de l'allégorie, la servante et la femme libre. Les Galates devaient naturellement faire l'application du texte dela Genèse selon l'allégorie proposée. La servante, c'est-à-dire l’ancienve alliance, est mise de côté, et ceux qui voudront s'y aîtacher opinâtrément suivront le même sort. Car il ne saurait être question de partager l'héritage, c’est-à-dire les biens messianiques, la vie en Dieu, dans ce monde et dans l’autre, entre les fils de la Loi, fils de la servitude, et les fils de la nouvelle alliance, qui sont aussi fils de Dieu. Les Juifs étaient exclus de l'héritage; les judaïsants qui faisaient cause commune avec eux en observant l’ancienne Loi, et ceux qui se laisseraient entraîner par eux devaient s'attendre au même sort. Il fallait choisir entre la Loi et l'Évangile, Avec quelle assurance Paul prononce cet arrêt, en se servant des termes mêmes de l'Écriture! L'Écriture, que dit-elle donc ? Lisez, vous qui voulez être sous la Loi! L'allégorie se termine sur cette condamnation sans appel. La solennité de cette sentence qui porte sur le monde présent et le monde à venir, ne permet pas de croire que Paul ait sous-entendu une autre conclusion pratique donc, chers Galates, à la porte les faux apôtres! IV, 34-V, 12. CONCLUSION PRATIQUE DES PRINCIPES POSÉS. 1V, 81-ν, 6. ÎL FAUT CHOISIR : TOUTE LA LOI SANS LE CHRIST, OU LA FOI AU CHRIST AVEC LA CHARITÉ. Nous faisons commencer cette péricope à 1v, 31 (Zahn, Bousset). C'est par le thème de la liberté qu’elle se rattache à ce qui précède. Elle met les Galates en demeure de se prononcer. Ajouter la Loï au christianisme, ce n’est point cumuler les avantages de deux systèmes religieux; il n'est pas possible d'embrasser telle observance légale, et cependant de recourir au Christ. Quand on a accepté la circoncision, il faut aller jusqu'au bout, mais se dire en même temps qu'on a renoncé au Christ, car on a cessé de mettre son espoir en Lui. Tandis que les vrais chrétiens vivent de foi, d'espérance et de charité dans le Christ.
4:31
De nombreux critiques voient dans ce verset le dernier mot de l’allérorie des deux alliances. Mais ce serait une conclusion déjà contenue dans 18 v. 28, et supposée en effet par les versets 29-30. Après la condamnation triomphante de la servante et de son fils, après l'héritage promis aux seuls fils de la femme libre, que pourrait ajouter le v. 31? 11 faut plutôt y voir le point de départ de ce qui suit, le principe général de l'épître, seulement nuancé par les couleurs de l'allégorie pour servir de transition. διό signifie « par conséquent », « c’est pour cela que », annonçant un développement comme dans Rom. τ, 24; 11, 1; Heb. mm, 7 ete. — Une tradition importante a même cru devoir accentuer le lien entre ce verset et le suivant; cf. infra. D'autres, probablement parce qu'ils sentaient que διό ne marquait pas assez une conclusion logique qu'ils voulaient faire ressortir, l'ont remplacé par ἡμεῖς δέ ou par ἄρα ou ἄρα οὖν. — ἀδελφοί est aussi l'indice, quoique insuffisant en soï, d’une période nouvelle.
4:3
… In short, to the forms of a rudimentary religion (στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου, cf. Gal. 4, 3) and to the imperfect "economy" of the Old Testament, according to the terminology dear to the Greek Fathers, is substituted a new "economy," based on the salvific work of Christ, …
4:4
… An antithetical parallel to the human fall and the fulfillment of the divine promise in Eden (Gen. 3), the mystery of the A. marks the "fullness of time" (Gal. 4, 4; Eph. 1, 10) and the beginning of the "New Testament" (Jer. 31, 31). "The fixed term of eternal counsel" (Dante, Par., 33, 3), a cooperator in the divine plan of the Redemption, the …
Theologically the m. is linked to the words of Sacred Scripture, according to which the Son is said to be sent by the Father and the Holy Spirit by the Father and the Son (Jn. 6:57; 14:16; 16:7; Gal. 4:4).
… St. Paul too (Rom. 1:2-2) knows that Jesus is a descendant of David as regards human nature (flesh) and Son of God as regards divine nature (spirit of sanctification), and that the Son of God is "born of a woman" (Gal. 4:4).
… is linked to the idea of adoptive filiation (v. ADOPTION, SUPERNATURAL) by virtue of a regeneration of man reborn from God; an idea not unknown to St. Peter (1 Pt. 1:3 and 23), frequent in the other two Apostles (Jn. 1:12-13; 1 Jn. 3:1; Rom. 8:14-15; Gal. 4:4 ff.; Eph. 1:5 ff.). …
Divine Maternity of Mary, Blessed
… In Sacred Scripture Mary is presented as the mother of Jesus, conceived by her and brought forth (Is. 7, 14; Mt. 2, 11; Lk. 1, 31; 2, 7; Jn. 2, 1, 3, 5, 12; 19, 25-26; Gal. 4, 4). Jesus, moreover, is presented as God. Mary therefore, being the mother of Jesus, true God, is in a true and proper sense the mother of God. Thus, moreover, St. Elizabeth greeted …
Luke 1:32 f.). This is the conception of the entire New Testament: the messianic time is called: καιρός ἔσχατος (1 Pet. 1:5, 20; Jude 18; 1 Tim. 4:1; 1 John 2:18); πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (Gal. 4:4); τῶν καιρῶν (Eph. 1:10); τὰ τέλη τῶν αἰώνων (1 Cor. 10:11); συντέλεια τῶν αἰώνων (Heb. 9:26; cf. F. Spadafora, Ezechiele, Turin 1948, pp. 280 f., 291 f.; E. B. Allo, Apocalypse, p. …
… The expression is frequent: "Grace and peace from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ" (Rom. 1, 7; Gal. 1, 3). Jesus is sent by the Father to save the world (Gal. 4, 4; Rom. 8, 3), he is the own Son, ἴδιος, of the Father (Rom. 9, 5; Tit. 2, 13). Christ, continuing to subsist as God in the divine nature, took our nature, making himself man (Phil. …
… In the New Testament the reference to the redemption of man as the end of the Incarnation of the Word is frequent: «Non enim misit Deus filium suum in mundum, ut iudicet mundum, sed ut salvetur mundus per ipsum» (Io. 3, 17: cf. Lc. 19, 10; Mt. 9, 13; Gal. 4, 4; I Tim. 1, 15). Likewise the Fathers: Irenaeus (Adv. haer., V, 14, 1): «Si enim non haberet caro salvari, neququam Verbum Dei caro factum esset». …
c) The other manifestations in the humility of the beginnings. — Eight days after the birth, the Newborn was incorporated into the people of Israel, becoming subject to the Law (Gal. 4:4) and receiving the name that indicates his nature and mission (v. above). …
… all humanity (Rom. 5:12), making it the object of God's wrath and curse (Eph. 2:3). But God in his infinite wisdom and mercy freely decrees the Redemption of the human race through his incarnate Son and carries out his design in the fullness of time (Gal. 4:4). Jesus Christ is thus the second Adam, who will give resurrection and life to men, as the first Adam had procured death for them (I Cor. 15:22; Rom. passim). …
4:5
… Jewish people prided itself on being the chosen people par excellence, and is in fact called by St. Paul an "adopted" people (Rom. 9:4); but in comparison with Christians it can no longer be called "son." Only in Christ are we truly adopted as sons (Gal. 4:5; F. Amiot, Epître aux Galates [Verbum Salutis, 14], Paris 1946, pp. 190-91; E. Mersch, La Théologie du Corps Mystique, II, ibid. 1946, pp. 16-49). In comparison with Christians the …
4:6
ABBA. - 1. An Aramaic term, the emphatic state of 'ab, "father," which occurs in a vocative sense in the New Testament, always followed by ὁ πνεῦρ, in Rom. 8, 5 and Gal. 4, 6; Mk. 14, 36 (v. 'AB). …
… It appears several times in the New Testament (Mark 14:36; Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6); each time it is addressed to God and followed by the translation: Father. …
… The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ, and whoever does not possess him is not a Christian (Rom. 8:9). The Holy Spirit teaches one to invoke God as Father (Rom. 8:15-17; Gal. 4:6), to judge spiritual and supernatural things (1 Cor. 2:10, 16) and, in general, to think and judge as Jesus Christ thought and judged (Phil. 2:5; F. Mura, Le Corps Mystique du Christ, …
… The great benefit was the "diffusion in souls" of the Holy Spirit (Rom. 5:5). This, and not the "charisms," made Christians "temples of the Holy Spirit" (1 Cor. 3:16) and gave to all the benefit of divine filiation (Gal. 4:6; Rom. 8:14).
… PL 10, 250) wrote regarding the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Son in the Gospels: "Non enim in incerto Dominus reliquit." With him many Greek and Latin Fathers find it expressed in the words: "Misit Deus Spiritum Filii sui in corda vestra" (Gal. 4:6); "Si quis autem Spiritum Christi non habet hic non est eius" (Rom. 8:9; cf. Acts 5:9; 16:15; II Cor. 3:17; Phil. 1:19). In the light of these texts St. Basil wondered how Eunomius …
… "dwelling"), "to abide," "to remain" (Io. 14:16, 17, 23). Alongside these terms, which express God's dwelling as actually present in the soul, there are others that rather indicate either its coming to be (the Holy Spirit sent to us: ibid. 14:26; Gal. 4:6; given to us: Io. 7:39; 14:16; Act. 5:32; 8:18; Rom. 5:5; I Thess. 4:8; I Io. 3:24; 4:13; received as a gift: Act. 2:38; I Cor. 2:12), or our transformation, soul and …
… Such a principle, in the total Christ, is nothing other than the Holy Spirit himself, several times called in Scripture "the Spirit of Jesus" or "the Spirit of the Son" (Acts 16, 7; Gal. 4, 6). He is therefore, as Pius XII teaches, "this divine principle of life and virtue given by Christ, inasmuch as he constitutes the very source of every gift and created grace... …
… Although he has most felicitous Trinitarian expressions (cf. Rom. 8, 9-11. 14-17; 15, 15. 16; I Cor. 6, 11; 12, 4-6; II Cor. 2, 21; 13, 13; Gal. 4, 6; Eph. 1, 3-14; Tit. 3, 4-6), P. presents an eminently Christocentric doctrine. …
4:7
… A reference to the natural origin of the right of succession can perhaps be seen in two Pauline texts "si... filii et heredes" (Rom. 8, 17; cf. also Gal. 4, 7); but it is in the ecclesiastical magisterium and above all in the social encyclicals that the question is addressed with a certain breadth and with arguments that reason is compelled …
4:9
of the supernatural economy to which they belong; in the Old Testament they did not have sanctifying efficacy (Gal. 4:9: "infirma et egena elementa"), but were only images and figures futurorum bonorum; in the New Testament, on the contrary, they have received from God, through the merits of the Redeemer, …
4:10
… corrects Pharisaic casuistry, affirming that the Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath (Mk. 2, 27). St. Paul reproaches the Galatians, converted to Christianity, for observing, according to the Mosaic law, days, months, times and years (Gal. 4, 10) and warns the Colossians that the obligation to observe new moons and sabbaths no longer holds (Col. 2, 16). The Apostles and the first Christians, although for some time they gathered …
4:13
surfaced (Gal. 1:9). But the lacunose character of the narrative of Acts must not surprise us. Paul himself seems to want to insinuate (Gal. 4:13) that the evangelization of the Galatians was occasioned by an illness that would have forced him to modify his itinerary (the impediment of Acts 16:6-7).
4:15
… The Septuagint translates it μακάριος; whence μακαρισμός (Rom. 4:6, 9; Gal. 4:15), "proclamation of happiness," in praise of someone. …
4:19
… is equivalent; St. Paul willingly uses the name Χριστός when he highlights the divine influence of Jesus in the soul (Rom. 8:10; II Cor. 13:5; Eph. 3:17; etc.), which is itself "anointed" (II Cor. 1:21), in which He goes about "being formed" (Gal. 4:19).
John, Apostle, Evangelist, Saint
Especially to be noted are certain terms proper exclusively to the Gospel of John and the letters: ἁμαρτίαν ἔχειν, ἀνθρωποκτόνος, γεννηθῆναι ἄνωθεν ἐκ θεοῦ, εἶναι ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου, περιπατεῖν ἐν σκοτίᾳ (νυκτί), παράκλητος, ἁμαρτία, τεκνίον (and Gal. 4:19), τιθέναι ψυχὴν ἑαυτοῦ (I Jn. 3:16; Jn. 10:11, 17 f., 15:13). Other terms and phrases occur commonly: ποιεῖν τὴν ἀλήθειαν (I Jn. 1:6 = Jn. 8:44); οὐκ ἔστιν ἡ ἀλήθεια ἐν τινι (I Jn. …
4:20
… is also described by Gal. 5:16-17 ("the flesh has desires opposed to those of the spirit," and vice versa); 6:8. With the flesh are connected the Mosaic law with the "letter that kills" (II Cor. 3:6), Judaism and its external circumcision (Rom. 2:29; Gal. 4:20), sin, death; with the spirit, faith in Christ, holiness, life. …
4:21
… pp. 190-91; E. Mersch, La Théologie du Corps Mystique, II, ibid. 1946, pp. 16-49). In comparison with Christians the Jewish people is in the condition in which the son of a slave woman stood in ancient society in relation to the son of the free wife (Gal. 4:21-31; F. Amiot, op. cit., pp. 200-206; L. Cerfaux, La théologie de l'Église suivant s. Paul, 2nd ed., Paris 1948, pp. 127-29). The reason for this difference lies in the fact that the regeneration …
4:22
Peter, Stephen and Paul will recall the Abrahamic promises (Acts 3, 25; 7, 2-8, 17; Heb. 6, 13; II Cor. 11, 22), which were fulfilled in Christ for all those who, through faith, are sons of the great patriarch (Rom. 9, 7-9; Gal. 3, 29; 4, 22-31). A. is the representative of the economy of the promise (ἐπικτωσία) — opposed to the bilateral Mosaic covenant — which has its full realization in the New Testament (Gal. 3, 16-18). …
… Jews are, excluded from the "promises" in punishment for their unbelief; the other (New Testament), symbolized in the free woman Sarah (Jerusalem, the Church), mother of free children, who are the believers, heirs of the promises made to Abraham (cf. Gal. 4:22 ff.).
… induced her husband to send away Ishmael and his mother (ibid. 21:9-21): St. Paul, referring to the episode, sees in the two mothers the two Testaments symbolized, the old in the slave Hagar and the new in S., the free woman who bears children in freedom (Gal. 4:22 ff.). …
4:23
A., a slave, represents the Synagogue enslaved to the Law, while Sarah, free, represents the Church (Gal. 4, 23-31).
4:24
… While "typical sense" is the technical and classical expression, there are also similar terms, which however are to be used with great caution, because they can give rise to misunderstandings: "parable" (Heb. 9:9), "allegory" (Gal. 4:24), "spiritual" (1 Cor. 10:3 f.).
4:26
… the seer contemplates the future glory of Jerusalem under the image of a woman who weeps over her son who died on the day of his wedding, but suddenly she disappears and in her place a noble city appears: the woman in mourning is "Zion our mother" (cf. Gal. 4, 26), the death of the son is the fall of Jerusalem; the newly built city is the heavenly Jerusalem, which will take the place of the earthly one. — The 5th vision (11, 1-12, 39) is dominated …
… Promised Land (cf. Mt. 5:4), transformed into a "heavenly calling" (Hebr. 3:1), which is a "rest" identical to the "rest of God" (ibid. 3:1-4:11). The faithful are journeying toward the "City of the living God" (ibid. 12:22; 13:14), the "higher" Jerusalem (Gal. 4:26) or the "new" or "heavenly" Jerusalem, bride of the Lamb (Apoc. 21:1-22:5), overflowing with the resplendent glory of God, the synthesis of every "ineffable gladness" (Dante, Par., …
4:28
The M. and his kingdom is the ultimate purpose intended by God in the "covenant" of Sinai, which specifies and determines the ancient "covenant" with Abraham, the "promise" (ἐπικητελία; Rom. 4:13-16; 9:8; Gal. 3:16-29; 4:28) formulated for his posterity. …
4:29
… Ishmael too, older in age and of indomitable character, began to harass the little I. (Gen. 21:9 says only that Ishmael "was playing" with I.: doubtless these were jokes in bad taste, cf. Gal. 4:29). Living together became difficult, and Abraham, yielding to the pressure of his wife Sarah and following the explicit command of Yahweh, sent away Hagar and her son (Gen. 21:9-21).
Douay-Rheims (Challoner) · Vulgata Clementina · original Douay-Rheims (Rheims 1582), transcription by EEBO-TCP (CC0) · La Sacra Bibbia, tradotta dalla Volgata da Antonio Martini (1769-1781) (LaParola (laparola.net), Martini OSIS text, Public domain (LaParola's electronic edition marks it 'Dominio pubblico')). Public domain.