Imprimatur

The Great Commentary of Cornelius a Lapide: the Epistle to the Galatians

Some errors in this text were corrected by AI.
The maxim may be yet more fitly applied to the doctrine itself of the Judaisers, in the sense that a single error in the faith, such as that about the necessity of the law, overturns the whole faith. Chrysostom and Theophylact apply it, yet more particularly, to circumcision , the receipt of which acts like leaven, and corrupts the whole lump. Their application is supported by the fact that the Apostle, in vers. 2, 4, and 6, is treating of circumcision, and declares that he who is circumcised is debtor to the whole law. The Judaisers, however, seem to have persuaded the Galatians that circumcision was not a matter of great moment, and to have passed lightly over the onerous character of the burdens to which those who were circumcised subjected themselves. On the contrary, Paul here lays bare their artifice, and declares circumcision to denote a profession of the whole of the Jewish law, and to be a corruption of Christianity as a whole, on the ground that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.
Ver. 10. — I have confidence in you . I trust the Lord to stablish you in the faith you have received, and to save you from believing aught save what I have taught you, and from following these new teachers and their novel doctrines.
But he that troubleth you . He who is stirring up this strife, and rending the whole Church, shall bear the punishment which God in His wrath shall inflict on those who teach heresy. By metonymy, judgment is put for punishment.
Ver. 11. — And I, brethren , if I yet preach circumcision . This is a reply to the calumny of the Judaisers, that Paul Judaised among the Jews, and opposed Judaism among the Gentiles. He asks, if this be so, why the Jews should so persecute him, and implies that the real reason is that he publicly opposes them, and condemns circumcision , so as to establish the Gospel.
Then is the offence of the cross ceased . If what they say of me is true, then they are not offended at the Cross which I preach, for they themselves wish to seem Christians, provided only that the Mosaic law may be taken into partnership with the Cross. Nay, the stricter Jews, whose only concern is for Judaism, oppose the preaching of the Cross only because it overturns their law, so much so that they would cease to persecute me if I would combine the law and the Cross. But since, as a matter of fact, they are offended at my preaching, it is obvious that I openly preach the abolition of the law by the Gospel, and the sole sufficiency of the Cross for salvation.
Ver. 12. — I would that they were even cut off which trouble you.
Cut off from the Church and your fellowship, lest they corrupt the whole. Cf. 1 Cor. v. 3. This is the obvious meaning, and one befitting the dignity of an apostolic writer. However, Ambrose, Chrysostom, Theophylact, Jerome, Augustine, and others understand it of the total deprivation of the organ to which circumcision is applied, so as to bring it more closely within the scope of the whole passage, in which circumcision is the main topic.
It may be asked how the Apostle can rightly imprecate a curse on the Judaisers, since this is opposed to charity, and is a mark of impatience and of a revengeful temper. “So detestable ,” says Jerome, “is the act of castration, that whoever inflicts it on a man against his will, or on himself ought to be accounted infamous .”
1. Jerome replies that the Apostle said this as a man and in passion ; but God forbid that an Apostle, and one especially who was moved by the Holy Spirit, should so speak. Accordingly, Jerome gives another answer, according to which, like Peter to Simon Magus (Acts viii. 20), and Elisha to the children who mocked him (2 Kings ii. 24), he spoke, not in anger, but partly in zeal for righteousness , partly in love, and entreated that they might be punished through their sin, i.e., through circumcision, and so, when punished, be purged of their shame.
2. Chrysostom and Theophylact say that the Apostle is not imprecating a curse, but speaking jestingly, as much as to say, If they insist on it, let them be not only circumcised, but wholly cut off.
3. S. Augustine and Anselm think that there is no curse here but a blessing, as if he were to say, Would that the Jews would become spiritual eunuchs by chastity for the kingdom of heaven’s sake, and cease to preach Jewish circumcision, fixing their thoughts instead on heavenly things, and on the law of Christ, as the way to attain them. Of these three explanations the second of Jerome’s is the best.
Origen castrated himself to prevent the motions of lust disturbing his chastity, but, as Chrysostom rightly says, wrongly ; for this is not taught by the Apostle, nor is it the members of the body but our vices that are to be cut off, otherwise it would be lawful to destroy our eyes, ears, and tongue. Moreover, castration does not destroy lust, but sometimes increases it, as S. Basil says in his treatise on Virginity. Cf. Ecclus. xx. 2, and xxx. 21.
Which trouble you . Who would rob you of your evangelical liberty.
Ver. 13. — Ye have been called unto liberty . Liberty from the burden of so many useless ceremonies of the law. Christian liberty throughout the Epistle is contrasted with Jewish slavery.
It is obvious, therefore, how grossly the Protestants pervert the Apostle’s words, when they argue from this that Christians are free from all positive law, and owe no obedience to prelates, to magistrates , or to parents. This is contrary to the law of nature and the Decalogue, subversive of all civil government, of all ecclesiastical order, of all human society. There has never been a nation, however barbarous, without its magistrates and laws, nor without them could the peace be kept, nor any nation continue, as all nations have clearly seen. If once men are persuaded that the civil or the ecclesiastical law does not oblige in conscience, but only as its sanctions constrain our fears, they will violate the law without any scruple, whenever they think it safe to do so. Accordingly, Christ, Paul, and the Apostles in general frequently order Christians to obey Caesar and other unbelieving magistrates, not only for wrath’s sake, but also for conscience’ sake. Cf. Rom. xiii. 5.
It may be objected that at all events, by parity of reasoning, Christians, since they live under a law of liberty, ought to be free from subjection to so many canons and rules, the burden of which is equal to that imposed by the older law. I answer that no just comparison can be drawn — (1.) Because the laws of the Church, so far as they concern the laity, are much fewer in number, and are all reducible to the five precepts of the Church. The canons, it is true, which deal with the clergy, are more numerous, but no one is obliged by them unless he, of his own free will, chooses to become a clerk. Moreover, it is the duty of the Pope and the Bishops to see that the number of canons and censures be reduced rather than added to. Many men of unquestioned piety are anxious lest too heavy a burden of rules be laid on the clergy, and so become a snare to them. (2.) Because the older laws were more burdensome and more difficult of observance, as may be seen in the number of sacrifices and lustrations. (3.) Because they were shadows of the laws of the New Testament. These latter, therefore, as being of easier observance, succeed to the former ; and, surely, it is better to serve the reality than to serve shadows. (4.) The older laws were unable to excite internal piety, and could only keep the people from idolatry, as the Fathers lay down unanimously ; but the laws of the Church are ordained for the special purpose of exciting piety, as is clearly shown by the laws about fasting, hearing Mass, confessing, and communicating.
Only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh . Do not (as the Protestants in our time are doing) use your freedom from Jewish ceremonies as an excuse for rushing into the lusts of the flesh. Do not let the flesh take what the Jew has been forced to give up.
serve one another . As Chrysostom says : “ Having removed one yoke, he, lest they should wax wanton , imposes another, the yoke of charity, so much the more strong as it is more light and pleasant. ” Do not, says the Apostle, serve ceremonies, nor yet the flesh ; I would have you free from both, and subject to one another through the spirit of love. The love of the Spirit is opposed to that love of the flesh so much boasted of by Adamites and other obscene sectaries.
1. The Apostle, as Chrysostom says, here cuts at the root of the evil, viz., the heresy and schism which induced some of the Galatians to try and draw others away to Judaism, and declares it to be pride and the love of power. He then applies the remedy, viz., charity.