He obviously means that freedom by which our mother [the church] is free, and she obviously is free by faith. For this is true freedom, to keep faith in God and to believe all God’s promises. Therefore by faith Christ has brought us back to freedom and made us free by the freedom of faith.

Do you see how many reasons he employs to lead them away from the error of the Jews? He shows first that it is the utmost foolishness, having become free instead of slaves, to desire slavery again instead of freedom. Second, he reveals them to be unmindful of and ungrateful to their benefactor, despising the one who frees them and preferring that which enslaves them. Third, he shows that this is absurd, since [as Paul says] the law has no power over you, since another has purchased you once for all from it.

He had to add an exhortation that they should persevere in the same way that they had first begun to receive from him the gospel and not return to the slavery under the law. He says stand which is not possible for one who is under a heavy yoke. For he bows his neck submissively and therefore cannot stand.

By the name of yoke he indicates to them the gravity of the affair. By again he shows how profound is their confusion. Paul implies, If you had no experience of that yoke, you would not deserve such recriminations. But when those who have learned by experience the heaviness of the law submit themselves to it again, what forgiveness do they deserve?

He adds again, not because the Galatians had previously kept the law . . . but in their readiness to observe the lunar seasons, to be circumcised in the flesh and to offer sacrifices, they were in a sense returning to the cults that they had previously served in a state of idolatry.

His statement,^[1] I, Paul, say to you, implies that the words are to be accepted not as Paul’s alone but as God’s.

Now Paul says that Christ will profit them nothing if they are circumcised, that is, in the physical way that his opponents wanted, namely, to put their hope of salvation in circumcising their flesh. For Paul himself circumcised Timothy as a young man when he was already a Christian. This he did [to avoid] scandalizing his own people, not at all in dissimulation but from that indifference which made him say circumcision is nothing, uncircumcision is nothing.^[1] For circumcision is no impediment to the one who does not believe that his salvation lies in it.

The letter that he wrote to the Romans was addressed to believers from both Jewish and Gentile backgrounds. . . . But writing to the Galatians he argues differently, since they belonged not to the circumcision party but to the believing Gentiles.

The provisions of the law imply one another. I mean something like this. Attached to circumcision are sacrifice and the observance of days. The sacrifice again entails the observance of a day and place, the place entailing many types of purification. The purifications set up a further string of varied observances. For it is not legitimate for the impure to sacrifice, to intrude upon the holy shrines or to do any such things. Therefore through this one commandment the law drags along many others. Now if you have been circumcised but not on the eighth day; or on the eighth day but without a sacrifice; or with sacrifice but not in the appointed place; or in the appointed place but not under the prescribed forms; or under the prescribed forms but not in a pure state; or in a pure state but purified by inappropriate rites—all these things are wasted. For this reason he is bound to keep the whole. Do not keep part but the whole, Paul says, but if it is not of the Lord, do not keep even part.

There are some who serve the law to a certain extent without being circumcised; for many Romans in Judea served the law without circumcision. . . . Yet there is no one who is circumcised without being required to serve the whole law. He is a debtor, since the law was given to the circumcised. His meaning here was that they had become so negligent as to deserve to bear all the burdens of the law.

Just as no one can serve two masters,^[1] so it is difficult to keep both the shadow and the substance of the law.

When he says bound, he is no longer speaking of the law as something unworthy but of a heavy burden which can be made lighter. There is one Lord, who is able to make it either heavy or light according to the choice of those who have not refused to accept salvation through his grace through his appearance in the flesh.

He is refuting those who believed that they were justified in the law, not those who observed its legitimate provisions in honor of him by whom they were commanded, understanding both that they were commanded as a foreshadowing of the truth and that they belonged to a particular time.

All the virtue of the one who believes in Christ is by the grace of God. Grace is not from merits but from readiness to believe God. Therefore [Paul writes] You have already fallen from grace if you place your justification in the law, because (for example) you serve works, because you observe the sabbath or on account of your circumcision. If you believe that you are justified by this, you have fallen from grace and been made void of Christ. You no longer have your faith from Christ nor hope for grace for yourselves from his passion and resurrection, if you believe that justification comes from the law.

Because it is they, not Christ, who are injured, he adds: you have fallen from grace. For when the effect of Christ’s grace is that those who were debtors to the works of the law were freed from this debt, these people, ungrateful to such great grace, prefer to be debtors to the whole law. Now this had not yet happened, but, because the will had begun to be moved, he therefore speaks frequently as though it had already happened.

Having now multiplied their fear and shaken their minds and shown them the shipwreck that they are about to suffer, he reveals to them the haven of grace close by. This he does everywhere, showing thereby how extremely benign and safe salvation is. . . . We need none of those legal provisions, Paul says, for grace sufficiently gives the Spirit to us, through whom we are offered righteousness and a multitude of great goods.

Since circumcision and uncircumcision belonged to the one God, both therefore were annulled in Christ because of the priority given to faith, this being the faith of which it was written the Gentiles shall believe in his name.^[1]

[Circumcision] is indifferent for those who have it already before believing but not for those who are circumcised after believing. Note how he has rejected it, putting it after uncircumcision. What makes the difference is faith. For just as when one is choosing athletes, it matters nothing in this trial whether they be hook-nosed or snub-nosed, dark or fair, but all that need be looked for is that they be strong and skillful. So when a person is to be enrolled in the new covenant, the lack of these bodily trappings does no harm, just as they do no good if they be present.

[Lest Gentiles should say] that uncircumcision, in which Abraham pleased God and had his faith counted for righteousness^[1] is better than circumcision, which was given as a sign and was of no profit to Israel though it possessed it, we shall see that this arrogant boast has also been excluded with the greatest foresight.

Everywhere he says that faith in the gospel of Christ accords no value to rank or sex or works done with regard to the body or from the body or for the sake of the body, such as circumcision, works and other things of this kind. None of these, he says, has saving value in Christ. Circumcision is therefore vain, nor by uncircumcision do we gain value in Christ. Because we have conceived faith in him and because we have believed his promises and because through his resurrection we too rise and have suffered all things with him and rise to life with him but also through him, our faith is sure. Through this faith comes works fitting to salvation. This comes about through the love that we have for Christ and God and thus toward every human being. For it is these two relationships above all that set life straight and fulfill the whole sense of the law. They contain all the commands in the Decalogue—if it follows necessarily that he who keeps faith will also keep love, since these two fulfill all the precepts of the law of Christ.

He strikes them here with a great blow by showing that it is their failure to be rooted in love for Christ that has given entrance to this error. For what is looked for is not only faith but also faith abiding in love. It is as though he said, Had you loved Christ as you ought, you would not have gone voluntarily into slavery, you would not have insulted your deliverer. And here he also alludes obliquely to those who have plotted against them, showing that if they had love for them they would not have dared to do this. He also wishes to amend their lives through this saying.

This is the faith that separates the righteous from the unclean demons, for they too, as the apostle James says, believe and tremble,^[1] but their actions are not good. Therefore they do not have that faith by which the righteous live.^[2]

If anyone, holding the faith that works through love, repents of his former sin in such as a way that he from then on turns his back on it, he will be guiltless of the blasphemy that is spoken against the Holy Spirit [namely, impenitence], which is not forgiven to the speaker either in this age or in the one to come.

These are not the words of one who asks a question but of one who is at a loss and grieving. [Paul means] How was so great a race cut short? Who had strength to do such a thing? You who were superior to all and were in the position of teachers have not even remained in the position of disciples.

It is for God to call and hearers to obey.

All leaven corrupts the bread, and the corrupted bread is flour. When the mass of flour is left, it sours, and then comes the leavening. Now when a small amount of the leaven is put into the mass, the mass is corrupted. You, he says, must be unleavened bread. Therefore that little addition of yours, which you thought a small amount, namely, your observing of circumcision and the rest, because it is corrupt, corrupts the mass of o ur gospel. If so, you do not have full hope in Christ, and neither does Christ regard you as his own or people whose hope depends on him. For it is faith that sets free, and, as I have said, he has no faith who hopes for any sort of help apart from Christ, even along with Christ.

Some may say, Why do you blow up the matter so portentously by your words? We have kept a single command of the law, and are you clamoring because of that? But Paul is concerned not only for their present but for their future. . . . For, he says, this little evil, if uncorrected, has the strength to lead you into complete Judaizing, just as leaven acts on the lump.

He says that he has this ground for trusting in them, that they had entered on the path of error not of their own accord, but they had been taken unawares. Thus he trusts that when they are shown the true road they will easily be able to return.

He did not say I know but I have confidence. I trust God, Paul says. I am confident when I call on the Lord to assist in your amendment. And he has not said, I have confidence in the Lord but I have confidence in you in the Lord. Everywhere he interweaves his admonitions with praises. It is as though he said, I know my disciples, I know your uprightness. My confidence is based first on the Lord who does not allow the least thing to be lost, and then on you, who can quickly recover control of yourselves. At the same time, he asks them to bring their own zeal, since we cannot receive from God without bringing something of our own.

Some say that Paul is tacitly attacking Peter, whom he says he opposed to his face^[1] . . . but Paul would not speak with such offensive aggression of the head of the church, nor did Peter deserve to be held to blame for disturbing the church. Therefore it must be supposed that he is speaking of someone else who had either been with the apostles, or was from Judea, or was one of the believing Pharisees, or at any rate was reckoned important among the Galatians.

Since they were slandering him as one who constantly Judaized and was a hypocrite in his preaching, see how blamelessly he meets the challenge, calling them to admit the truth. For you know that this is the pretext for persecuting me, that I ask you to avoid the law. But if I preach circumcision, why am I persecuted? For the Jews have nothing to charge me with but this one thing. . . . What then? Did he not preach circumcision? Did he not circumcise Timothy? He did indeed circumcise him. How then can he say I do not preach? Now learn here his precise meaning. He did not say I do not perform circumcision I do not preach it, that is, I do not tell you to believe in this way.

Since he speaks of a stumbling block here, he is reminding them that the principal reason for the Jews’ taking offense at Christ was that they often saw him ignoring and disdaining those ceremonial observances which they believed themselves to have for their very salvation. What he says here, then, is as much as to say: It was therefore in vain that the Jews in their indignation crucified Christ when he disdained these commandments. Now they still try to enjoin such things on those for whom he was crucified.

It is asked how Paul, a disciple of him who said, Bless those who curse you,^[1] . . . now curses those who were disturbing the churches of Galatia. . . . The words that he speaks are prompted not so much by anger against his opponents as by affection for the churches of God. . . . Nor is it any wonder that the apostle, as a man still enclosed in a frail vessel and seeing the law in his own body taking him captive and leading him into the law of sin, should have spoken like this once, when we observe such lapses to be frequent in holy people.^[2]

If they will, let them be not only circumcised but emasculated. But where are those who dare to emasculate themselves, drawing upon themselves the curse, slandering the divine creation and acting like the Manichaeans?^[1] For the latter say that the body itself is a deceiver and the work of evil matter. By their deeds they have given an impetus to these evil doctrines. For they cut off the member as an enemy and an intriguer. . . . Yet no physical member is responsible but free will. If you do not accept this, why not cut out the tongue on account of blasphemy, the hands on account of theft, the feet on account of their swiftness in pursuing evil, and, as it were, the whole body? . . . But this is absolutely illicit and a satanic aberration. It is necessary only to correct the disorderly impulse of the soul, the evil demon, who rejoices unceasingly in murder, who has persuaded you to cut off the instrument as though the Creator had erred.

[The point is] that those who had deprived the Galatians of the grace of God should themselves be cut off from the grace of God.

If anyone in sickness has been subjected by physicians to a surgical operation, or if he has been castrated by barbarians, let him remain among the clergy; but, if anyone in sound health has castrated himself, it behooves that such a one, if [already] enrolled among the clergy, should cease [from his ministry], and henceforth should not be promoted. But, as this is said of those who willfully do the thing and presume to castrate themselves, so if any have been made eunuchs by barbarians, or by their masters, and should otherwise be found worthy, such men the canon admits to the clergy.

Since the man who has mutilated himself, in fact, is subject to a curse, as Paul says, “I would they were even cut off which trouble you.” And very reasonably. For such a one is venturing on the deeds of murderers, and giving occasion to those who slander God’s creation, and opens the mouths of the Manicheans, and is guilty of the same unlawful acts as those Greeks who mutilate themselves. For to cut off our members is a work of demoniacal agency, and satanic device, that they may bring up a bad report on the work of God, that they may mar this living creature, that imputing all not to the choice but to the nature of our members, the more part of them may sin in security, as being irresponsible; and doubly harm this living creature, both by mutilating the members, and by impeding the free choice on behalf of good deeds.

Observe how bitterly [Paul] speaks against their deceivers: . . . “I would that they that unsettle you would even cut themselves off” [Gal 5:12]. . . . On this account he curses them; and his meaning is as follows—for them I have no concern, “A man that is heretical after the first and second admonition refuse” [Ti 3:10]. If they will, let them not only be circumcised, but mutilated. Where are those who dare to mutilate themselves, seeing that they draw down the apostolic curse, and accuse the workmanship of God, and take part with the Manicheans?

He now shifts to ethical exhortation and commends the practice of virtue. For it was not in order to sin without fear, he says, that we have been freed from the law. From this it is clear that in rejecting the superfluous parts of the ceremonial law he is commending the observance of the moral law and, above all, love.

One who is free and follows the spirit and the truth in the higher sense may look beyond the mere letter of Scripture with its types and precursors. But he should not therefore despise the less mature nor give some cause to lose hope to those who cannot grasp the deeper sense. For even if they are weak and fleshly in comparison with those who are spiritual, they remain the body of Christ.

From this point Paul begins to discuss those works of the law which . . . no one denies also pertain to the new covenant, but with another aim, appropriate to those who perform good works in freedom. These acts aim for the rewards of a love that hopes for eternal things and looks forward in faith. This is quite unlike the Jews, who were forced to fulfill these commandments from fear, and not that righteous fear which endures to eternity but one that made them fear for the present life. The result: they fulfill certain works of the law which consist in ceremonies but are completely unable to fulfill those that consist in good conduct. For nothing fulfills these except love. . . . And so the apostle now says, You are called into freedom, brethren, but on condition that you do not let your freedom be an opportunity for the sin nature. Do not suppose, upon hearing the word freedom, that you can sin with impunity.

He then also shows the way by which this rectification^[1] may be easily accomplished. Be slaves to one another in love, Paul says. Here again he hints that love of strife, faction, ladder climbing and folly were the causes of their error. The mother of heresies is desire for power. From this foolishness and conceit he is calling them to be slaves to one another. Therefore Paul applies this corresponding remedy: Since you have been torn apart by your desire to rule one another, be slaves to one another. In this way you will be brought together again. He does not openly state their fault, but he states the remedy openly, so that through the remedy they may also better grasp the fault. . . . He did not say love one another but be slaves to one another, to express the most intense possible love.

What need is there for the holy apostle to make use of the law, if the new covenant is foreign to the old legislation? He wants to show both covenants are from the one Lord. They are best perceived as sharing the same intent. The fulfillment of the law is through the love of one’s neighbor, because love is that which effects the perfect good. He therefore says that love is the fulfilling of the law.

The whole work of the law is fulfilled by this one command: love. For one who loves another neither murders nor commits adultery nor steals. . . . Now Paul himself adds a text^[1]: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. But we ought to understand by neighbor every human being and then constantly view Christ as our neighbor. And you too must love one another but in the spirit. Here he now seems, as if neglecting the previous question and discussion, to urge them to avoid discord. And this can happen if you love one another in the Spirit, not in the flesh nor for the works of the flesh nor in natural observances. For he who loves another feels no envy, nor steals from another, nor despises or abuses him.

Since I have turned the law upside down, if you wish to fulfill it, do not be circumcised; for it is fulfilled not in circumcision but in love. Notice that he does not forget his grief. He keeps on touching upon what troubled him even as he turns to ethical issues. HOMILY ON GALATIANS 5.14.

5:15 Take Heed That You Are Not Consumed

Paul is not here erupting suddenly into ad hoc legal precepts against the tenor and sequence of the whole letter. He is still discussing circumcision and the observance of the law. . . . If you read the whole Old Testament and understand it according to the text an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth^[1] . . . what appears as justice will eat you away, not avenging anything but consuming everything.

He does not accuse explicitly, but he speaks hypothetically, so as not to irk them. He has said not Since you bite one another but If you bite. Again, he has not said explicitly here, You will be destroyed by one another, but instead he says Take care lest you be destroyed by one another. He is expressing his concern and admonition rather than his condemnation. . . . He does not refer only to biting, as the act of a person out of control, but also to devouring, which implies malice. For the one who bites satisfies the immediate passion of anger, but the one who devours proves he is acting like an animal. By bitings and devourings he does not mean a literal biting and devouring. He refers to something more pernicious. The harm done by one who tastes human flesh is not so great as that done by the one who sinks his teeth into the soul. In proportion as the living soul is more precious than the corruptible body, so much the worse is the harm done to it.

Here Paul hints that, while some had been circumcised under duress, others had relied on their faith and stood firm. Nevertheless, they were at odds, some praising the legalistic way of life, others showing due admiration for the gifts of grace. For this reason Paul focuses his attention on the exhortation to love.

The whole essence of the gospel is to think according to the Spirit, to live according to the Spirit, to believe according to the Spirit, to have nothing of the flesh in one’s mind and acts and life. That means also having no hope in the flesh. Walk, then, he says, in the Spirit—that is, Be alive. If you do so you will not consummate the desire of the flesh. You will admit into consciousness no sin, which is born of the flesh.

See how he also shows a better way. It makes virtue uncomplicated and rightly accomplishes what he has previously said—a way that brings forth love and is sustained by love. For nothing, nothing makes people so lovable as to be formed by the Spirit. And nothing so causes the Spirit to abide in us as the strength of love. . . . After having stated the cause of the illness, he also shows the remedy that bestows health.

The body as such does not cause motion but is moved. It is not an agent but is acted upon. For desire is not of the body but of the soul. . . . How then does Paul say the flesh struggles against the spirit? By flesh he means not the physical body but the evil choice. . . . What then? Ought one to suppress the flesh? Was not the one who said this himself clothed with flesh? . . . By flesh here he means earthly thoughts that are apathetic and heedless. This is not a condemnation of the body but a reproach of the apathetic soul. For the flesh is an instrument, and no one repudiates and hates the instrument as such, but only the one who handles the instrument badly. . . . Yet, one may argue, even this is a condemnation of the body, to call the faults of the soul by the name of the flesh. Now I agree that the body is less precious than the soul, yet it is itself good as created. For what is less than truly good may remain proximately good. Evil is not less than the good but opposed to it. . . . The eucharistic mysteries too, and the whole church, are customarily called by the name of flesh in Scripture, which is called the body of Christ^[1] . . . But if he says the flesh struggles against the Spirit, he is speaking of two opposing ways of thinking. The things that oppose each other are virtue and wickedness, not the soul and the body. For if the latter are opposed, each is the destruction of the other . . . but if the soul cares for the body . . . and the body serves the soul . . . how can they be contraries and at war with one another?

The flesh struggles against the Spirit: that is, the literal and flat understanding of Scripture fights against allegory and spiritual doctrine. . . . And the carnal^[1] sense of Scripture, which cannot be fulfilled (since we cannot do all that is written), shows that we do not have it in our power to fulfill the law when even if we wish to follow the letter we are prevented by its impossibility.

The fact is that both are good: the spirit is good and the flesh too is good. And the whole person who consists of both, one ruling and one obeying, is indeed good but a changeable good. Yet these changing goods could not arise were it not for the immutable good, which is the source of every created good, whether small or great. But however small might be one particular good, it is nonetheless made by the one incomparably good. Yet however great, it is in no way comparable to the greatness of its Maker. But in this human nature, good as it is in origin and constitution, there is now war, because there is not yet salvation.

The flesh struggles against the spirit yet does not subdue it, since the spirit also struggles against the flesh. Although that same law of sin holds something of the flesh as its prisoner and thereby resists the law of the mind^[1] it does not, however, reign in our body, mortal though it is, if our body does not voluntarily obey its desires.

An inward war is being waged every day within us. The desires of the flesh and of the spirit are within one and the same person. The lust of the flesh rushes headlong into vice, delights in the worldly enjoyments that seem to satisfy. By contrast the opposed desire of the spirit is so eager to cleave entirely to spiritual pursuits that it in an exaggerated way chooses even to exclude the necessary uses of the flesh. By wishing to be so inseparably attached to spiritual things it refuses to take care of its own bodily fragility.

Now this, I think, he writes to the Galatians, to whom he says, Who gave you the Spirit.^[1] . . . From this it is apparent that he is speaking to Christians, people to whom God had given the Spirit, and therefore to the baptized. See, the sinful nature is an adversary even within the baptized, and there is not in them that possibility [of sinlessness] which [Pelagius^[2]] says is so implanted in our nature that it cannot be annulled.

People think that the apostle here denies that we possess free will. They do not perceive what he is saying to them: If they refuse to hold fast to the grace they have received, through which alone they are able to walk in the Spirit and avoid fulfilling the desires of the flesh, they will not be able to do as they wish. . . . It is love that fulfills the law.^[1] But the wisdom of the flesh by following temporal goods opposes spiritual love. How can it be made subject to the law of God (that is, freely and obediently fulfill righteousness and not be opposed to it) when even as it tries it must be vanquished? The flesh imagines that it can procure a greater temporal good by iniquity than by maintaining righteousness. The first stage, the natural life of a human being, precedes the law, when no wrongdoing or malice is prohibited. The natural being makes no resistance at all to base desires, since there is no one to prohibit them. The second stage is under law before grace, when he is indeed prohibited and tries to abstain from sin but is overcome because he does not yet love righteousness for God’s sake and its own but wishes to observe it in the hope of earthly acquisitions. And therefore, when he sees righteousness on one side and temporal good on another, he is dragged by the weight of his temporal desire and thus forsakes righteousness, which he was trying to maintain only in order to have that which he now sees that he is going to lose by maintaining it. The third stage of life is the one under grace, when no temporal good is preferred to righteousness. This cannot happen except by spiritual love, which the Lord has taught by his example and be-stowed by grace. For in this life, even if there remain desires of the flesh from the mortality of the body, yet they do not subdue the mind to consent to sin.

A person is under the law when he is conscious of abstaining from works of sin through fear of the torments threatened by the law rather than by love of righteousness. He is not yet free, not yet a stranger to the will to sin. For he does wrong by his very willing, since he would prefer if it were possible that there should be nothing for the will to fear, so that he might do freely what he secretly desires. . . . By the law which he has used to instill fear [God] has not imparted love. Godly love is suffused in our hearts not through the letter of the law but through the Holy Spirit, which is given to us.

Yet it seems to me that here he has pronounced a great and remarkable eulogy on the law. For the power of the law was such as to put it in the place of the office of the Spirit before the Spirit came to us. That is not to say that one should therefore cleave to this custodian. For then we were properly under the law, so that by fear we might restrain our desires, the Spirit not yet having appeared. But what need is there now of the law when the Spirit has been given? This grace does not merely bid us to abstain from the commands of the old covenant but also quenches them and leads us on to a higher rule of life.

The holy prophets and Moses, walking in the Spirit and living in the Spirit, were not under the law. But they lived as if under the law, so that they appeared indeed to be under the law, but only in order to benefit those who were under the law and spur them on from the lowliness of the letter toward the heights of the Spirit.

He did not say Walk in the Spirit so that you will not have desires of the flesh but so that you will not gratify them. Not to have them at all, indeed, is not the struggle but the prize of struggle, if we shall have obtained the victory by perseverance under grace. For it is only the transformation of the body into an immortal state that will no longer have desires of the flesh.

These and others like them are the members of sin, which the apostle calls the works of the flesh because these errors come from the world, from which also the flesh comes. For all these sins arise from the side of the flesh, not from that of the Spirit.

By saying that the works of the flesh are plain, he means that they are known to all because they are so self-evidently bad and abhorrent, so much so that even those who do them desire to hide their deeds. Or else it may mean that they are plain only to believers in Christ.

Now it is clear that idolatry and sorcery and things of that kind belong not to the flesh but to the soul. In fact it is not the flesh that he is condemning but the wayward mind.

So that poisoning and sorcery might not appear to be condoned in the New Testament, they are included among the works of the flesh. This happens when people love and are loved through magical arts.

It often happens that dissensions arise in the interpretation of Scripture, from which heresies, here numbered among the works of the flesh, boil over. For if the wisdom of the flesh is at enmity with God^[1] (and all false doctrines, being repugnant to God, are at enmity), heresies also, being at enmity with God, are consequently included among the works of the flesh.

Let no one suppose that envy is the same thing as jealousy. For they are indeed neighbors and because of that very neighborhood either of them is often freely substituted for the other. . . . But because each is distinguished here they require us to make a distinction. Jealousy is the mind’s anguish when someone achieves something that two or more were seeking but which can be had only by one. Jealousy is cured by peace, in which all may obtain that which is sought and thus become one. Envy on the other hand is the grief one feels in one’s mind when an unworthy person appears to have obtained something, even if it is not being sought by others. Envy is overcome by meekness, when all who yearn appeal to the judgment of God and do not resist his will, trusting rather in the justice of what he does than in one’s own estimate of what people deserve.

It would have been a long task to enumerate all the works of the flesh and make a catalog of vices, so Paul has wrapped this all up in one phrase: and the like. I wish that we could avoid these vices as easily as we can see them!

Since God is righteous, such people do not obtain the kingdom of heaven so long as they do such things. But since God is merciful, the wicked, if they cease doing revolting things by which they try God’s patience and turn to God in humble amendment, they do without doubt obtain the kingdom of God.

He didn’t say the works of the Spirit but the fruits. Therefore [it may seem that] the soul is superfluous. For if the statement mentions the flesh and the Spirit, where is the soul? Is Paul then speaking of soulless beings? For if the evil belongs to the flesh and the good to the Spirit, then the soul would be superfluous. Not at all; for the ordering of the passions is the work of the soul and concerns the soul. The soul is situated in the middle of the struggle between virtue and vice. If the soul uses the body as it should, it makes itself more spiritual. But if it departs from the Spirit and yields itself to evil desires, it renders it more earthy. Do you see how everywhere he is not speaking of the essence of the flesh but of moral choice that is inclined toward virtue or vice? So why does he refer to the fruits of the Spirit? Because evil works come from us alone, and hence he calls them works, while the good works require not only the resolution of our will but the kindness of God.

He has spoken elegantly by allotting works to the flesh and fruits to the Spirit. Vices come to nothing and perish in themselves. Virtues multiply and abound in fruit.

What deserves to hold the first place among the fruits of the Spirit if not love? Without love other virtues are not reckoned to be virtues. From love is born all that is good.

By joy people mean an elation of mind over things that are worthy of exultation, whereas gaiety is an undisciplined elation of mind which knows no moderation. . . . We should not suppose that peace is limited to not quarreling with others. Rather the peace of Christ—that is, our inheritance—is with us when the mind is at peace and undisturbed by conflicting emotions. Among the fruits of the Spirit faith holds the seventh and sacred place, being elsewhere one of three—faith, hope and love.^[1] Nor is it remarkable that hope is not included in this catalog, since the object of hope is already included as a part of faith.

He put fornication at the head of carnal vices and love at the head of spiritual virtues. Anyone who takes pains in the study of divine Scripture will be prompted to inquire attentively into the rest. Fornication is love divorced from legitimate wedlock. It roves everywhere in search of an opportunity to fulfill its lust. Yet nothing is so rightly suited for spiritual procreation as the union of the soul with God. The more firmly it adheres, the more blameless it is. Love is what enables it to cleave. Rightly then the opposite of fornication is love. It is the sole means by which chastity is preserved. Now impure acts come from all those disturbances produced from the lust to fornicate, to which the joy of tranquillity is opposed. And bondage to idolatry is the ultimate fornication of the soul. A most furious war is waged against the gospel and against those who have been reconciled to God. The remnants of fornication, though long lukewarm, can nonetheless still be rekindled. The contrary of this war is the peace by which we are reconciled to God. When the same peace of God is maintained toward humans, the vices of poisonings, enmity, strife, deceit, animosity and dissension are healed among us, so others among us may be treated with due moderation. Forbearance fights to endure these vices, kindness to assuage them and goodness to forgive them. Furthermore, faith struggles against heresy, meekness against envy, continence against drunkenness and gluttony.

Paul did not mention more than ten excellent behaviors because he is referring to the fruits of the Spirit. These fruits embrace everything in the tablets of God’s covenant, in which no more than ten words of command are succinctly handed down.

He did not say against these, so that they would not be thought the only ones—though in fact even if he had said this we ought to understand all the goods of this kind that can be imagined. No, he says against such things, namely, both these and whatever is like them.

He has added against such there is no law so that we understand that those on whom the law must be imposed are those in whom these excellent behaviors do not already reign. For those in whom they reign are the ones who apply the law legitimately, since the law is not imposed on them with coercive intent, seeing that righteousness is already their overwhelming preference. . . . These spiritual fruits reign in one in whom sins do not reign. These good things reign if they are so delightful that they themselves uphold the mind in its trials from falling into consent to sin. For whatever gives us more delight, this we necessarily perform.

So that no one may ask, And who is like this? he points to people who perform such good things by their works. Once again he makes flesh stand for evil deeds. He does not mean that they had destroyed their flesh; otherwise how were they going to live? For the crucified person is dead and inactive. But what he means is strict discipleship. Even if desires press hard they rage in vain. Since the power of the Spirit is such, let us live according to it, and let us be content with it.

We crucify the flesh, of course, by being baptized in the water of baptism, which is a likeness of the cross and his death, his entombment and his resurrection, as it is written.

If those who are Christ’s have crucified the flesh, it is therefore clear that the slaves of Christ have presented their flesh in purity along with its desires and passions. They are participating in Christ, thus acknowledging that he crucified the flesh. That is why the faithful, thinking the same thoughts as their Lord, have crucified the flesh. And if believers have crucified the flesh it is unthinkable that those who suffered on Christ’s behalf should not be reigning with him.

What he means by walk by the Spirit is let us be content in the power of the Spirit, and let us not seek to augment it with the law. Then, having shown that those who introduce circumcision are doing this through ambitious motives, he says, Let us not become proud, which is the cause of evils, calling one another out to factiousness and strife, in jealousy of one another. For jealousy comes from vainglory, and from vainglory all those other evils.

What he is saying is that if we live well and honestly we should also express this in good conduct. This is what it is to live in the Spirit: to have an unblemished life. We walk in the Spirit if we study peace. For this is what engenders love. It is, on the other hand, empty glory to seek a victory where there is no prize, so that someone would end up having only a zeal for strife and spiritual competition. These things tend toward discord and wrangling.

Some who were grounded in faith were showing a constant disdain of their oppressors. They were thereby provoking them to strife. Paul exhorts them to offer their hands to those who have inclined toward the law.