True religion consists of these two elements: pious doctrines and virtuous actions. Neither does God accept doctrines apart from works, nor are works, when divorced from godly doctrine, accepted by God. . . . The knowledge of doctrines is a precious possession. There is need of a vigilant soul, since there are many who would deceive you by philosophy and vain deceit.

Then because the term philosophy has an appearance of dignity, Paul added, And vain deceit. For there can also be a pious deceit, such as many have been deceived by, that one should not consider a genuine deception. Jeremiah notes that even God can seem to deceive. O Lord, you have deceived me, and I was deceived^[1]; in this example we have nothing we can describe as deceit. For Jacob also deceived his father, but that was not finally a deceit but the proper way to act in the situation.^[2]

Philosophy is smooth argumentation that persuades. Empty deceit refers to superfluous and noxious human tradition, that is, not the divine law itself but its intemperate and skewed observance.Elements of the world are the observation of cultic days.

He calls that philosophy worldly by which men who desire to be wise in earthly terms are seduced.

The enemy here is philosophy that believes that the power of God rises from natural things, that nothing can be made from nothing, that the soul cannot have a beginning or be mortal, that a virgin cannot conceive, or God be born of a man or die and rise again.

For in him dwells, that is, for God dwells in him. But that you may not think him enclosed, as in a body, Paul writes, All the fullness of the Godhead bodily: and you are made full in him. Others say that Paul means the church filled by his Godhead, as he elsewhere says, of him that fills all in all,^[1] and that he employs the term bodily here, as the body in the head. But if this interpretation is true, why did he not add which is the church?

This fullness is said of the whole creation restored by him, for, in the sense that has been established earlier, all creation dwells in him, that is, is joined to him, so that he contains it in a bodily way.

Some teachers say that Christ is here being called the church, since the fullness of his divinity dwells in it. I am unsure, however, whether this interpretation suits the term bodily. I think that since he calls Christ the head of the church, it is clear that this refers to his humanity, by which he is our head, and that this is said about his human nature, which contained complete divinity within itself.

In the past Christ the Word was accustomed to come to the saints individually and to sanctify those who rightly received him. But neither, when these individuals were first born did people assert that he had become man in any of them, nor when they suffered, did anyone say that God himself suffered in them. But then 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). And then it was said, that he took flesh and became man. It was in that flesh he suffered for us. His intention was to show, so that all might believe, that whereas he was ever God, and sanctified those to whom he came, and ordered all things according to the Father’s will, afterwards for our sakes he became man, and bodily, as the apostle says, the Godhead dwelt in the flesh. This was as much as to say, Being God, he had his own body, and using this as an instrument, he became man for our sakes.

Since then it was impossible that our life, which had been estranged from God, should of itself return to the high and heavenly place, for this reason, as the apostle says, he who knew no sin is made sin for us^[1] and frees us from the curse by taking on him our curse as his own.^[2] Having taken up and, in the language of the apostle, slain in himself the enmity^[3] which by means of sin had come between us and God (in fact sin was the enmity) and having become what we were, he through himself again united humanity to God. For having by purity brought into closest relationship with the Father of our nature that new man which is created after God,^[4] in whom dwelled all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, he drew with him into the same grace all the nature that partakes of his body and is akin to him.

Neither do we say that the Word of God dwelled, as in an ordinary man, in the one born of the holy Virgin, in order that Christ might not be thought to be a man bearing God. For even if the Word both dwelt among us,^[1] and it is said that in Christ dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, we do not think that, being made flesh, the Word is said to dwell in him just as in those who are holy, and we do not define the indwelling in him to be the same. But united kata phusin, and not changed into flesh, the Word produced an indwelling such as the soul of man might be said to have in its own body.

The law has proved God’s oneness.^[1] It speaks of one God, as also the apostle when he says of Christ: In whom dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. For if, as the apostle says, all the fullness of the Godhead, bodily, is in Christ, then must the Father and the Son be confessed to be of one Godhead. Or if one desired to sunder the Godhead of the Son from the Godhead of the Father, as long as the Son possesses all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, what is supposed to be further reserved, seeing that nothing remains over and above the fullness of perfection? Therefore the Godhead is one.

All that the Father has, he has given to the Son when he begot him bodily in the fullness of divinity, so that as he is the head, the creation is his body.^[1] Therefore, whatever can be supposed to be a heavenly creature must be seen as fully subordinate to Christ, so that no lesser being may be thought worthy of worship.

Speaking of him as our Head, the apostle says: For in him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead corporally. He does not say corporally because God is corporeal, but he either uses the word in a derived sense as if he dwells in a temple made by hands, not corporally but symbolically, that is, under prefiguring signs . . . or else the word corporally is certainly used because God dwells, as in his temple, in the body of Christ which he took from the Virgin.

Embracing then, dearly beloved, the sole pledge of the Christian hope, let us not be torn from our faithful bonding to the body of Christ, in whom, as the apostle says, dwells the fullness of divinity in bodily manner, and you have been filled out in him. Since the substance of God is incorporeal, how does it dwell in bodily manner in Christ unless the flesh of our race has been made the flesh of the divinity? We filled out in that God in whom we have been crucified, in whom we have been buried, in whom we have been even raised up.

He calls the church that which is filled with the Father’s divinity. The church is full by dwelling bodily in Christ, that is, as the body is completed in the head, he says that Christ is everywhere the head of the church. And you are fulfilled in him, fulfilled for his sake and through him.

Circumcision is no longer performed with a knife, Paul says, but in Christ himself; for no human hand circumcises . . . but the Spirit. The Spirit circumcises the whole man, not simply a part. . . . When and where? In baptism. And what Paul calls circumcision, he again calls burial. . . . But it is not burial only: for notice what he says, Wherein you were also raised with him, through faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.

Circumcision refers to the life of immortality embraced through baptism, just as uncircumcision is the old life of mortality.

Through baptism comes the stripping away and circumcision of sins. . . . Those being baptized in the blood of Christ confess that they share in his death through baptism and that following this they enjoy the resurrection. Resurrection is used here in a twofold sense, the one spiritual and the other physical. All persons will rise through the resurrection of Christ from the dead. Those, however, who have not been baptized in Christ but have died without faith will share in the general resurrection. However, they will not enjoy the promise of redemption. . . . As many as were baptized into Christ, these have freely benefitted before the general resurrection from the spiritual resurrection, for they have already risen from the death of sins. Thus, Paul also says: in whom you were raised, not in whom you will be raised.

This, too, is plain, that in him who is baptized the Son of God is crucified. Indeed, our flesh could not eliminate sin unless it were crucified in Jesus Christ. . . . And to the Colossians he says, Buried with him by baptism, wherein you also rose again with him. This was written with the intent that we should believe that he is crucified in us, that our sins may be purged through him, that he, who alone can forgive sins, may nail to his cross the handwriting which was against us.

Therefore, the Lord permitted mortality to steal in [as an atonement], that guilt might cease. But so that the end set by nature might not also be in death, there was granted a resurrection from the dead, that the guilt might fail through death but the nature be continued through resurrection. And so death is a passage for all men, but you must pass with virtuous steadfastness—a passage from corruption to incorruption, from mortality to immortality, from disquiet to tranquillity. . . . What indeed is this death but the burial of vices and the awakening of virtues? For this reason may my soul depart among the souls of the righteous, that is, may it be buried together with them,^[1] that it may lay down its sins and take up the grace of the just, who bear about the dying of Christ in their body^[2] and soul.

[Paul] says that the Gentiles were dead, because they refused to receive the law, which had been given as a witness to the Creator, and then as a means of condemning vice. With Christ has come the forgiveness of sin, since freedom from sin is impossible without this gift, which saves us from the penalty of death.

After all, if we find these passing days, in which we recall Christ’s passion and resurrection with special devotion and solemnity, so exhilarating, how blessed and blissful will that eternal day make us, when we shall actually see him and stay with him, the one we now rejoice in merely by desiring and hoping for him! What exultant joy God will give to his church, from which as it is born again through Christ he has after a fashion removed the foreskin of its fleshly nature, that is, the reproach of its natural birth! That is why it says, And you, while you were dead in transgressions and the foreskin of your flesh, he made alive in him, forgiving us all our debts.

What bond? He means either that which they said to Moses, namely, All that God has said will we do, and be obedient,^[1] or, if not that, this, that we owe to God obedience; or if not this, he means that the devil held possession of it, the bond which God made for Adam, saying, In the day you eat of the tree, you shall die.^[2] This bond then the devil held in his possession. And Christ did not give it to us, but himself tore it in two, the action of one who joyfully remits what we owe.

See to it that we do not again become debtors to the old contract. Christ came once; he found the certificate of our ancestral indebtedness which Adam wrote and signed. Adam contracted the debt; by our subsequent sins we increased the amount owed. In this contract are written a curse, and sin, and death and the condemnation of the law. Christ took all these away and pardoned them. St. Paul cries out and says: The decree of our sins which was against us, he has taken it completely away, nailing it to the cross. He did not say erasing the decree, nor did he say blotting it out, but nailing it to the cross, so that no trace of it might remain. This is why he did not erase it but tore it to pieces.

The decree, or bond, was the demand contained in the old law that we fulfill all of its provisions. Since, however, not to sin is impossible, punishment is necessitated. Thus the law’s bond was against us in not allowing us to pursue righteousness because of its detailed demands. . . . Only in the resurrected life are we freed from sin, and then the law becomes superfluous. When Christ nails it to the cross, he makes death the end of this life and its domination by sin. In the resurrection, therefore, to which we pass through baptism, the law is not needed.

When the law was given as a curse on transgressors, all the people of Israel stood crying aloud. For there was deposited with what was said a bond that bound them, as they received these things. This bond was the binding character of the law, which Christ transcended in his teachings, when he decreed against the observances of the law. . . . Retroactively he abolished the punishments of the law against sinners through the forgiveness of sins and repentance for salvation.

This decree or bond may be understood, some say, as the law, but it is better to equate it with the human body, since it is here that every evil action is conceived. Thus, it is the senses and their tendency to sin that are nailed to the cross, when God the Word assumes our human nature.

But Christ was sold because he took our condition upon himself, not our sins themselves; he is not held to the price of sin, because he himself did not commit sin.^[1] And so he made a contract at a price for our debt, not for money for himself; he took away the debtor’s bond, set aside the moneylender, freed the debtor. He alone paid what was owed by all. We ourselves were not permitted to escape from bondage. He undertook this on our behalf, so that he might drive away the slavery of the world, restore the liberty of paradise and grant new grace through the honor we received by his sharing of our nature. This is by way of mystery.

Paul expounds here the nature of God’s gracious care through its various sources. He recalls the many deeds by which God has brought rescue to the human race, so that he has not only remitted our transgressions but also lifted that sin, which from Adam’s disobedience (which he calls the signed bond) did not allow us to rise from the dead. . . . Because death came from sin, when sin in fact was overcome, the resurrection of the dead became a reality. Indeed this could not have been done, if he had not nailed it to the cross. While the Savior conquers sin by not sinning, he holds man to be culpable and, being innocent, is killed by him: thus he crucifies sin. Sin being overcome is said to be put to death; the cross is not the death of the Savior, but of sin.

Some say that the bond was, as it were, a written memorial before God of sins. This, then, was destroyed on the cross, when, sins being forgiven, the memorial of transgressions was abolished.

She [i.e., his mother, Monica] did not ask for such things but simply requested that remembrance be made for her at Thy altar, which she had attended without missing a single day. She knew that on it the Holy Victim is offered; by means of which the decree against us, which was hostile to us is canceled; by means of which the Enemy, adding up our offenses and seeking something to charge against us, and finding nothing in him in whom we conquer, was overcome.

With good reason do we celebrate the Passover wherein the blood of the Lord was poured out, by which we are cleansed of every offense. Let us be assured; the devil was holding the bond of slavery against us, but it was blotted out by the blood of Christ.

This is the whole scheme of our salvation, by which the one who as God had made man himself became man, for the sake of finding lost man. This is the whole matter of Christ shedding for the forgiveness of our sins true, not false, blood, and with his blood, obliterating the bond of our sins. All this these damnable heretics strive to drain of all meaning. All this, so the Manichaeans believe, as it appeared to human eyes, was spirit and not flesh.

At the birth of the Son the King was enrolling all men for the tribute money, that they might be debtors to him: the King came forth to us who blotted out our bills and wrote another bill in his own name that he might be our debtor.

Although Jesus was one, he had several aspects; and to those who saw him he did not appear alike to all. . . . Moreover, that his appearance was not just the same to those who saw him, but varied according to their individual capacity will be clear to people who carefully consider why, when about to be transfigured on the high mountain, he did not take all the apostles but only Peter, James, and John. . . . Accordingly, as we hold that Jesus was such a wonderful person, not only as to the divinity within him which was hidden from the multitude, but also as to his body which was transfigured when he wished and before whom he wished, we affirm that everyone had the capacity to see Jesus prior to the time when he had not put off the principalities and powers and had not yet died to sin. But after he put off principalities and powers, all those who formerly saw him could not look upon him, as he no longer had anything about him that could be seen by the multitude.

Having put off from himself the principalities and the powers. He means the diabolical powers; because human nature had arrayed itself in these, or because they had, as it were, a hold on human nature. When he became man he put away from himself that hold. What is the meaning of he made a show of them? Paul speaks well in these words. Never yet was the devil in so shameful a plight. For while expecting to have him, he lost even those he had; and when Christ’s body was nailed to the cross, the dead arose. At the cross death received his wound, having met his death stroke from a dead body. And as an athlete, when he thinks he has hit his adversary, himself is caught in a fatal grasp, so truly does Christ also show, that to die with arrogance is the devil’s shame.

It is in the putting off of mortality that the demonic powers are overcome.

Through the exposing and putting off of the flesh Christ subdued the opposing powers. . . . For until his cross and death it was not clearly known that Christ was their Lord, that he was both God and Son of God. This was because he exercised his wonder-working powers in a way that was hidden in his body. This is why Satan made an attempt on him, wishing to learn if he was truly the one proclaimed by the prophets. This was with the intention that if it was so, Satan might hinder the outworking of salvation [i.e., the economy]. But the evil one accomplished nothing, nor was he able to learn anything; for a while the Christ escaped his notice. But when Christ was beaten and died and was buried and rose, God’s plan of salvation was completed, his being unnoticed was over, his divinity became visible and was seen in his head and body.

Since through the bodily affections the demons have power over us, he, clothed with the body, was more powerful than sin, and he overturned the power of the adversaries. He made their stupidity known to all, since through his body the victory was given to all of us against them.

But if a man is gone down even to Hades and stands in awe of the heroes who have descended there, regarding them as gods, yet he may see the fact of Christ’s resurrection and victory over death. He may infer that among them also Christ alone is true God and Lord. For the Lord touched all parts of creation and freed and undeceived all of them from every illusion. As Paul says, Having put off from himself the principalities and the powers, he triumphed on the cross; that no one might by any possibility be any longer deceived but everywhere might find the true Word of God.

And where the devil could do something, there he met with defeat on every side. While from the cross he received the power to slay the Lord’s body outwardly, it was also from the cross that the inward power, by which he held us fast, was put to death. For it came to pass that the chains of many sins in many deaths were broken by the one death of the One who himself had no previous sin that would merit death. And, therefore, for our sake the Lord paid the tribute to death which was not his due, in order that the death which was due might not injure us. For he was not stripped of the flesh by any obligation to any power whatsoever, but he willed his own death, for he who could not die unless he willed doubtless died because he willed; and therefore he openly exposed the principalities and the powers, confidently triumphing over them in himself.

He triumphed not by killing but by dying, not by bringing force to bear on people but by providing them with sustaining power, so that, for us, all pride having been broken, he might give an example of true conquest.

Let us not be ashamed to confess the Crucified. Let the cross, as our seal, be boldly made with our fingers upon our brow, and on all occasions; over the bread we eat, over the cups we drink; in our comings and in our goings; before sleep; on lying down and rising up; when we are on the way and when we are still. It is a powerful safeguard; it is without price, for the sake of the poor; without toil, because of the sick; for it is a grace from God, a badge of the faithful, and a terror to devils; for he displayed them openly, leading them away in triumph by force of it. For when they see the cross, they are reminded of the Crucified.

As renowned victor over the devil and most powerful conqueror of hostile spirits, in an admirable spectacle, he carried the trophy of his victory. On the shoulders of his unconquered endurance, he bore the sign of salvation to be worshiped in every kingdom. Even then he encouraged all his imitators by the sight of his labor, saying, Any who do not take up their cross and follow me do not deserve me.^[1]

Let none of you be found a deserter. Let your baptism endure as your arms; your faith as your helmet; your love as your spear; your patience as a complete panoply.

They drank from a spiritual rock which followed; and that rock was Christ.^[1] Paul says this, A Hebrew of Hebrews, according to the law, a Pharisee,^[2] educated at the feet of Gamaliel,^[3] who would never dare to speak of spiritual food and spiritual drink unless he had learned that this is the meaning of the Lawgiver through the knowledge of the truest doctrine handed down to him. For this reason, he adds, as he is bold and certain about the meaning of clean or unclean foods, that it must be observed not according to the letter but spiritually. He says, Therefore, let no one judge you in food or in drink or in participation of the feast days or new moons or sabbaths which are a shadow of the future.

Let no man, therefore, judge you regarding food or drink, or with respect to a holy day, or the new moon, or sabbath days, which are a shadow of things to come. For if the laws relating to the difference of foods, and the holy days and the sabbath, like shadowy things, preserved a copy of other things that were mystically true, you will not say without reason that the high priest also represented the symbol of another High Priest, and that he was called Christ, as the pattern of that other, the only real Christ.

There is, however, a certain other life, to which these words call us; and, although at present our days are evil, yet some others are good, which night does not interrupt; for God will be their everlasting light, shining upon them with the light of his glory.^[1] Consequently, when you hear of the good days, do not think that it is your life here that is set forth in the promises. In fact, these present days are the destructible days, which the sensible sun produces; but nothing destructible could suitably be a gift for the indestructible. This world as we see it is passing away.^[2] Therefore, since the law has some shadow of the good things to come, consider I pray, present sabbaths to be pleasant and holy, as they have been brought from the eternal days, and new moons, and festivals. But look upon them, I pray you, in a manner proper to the spiritual law.

Do you see how he depreciates what the Colossians think important? If you have obtained such things [i.e., grace and wisdom through Christ], Paul asks, why make yourself accountable for these petty matters? And he makes light of them. . . . Don’t put up with those who judge you in these trivial considerations.

Paul teaches that the law is abolished, Christ having passed over the bond against us. He teaches that the evil one has fallen, Christ having exposed and made a parade of the evil powers. Thus, we are no longer to obey what has been abolished, and we are to reject Jews who would urge us to keep the law. . . . This law was the mere shadow of Christ, lacking the substance. Further, we are not to obey Greeks who would encourage us to worship angels or worldly elements.

Shall we, then, think of festival days in terms of eating and drinking? On the contrary, let no one call us to account with respect to eating, For we know that the law is spiritual.^[1] Let no one, therefore, call you to account for what you eat or drink or in regard to a new festival or a new moon or sabbath. These are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ. So let us seek the body of Christ which the voice of the Father from heaven, the last trumpet, as it were, showed to you on that occasion when the Jews said that it thundered for him.^[2] . . . Wherever the body of Christ is, there will be the truth.

Whoever seeks to be a stranger to that carnal . . . Judaism which is justly repudiated and condemned must first consider as alien to himself those ancient observances which have clearly ceased to be necessary. This is so because the New Testament has been revealed, and the things which were prefigured by those others have come to pass. A person is not to be judged in meat or drink or in respect of a festival day, or of the new moon or of the sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come. On the other hand, he must receive, embrace and observe, without any reserve, those commandments in the law which help to form the character of the faithful . . . [and] whatever progress he makes in them he must not attribute to himself but to the grace of God by Jesus Christ our Lord.

The term meaning to rob you of your prize is employed when one person is victorious, but the prize of victory is given to another, when though a victor, you are robbed of the victor’s prize.

The verb translated disqualify means to judge a victory unfairly. Whoever mixes legal observances with the gospel leads people from better things to worse.

You will find particularly in Jeremiah that the word of God through the prophet finds fault with Israel because they worship these [i.e., angels] and sacrifice to the queen of heaven and to all the host of heaven.^[1] . . . Paul, who received a meticulous education in Jewish doctrines and later became a Christian as a result of a miraculous appearance of Jesus, says these words in the epistle to the Colossians: Let no man rob you.

But what is the general drift of Paul’s words? There are some who maintain that we must be brought near by angels, not by Christ; for Christ to do so would seem too great an act on our behalf. Paul continually emphasizes what has been done by Christ.

Because it was said that the law had been given through angels—since it was by these ministers that the law was given at that time—the blessed Paul himself had said, For if the message declared by angels was valid.^[1] They, therefore, who were arguing with them to keep the law were also taking the position that the angels were angered if the law were not being kept.

Those who defend the law lead persons to worship angels, since they say that the law was given through them. This vice persisted for a long time in Phrygia and Pisidia, such that a synod gathered at Laodicea in Phrygia laid down a law that angels should not be invoked.^[1]

What is self-abasement? Saying that we are self-abased [can only mean] that God is great and far above any service we can render to him. Since, then, we cannot get near him, it is through his angels that propitiation comes and we may draw near him. For this reason he spoke earlier of one who is the head of every power and principality. And now he says, Why do you come to elements and angels, having renounced their head, who is Christ?^[1]

There is another even more obscure passage about which I ask you to pull me up out of deep water and set me in the shallows. In the epistle to the Colossians, I simply cannot see the connection where he says: Let no man seduce you into taking pleasure in the humility and religion of angels, walking in the things which he has not seen; in vain puffed up by the sense of his flesh and not holding the head. What angels does he mean? If he means the rebel and wicked angels, what is their religion or their humility, or who is the master of this seduction, who under cover of some angelic religion or other would teach what he does not see as something seen or experienced? Doubtless, the heretics, who follow the teachings of demons, who think up false systems under the impulse of their spirit, who give out that they have seen visions which they have not seen and by their deadly arguments sow their seed in foolish and credulous hearts—doubtless, these are the ones who do not hold the head, namely, Christ, the source of truth.

There is a corporeal eye, by which we see those earthly things, an eye according to the sense of the flesh. Scripture says of it, He walks in vain, puffed up by the sense of the flesh. We have another eye, opposed to this one. It is better and perceives divine things. But it was a blind eye in us. Jesus came to enable it to see, so that those who were blind might see and those who saw might become blind.

For [this man] has not seen angels and yet acts as though he had. Therefore Paul says, vainly puffed up by his carnal mind, not about any true fact. About this doctrine, he is puffed up and puts forward a false humility. He acts and thinks carnally, not spiritually. His reasoning is simply human reason alone.

It happens that persons become bound up with the worship of earthly things under the form of philosophy, so that, held by these, they do not rise. . . . They end up simulating true religion. They become inflated by watching the movements of the stars, which Paul calls angels, not by divine authority but by human superstition, which brings nothing but damnation.

Let no one, haughty with feigned humility and telling the lie that he sees angels, vainly exalt himself above other men; these voice their visions from the heart. Let the man who only seems to be humble and religious not be imitated.

The purpose and view of the epistle is here, as Paul mentions, to respond to the emphasis on angels urged by some. Christ is the head of all, just as the soul is the head of the body. Christ is head of all the cosmic elements. It makes no sense to be in submission to anything else.

It follows that celibacy is not particularly praiseworthy unless it arises through love of God. The blessed Paul says of those who show a distaste for marriage: In the last times people will abandon the faith, attaching themselves to deceitful spirits and the teachings of demonic powers that they should abstain from food, at the same time forbidding marriage.^[1] Again he says, Do not let anyone disqualify you in forced piety of self-mortification and severity to the body.

To have one’s feet washed by Jesus was expedient in order to have a part with him. But Peter, because he did not understand that this was expedient, first objected, as it were, and said, so as to put himself to shame, Lord, are you going to wash my feet? and a second time, You shall never wash my feet.^[1] If what he said was a hindrance to the act that would cause him to have a part with the Savior, it is clear that although he said this to the teacher with a sound and reverent intention, he spoke in a way harmful to himself. Now life is full of errors of this kind, of people who intend what they believe to be best but out of ignorance say, or even do, things which take them in the opposite direction. Such indeed are those who declare, Touch not, taste not, handle not, concerning everything that is meant for destruction and human consumption, based on some teaching which generally falls far below the divine statement, You shall die as men.^[2]

God delights only in our faith, our innocence, our truthfulness, those virtues of ours which dwell in the soul, not the stomach. Fear of God and heavenly awe, not earthly perishable food, obtain these virtues for us. With reason does the apostle rebuke those who are slaves to the superstitions pertaining to angels, inflated with their fleshly outlook, not clinging to Christ, who is the head, by whom the whole body is fitted together by joints, and fastened together and united by mutual members in the bond of love to reach full growth in the Lord. They prefer to follow the admonition: Do not touch nor handle things that indeed seem to have a show of religion because the body is treated severely. Yet there is in them no increase at all of righteousness in that we are recalled by a self-imposed slavery to the rudiments to which we are dead through baptism.

You are not in the world, Paul says. How is it you are subject to its elements? And note how he pokes fun at them, touch not, handle not, taste not, as though they were cowards and keeping themselves clear of some great matters, all which things are to perish with the using. . . . So that even though they appear to be wise, let us turn away from them. For one may seem to be a religious person, and modest, and to have a contempt for the body. . . . They dishonor the flesh, Paul writes, depriving it and stripping it of its liberty, not allowing them to rule it with their will. But God has honored the flesh.

These prohibitions about eating and drinking that you hear from the Greeks are based on their mistaken conviction that you should not partake of anything living. But all this has been given for consumption and nourishment. So, don’t pay attention to what has been given in accordance with their teaching.

When these intemperate teachers bring in their own ideas, they do not follow the purpose of the law. Instead, they deceive with spurious words, they call observance of the law humility, they say that one must not transgress that which was given by God and that the body is not to be spared, that, indeed, all things are not to be used freely. This is just plain slavery and the abrogation of an honor given to us. Abstinence must be freely chosen, not because created things are repulsive but precisely because they are pleasing.

This is what the apostle said: You make observations of the months and of the times and of the years.^[1] Or again: Do not touch, do not taste, do not pick up. And there is no doubt that this is said about the superstitions of the law. To plunge into them is to be an adulterer from Christ.

To be a virgin it is not enough just to be unmarried. There must be spiritual chastity, and I mean by chastity not only the absence of wicked and shameful desire, the absence of ornaments and superfluous cares, but also being unsoiled by life’s cares. Without that, what good is there in physical purity? . . . [Those who do not understand this belong] to the very weak who crawl along the earth. It was impossible to uplift souls so disposed all at once to the argument on behalf of virginity. One who has been so excited by worldly things and so admiring of the present life will think . . . that what is worthy of heaven and close to the angelic state [the call to virginity] is deserving of disgrace. How would such a one tolerate advice promoting this course? And then is it surprising if Paul has adopted the same strategy of argument in the case of something that has been permitted when he does the same thing in the case of what has been forbidden and is contrary to law? For instance: dietary laws, the acceptance of some foods while rejecting others, were a Jewish weakness. Nevertheless, there were among the Romans those who shared this weakness. Paul has not only vehemently denounced them, but he does something more than this. He disregards the wrongdoers and censures those who attempted to prevent them with the words, But you, how can you sit in judgment on your brother?^[1] Yet he did not do this when he wrote to the Colossians; rather, with great authority he rebukes them and treats the matter philosophically: No one is free . . . to pass judgment on you in terms of what you eat or drink. And again: If with Christ you have died to cosmic forces, why should you be bound to rules that say, ’Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!’ as though you were still living a life bounded by this world? Such prescriptions deal with things that perish in their uses. Why ever does he do this? Because the Colossians were strong, but the Romans still required much accommodation.

When Paul blames those who claim to have had visions of angels, on the basis of which they teach that people are to abstain from meat . . . he does not mean to criticize the mandates of the Jewish law, as if he had been speaking at the instigation of superstitious angels. His intention, rather, is only to condemn those who do not accept Christ as the One who has true authority over all such things.

Indeed, we are often deceived by sight, and we see things for the most part other than they really are. We are deceived by hearing too. And so, if we do not wish to be deceived, let us contemplate not what is seen but what is unseen. . . . On this account the apostle also cries out: Do not touch, nor taste, nor handle, things which must all perish; for things which are for the body’s indulgence are also for its corruption.

With the knowledge of what Paul had seen and heard in paradise, he cried out saying: Why, as if still viewing the world do you lay down rules: ‘Do not touch; nor handle; nor taste!’—things which must all perish in their very use! He wished us to be in the world in figure, not in actual possession and use of it. We are to use the world as if we did not use it, as if we were but passing through,^[1] not residing in it, walking through as in a dream, not with desire, so that with the speed of thought we might pass through the shadow of this world.

The problem is that the Colossians worship worldly things, put their hope in them, and not in Christ alone . . . so that these rules have been cut off from the head, who is Christ, and thus have become the basis of a pseudo-religion and a sacrilege.

What is so praiseworthy as a show of wisdom, and what so detestable as the superstition of error? Humility, also, both pleasing to God and eminently praiseworthy in true religion, is given with a show of wisdom to those of whose teachings and actions we are told: Touch not, taste not, handle not, which are unto destruction, because they are not of God, and all that is not of faith, is sin.^[1] . . . I wish to know what this humility is and this show of wisdom which he says is in their superstition, which comes from the doctrines of men. . . . I think he is speaking of a pretended and useless abstinence such as heretics usually strive after . . . because they put on the appearance of a holy work, but, as they do not practice it in the fold of truth, they gain neither honor nor the reward of glory.

As to the words Touch not, taste not, handle not, they are not to be considered as a commandment of the apostle forbidding us to touch, taste or handle something or other. It is just the opposite, if I am not deluded by the obscurity of the passage. Surely he used these words in mockery of those by whom he did not want his followers to be deceived and led astray. They were the ones who made a distinction of foods according to the worship of angels and issued decrees for this life, saying: Touch not, taste not, handle not, although all things are clean to the clean.^[1] For every creature of God is good,^[2] as he assures us in another place.

[Some] say that Paul was a teacher of wantonness. Pray, who will be a teacher of sobriety if he taught wantonness, for he chastised his body and brought it to subjection^[1] and by many fasts said that he had rendered the worship which is due to Christ. He did so not to praise himself and his deeds but to teach us what example we must follow. Did he give us instruction in wantonness when he said: ‘Do not touch; nor handle; nor taste!’ things that must all perish in their use? And he also said that we must live Not in indulgence of the body, not in any honor to the satisfying and love of the flesh, not in the lusts of error; but in the Spirit by whom we are renewed.^[2]

[T]herefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord’s Day, on which our life has sprung up again by him and by his death.

[W]e too would observe the fleshly circumcision, and the Sabbaths, and in short all the feasts, if we did not know for what reason they were enjoined [on] you—namely, on account of your transgressions and the hardness of your heart. . . . [H]ow is it, Trypho, that we would not observe those rites that do not harm us—I speak of fleshly circumcision and Sabbaths and feasts? . . . God enjoined you to keep the Sabbath, and imposed on you other precepts for a sign, as I have already said, on account of your unrighteousness and that of your fathers.

[L]et him who contends that the Sabbath is still to be observed as a balm of salvation, and circumcision on the eighth day . . . teach us that, for the time past, righteous men kept the Sabbath or practiced circumcision, and were thus rendered “friends of God.” For if circumcision purges a man, since God made Adam uncircumcised, why did he not circumcise him, even after his sinning, if circumcision purges? . . . Therefore, since God originated Adam uncircumcised and unobservant of the Sabbath, consequently his offspring, Abel, offering him sacrifices, uncircumcised and unobservant of the Sabbath, was by him [God] commended [Gn 4:1–7; Heb 11:4]. . . . Noah also, uncircumcised—yes, and unobservant of the Sabbath—God freed from the deluge. For Enoch too, most righteous man, uncircumcised and unobservant of the Sabbath, he translated from this world, who did not first taste death in order that, being a candidate for eternal life, he might show us that we also may, without the burden of the Law of Moses, please God.

Hence it is not possible that the [day of] rest after the Sabbath should have come into existence from the seventh [day] of our God. On the contrary, it is our Savior who, after the pattern of his own rest, caused us to be made in the likeness of his death, and hence also of his Resurrection.

This sixth day [Friday] is called parasceve, that is to say, the preparation of the kingdom. For he perfected Adam, whom he made after his image and likeness. But for this reason he completed his works before he created angels and fashioned man, lest they should falsely assert that they had been his helpers. On this day also, on account of the Passion of the Lord Jesus Christ, we make either a station to God, or a fast. On the seventh day he rested from all his works, and blessed it, and sanctified it. On the former day we are accustomed to fast rigorously, that on the Lord’s Day we may go forth to our bread with thanksgiving. And let the parasceve become a rigorous fast, lest we should appear to observe any Sabbath with the Jews, which Christ himself, the Lord of the Sabbath, says by his prophets that “his soul hates” [Is 1:13–14]; which Sabbath he in his body abolished.

[The early saints of the Old Testament] did not care about circumcision of the body; neither do we [Christians]. They did not care about observing Sabbaths, nor do we. They did not avoid certain kinds of food, neither did they regard the other distinctions that Moses first delivered to their posterity to be observed as symbols; nor do Christians of the present day do such things.

Fall away neither into the sect of the Samaritans, nor into Judaism: for Jesus Christ has ransomed you. Stand aloof from all observance of Sabbaths, and from calling any indifferent meats common or unclean.

Christians must not Judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honoring the Lord’s day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any shall be found to be Judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ.

And that you may learn that we know this from the first, the lawgiver, when he afterwards gave laws, and said, “You shall not kill” [Ex 20:13], did not add, “since murder is an evil thing,” but simply said, “You shall not kill”; for he merely prohibited the sin, without teaching. How was it then when he said, “You shall not kill,” that he did not add, “because murder is a wicked thing.” The reason was that conscience had taught this beforehand; and he speaks thus to those who know and understand the point. This is why when he speaks to us of another commandment, not known to us by the dictates of conscience, he not only prohibits, but adds the reason. When, for instance, he gave the commandment respecting the Sabbath, “On the seventh day you shall do no work”; he gave the reason for this cessation. “Because on the seventh day God rested from all his works which he had begun to make” [Ex 20:10]. And again; “Because thou were a servant in the land of Egypt” [Dt 21:18]. For what purpose, then, did he add a reason respecting the Sabbath, but did no such thing in regard to murder? Because this commandment was not one of the leading ones. It was not one of those that were accurately defined by our conscience, but a kind of partial and temporary one; and for this reason it was abolished afterwards. But those that are necessary and uphold our life are the following: “You shall not kill. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not steal.” On this account he adds no reason in this case, nor enters into any instruction on the matter, but is content with the bare prohibition.

You have put on Christ, you have become a member of the Lord, and been enrolled in the heavenly city, and you still grovel in the Law? How is it possible for you to obtain the kingdom? Listen to Paul’s words, that the observance of the Law overthrows the gospel, and learn, if you will, how this comes to pass, and tremble, and shun this pitfall. Wherefore do you keep the Sabbath, and fast with the Jews?

The rite of circumcision was venerable in the Jews’ account, because the Law itself gave way to it, and the Sabbath was less esteemed than circumcision. The Sabbath was broken so that circumcision might be performed; but so the Sabbath might be kept, circumcision was never broken; and mark, I pray, the dispensation of God. This is found to be even more solemn than the Sabbath, as not being omitted at certain times. When it is done away, much more is the Sabbath.

Well, now, I should like to be told what is in these Ten Commandments, except the observance of the Sabbath, that ought not to be kept by a Christian—whether it prohibit the making and worshipping of idols and of any other gods than the one true God, or the taking of God’s name in vain; or prescribe honor to parents; or give warning against fornication, murder, theft, false witness, adultery, or coveting other men’s property? Which of these commandments would anyone say that the Christian ought not to keep? Is it possible to contend that it is not the law that was written on those two tablets that the apostle describes as “the letter that kills,” but the law of circumcision and the other sacred rites that are now abolished?