Galatians 2:4Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

For example, Paul wrote to the Corinthians and commanded wives and husbands to live together again (1 Cor 7:5). But lest you think that by these words he imposes a law on them, he added, “I say this by way of concession, not of command” (1 Cor 7:6).

This did not signify his decisive judgment, but his condescension to their lack of continence. Therefore he says, “because of your lack of self-control” (1 Cor 7:5).

If you wish to know Paul’s judgment on this matter, listen to what he says: “I wish that all men were as I myself am,” namely, in continence (1 Cor 7:7).

So also here, the Apostles allowed circumcision not as defenders of the Law, but by condescension to the weakness of the Jews.

If they had defended the Law, they would not have preached one way to Jews and another way to Gentiles. If something was necessary by the Law of Christ for unbelievers, it is evident that the same was necessary for all believers.

But if they laid down as law that the Gentiles were not to be burdened with circumcision, they thereby showed that they allowed it to the Jews only by condescension.

The false brethren did this from a different motive. They wished to tear the believers away from grace and again subject them to the yoke of slavery.

This is the first difference, which places a great distance between the Apostles and the false brethren. The second is that the Apostles did this in Judea, where the Law still had force.

The false brethren did this everywhere, because they wished to enslave all the Galatians as well. From this it is clear that it was done not for edification, but for complete destruction.

Moreover, the Apostles allowed this with one intention, while the false brethren compelled it with another. “Who slipped in to spy out our freedom which we have in Christ Jesus.” Do you see how by calling them spies he expressed their hostility?

Spies enter only in order to learn the affairs of their opponents and prepare the most convenient means to defeat and destroy them. The false brethren acted in the same way, wishing to subject the Galatians to Old Testament bondage.

Thus from this also it is clear that the intention of the Apostles and that of the false brethren was not one and the same. On the contrary, they were completely opposed.

The former allowed condescension in order gradually to lead them out of bondage. The latter established it in order to subject them to still greater bondage.

For this reason they carefully spied and watched who had been circumcised. Paul indicates this when he says, “who slipped in to spy out our freedom.” He reveals their treachery not only by the name “spies,” but also by saying that they came secretly and covertly.

For spies come for no other reason than to find everything out and make the path easier for destruction and enslavement.

This is exactly what they were doing. They observed who were uncircumcised and had freedom in Christ, that is, who were not subject to the law.

They wished to attack them, compel them to be circumcised, and again subject us to the slavery of the law, from which Christ has freed us.

Thus it is clear from this that the Apostles allowed things under the law in order little by little to free people from this slavery. But those men acted so as to establish this slavery.

Or what truth of the Gospel is this, to yield to the hypocrisy of the Jews? Is it truth to observe what you formerly counted as refuse, σκύβαλον, and despised as worthy of condemnation? Is it truth to see something in what is in reality nothing?

Finally, the very sense of this epistle plainly contradicts the idea that the Apostle is summoning the Galatians to circumcision. By the whole structure of his discourse he wishes to show that he despises everything by the grace of Christ.

He is a Hebrew of Hebrews. He once observed the works of the Law and was circumcised on the eighth day according to the law of the Pharisees. Yet by Christ’s grace he despises all.

When he went to Jerusalem, the false brethren, believers in Christ from the circumcised, wanted him to circumcise Titus. Neither Paul nor Titus yielded to force, in order to preserve the truth of the Gospel.

Therefore, if he says that he was compelled by necessity to circumcise Titus, how does he turn the Galatians away from that circumcision from which he could not free Titus in Jerusalem, though Titus was from the Gentiles?

Either we must follow the reading of the Greek codices of the sacred books: “To them we did not submit even for a time.” Then the saying follows coherently: “that the truth of the Gospel might remain unchanged among you.”

Or, if one chooses to trust some Latin copy, we must follow the meaning indicated above. The temporary submission consisted not in circumcising Titus, but in going to Jerusalem.

Thus Paul and Barnabas submitted to the desire to go to Jerusalem when division arose in Antioch over the question of the Law. Their judgment was to be confirmed by a letter from the Apostles.

Then the truth of the Gospel would remain firm among the Galatians. This truth is not in the letter, but in the spirit. It is not in the carnal sense, but in spiritual understanding. It is not in manifest Judaism, but in the hidden (occulto).

One should know that the conjunction “but” (autem) is superfluous in the words, “but because of the false brethren who slipped in.” Even if it is read, there is no corresponding word to complete it.

The order and sense of the passage are as follows: “But not even Titus, though he was of Gentile origin, was compelled to be circumcised.” Immediately after this he adds the reason why he could have been compelled against his will to circumcision.

He says, “Because of the false brethren who slipped in, who slipped in to spy upon our freedom which we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into bondage.”

Since they frightened us by plots and wished by their number to bring us from the freedom of Christ into bondage to the Law, we did not yield to them even for a time by circumcising Titus.

This was especially so when a certain necessity for the sake of ecclesial peace might have excused us. We did all this so that you would have no occasion to depart from the grace of the Gospel.

Therefore, if in Jerusalem, among the Jews, there were so many threatening false brethren, and if those who were elders resisted them only in part, yet we could not be induced by any force or persuasion to observe circumcision, which we knew had ended.

Why then do you, who are from the Gentiles and live in Galatia, voluntarily pass from grace to the already abolished antiquity of the Law? No force could have been brought against you.

As soon as Saint Paul believed, he left the law. In this same freedom he raised up all believers through his Gospel, not only Gentiles but also Jews. Therefore they could become an object of curiosity for everyone.

But it was not curiosity alone that drew the false brethren there. They had a hidden thought: 'that they might bring them into bondage.' It is evident that the pressure from their side was considerable.

But they achieved nothing. This did not happen without effort on the Apostle's part.

All this was done for you, Galatians, says the Apostle. He views them as representatives of the Christians from among the Gentiles.

Through this steadfastness of the Apostle, it was soon decreed at the Apostolic Council not to trouble the Gentiles turning to God by requiring circumcision and the other rites of the Law of Moses, Acts 15:19, 24, 28.

There Paul and Barnabas were acknowledged as beloved men who had risked their lives for the name of the Lord, Acts 15:25-26.

According to Blessed Jerome, the Apostle here speaks to the Galatians as though saying: if we, while in Jerusalem, surrounded by such a multitude of Jews and false brethren, and amid the concession of the elder Apostles. Could not by any force be compelled to fulfill the rite of circumcision, then how have you, Gentiles living in Galatia, whom no powerful compulsion could reach, conceived the idea of departing from grace and submitting to the obsolete law?

Saint John of Damascus says, "The Apostles did not compel the uncircumcised Titus to be circumcised, though the false brethren who had slipped in were watching this and were pressing for circumcision."

Photius in Oecumenius says, "even seeing the false brethren present." Oecumenius himself says, "not even because of the false brethren who had slipped in." Theophylact says the same.

Among the Latin teachers, blessed Augustine writes, "Because of the false brethren who had slipped in, Titus was not compelled to be circumcised.

"That is, it was impossible to extract from him agreement to circumcision, though those who had slipped in to spy on our freedom greatly wished Titus to be circumcised.

"They wished afterward to proclaim that circumcision was necessary for salvation, by the agreement and testimony even of the Apostle Paul himself."

Thus all antiquity supports this kind of connection in the discourse, and we should not separate ourselves from them. Our Slavonic translation does not depart from them.

Modern non-Orthodox interpreters suppose that Saint Paul begins a separate discourse here. They are forced to this by the particle "but," which blessed Theodoret mentions.

This reading indeed preserves the form, but it confuses the course of the discourse. For "but because of the false brethren who had slipped in," such and such, "to whom we did not yield for an hour," comes out awkwardly.

To give the discourse order, they make various suppositions, sometimes very unsuitable ones.

Who were the false brethren? They were brethren, that is, men who had believed in the Lord and been baptized. Yet they were false brethren, because they held false principles.

They thought that, along with faith in the Lord, it was necessary to keep the old law in order to be saved.

At the same time, their faith concerning the Person of the Savior could not have been true, and after that their whole moral order could not have been true.

Outwardly, therefore, they were Christians. Inwardly, they did not have a Christian disposition.

There were many adherents of the law among believing Jews. In Jerusalem, one may say, all were such.

Among them, however, some held to it only by habit, no longer considering its fulfillment a necessary condition of salvation.

Others held it precisely in this sense, thinking that without it one could not be saved.

Among these, some formed such convictions and lived quietly. Others came forward as active champions of the truth and zealously tried to communicate their convictions to all.

Those who came to Antioch and raised the dispute there belonged to this number. So did these men, who now slipped in to Saint Paul and his companions, to spy out whether they lived in a Jewish way.

"Because of the false brethren who came in," pareisaktous, means those who had slipped in, secretly introduced. "Who slipped in," pareiselthon, means as though they had crept in.

This refers not to the Christian community, but to the house where the Apostle Paul was with his companions.

They entered Christ's Church through faith in the Lord. At that moment they had no thought about how one should relate to the law.

They were convinced that the law would remain in force, and that by accepting faith in Christ they were becoming true Jews, complete according to all the prophetic promises.

After Cornelius's baptism, they saw that Christians had taken a road on which the law could not retain the force they ascribed to it.

Yet they did not wish to return again to Judaism. Therefore they determined to defend the law together with faith, and they began to act in this spirit.

In spite of this, they were tolerated for a long time in the Church. They were not excommunicated, in the hope of their coming to understanding and correction.

"They slipped in to spy." The words "slipped in" already show something unsound in them, as though they had crept in secretly under the guise of brotherhood.

The words "to spy" expose their evil intentions still more. They meant to observe what was being done and said there, so that afterward they could use it against them.

Ambrosiaster writes, "They entered with guile, showing themselves to be brethren when they were enemies. They entered with humility, pretending to be friends."

Oecumenius says the same: "See how he presents them as enemies who came in to harm the faith. First, he says, 'they slipped in,' meaning that they secretly and maliciously crept in.

"Second, he says, 'to spy.' For one who spies does so with the aim of harming and doing evil."

Saint Chrysostom speaks more fully: "Do you see how he expressed their hostility by calling them spies?

"For spies enter only in order, after observing the affairs of their opponents, to prepare for themselves the most convenient means of striking and overthrowing them.

"So the false brethren acted then, wishing to enslave them to that Old Testament slavery.

"From this too it is clear that the intention of the Apostles and of the false brethren was not one and the same, but very different and opposite.

"The Apostles condescended in order little by little to lead them out of slavery. These men, on the contrary, arranged this in order to subject them to still greater slavery.

"Therefore they carefully spied and watched who had been circumcised. Pointing to this, Paul said, 'They slipped in to spy on our freedom,' indicating their treachery not only by the name spies.

"He also indicates it by saying that they came secretly and like thieves."

"To spy on our freedom in Christ Jesus." Our Lord Jesus Christ, by His death on the Cross, replaced all the Old Testament sacrifices and rites of propitiation, justification, and sanctification.

By the grace of the Holy Spirit, which renews our nature in the Mysteries, He freed those who believe in Him from the yoke of the prescriptions of the Mosaic law.

He made them no longer necessary. Those who approached the Lord with faith received, precisely by approaching Him, everything that the old law only promised in figures.

Consequently, by the very essence of the spiritual state into which faith placed them, they became free from it.

By this expression the Apostle indicates both the freedom that all believers ought to have and the freedom that he and his companions actually have, having cast off all the bonds of the law.

In Jerusalem, even those who soundly understood the power of faith in the Lord kept the legal statutes by habit.

Saint Paul, as soon as he believed, abandoned the law to which he had been so devoted.

In this same freedom he raised all believers according to his Gospel, not only Gentiles but Jews also.

The Jerusalem believers could nowhere else see this freedom as they could in Paul and those with him.

They appeared in Jerusalem as representatives of the order of renewed life in Christ Jesus, pure from every admixture of Judaism, and still more from paganism.

Therefore they could be an object of curiosity for all.

Everyone was curious to see how people lived and were saved without keeping the customs then in use, customs considered an indispensable mark of a pious Jew.

But the false brethren were drawn there by more than curiosity. They had a hidden thought, which Saint Paul indicates with the words, "that they might enslave us."

They crept in secretly to Saint Paul, and they crept in to observe his freedom and that of those with him.

Yet they also had in mind not to limit themselves to observation.

Zeal for the law drew them there so that, having noticed non-submission to the law, they might make efforts to bring those freed from it back under its yoke.

Saint Paul's words suggest that they did make attempts of this kind.

But how could they do this? Certainly they had no authority in their hands for it.

One might suppose this if they acted in the name of the Apostles. Yet from the whole course of the matter it is clear that they had already separated from the Apostles and acted independently of them.

Could they do it merely by their presence? Perhaps they were important persons among the Jews, and their number was not small.

By both of these things they could weigh heavily with influence upon the Apostle Paul and those with him.

They could shake their firmness, now by respect, now by fear of discord, and now by some other fear.

More directly, however, they began to speak and tried to persuade. Their zeal could not permit them to remain silent.

It is evident that there was no small pressure from their side. But they accomplished nothing.

Still, this did not pass without effort for the Apostle. It was therefore memorable, as one may conclude from the following words.