Galatians 4:25Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

It is sunk into a low and deepest place. "For these are the two covenants, one from Mount Sinai, bearing children into bondage, which is Hagar. Now Sinai is a mountain in Arabia. It corresponds to what is now Jerusalem, and she is in bondage with her children. But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is the mother of us all." The explanation of almost everyone concerning this place is as follows. By Hagar the maidservant they understand the Law and the Jewish people. By Sarah the free woman they understand the Church gathered from the Gentiles. According to the word of the Apostle, she is the mother of the saints: "She is the mother of us all." For a long time she produced no children and was barren, before Christ was born of the Virgin. The Isaac who was still the world's mockery had not yet cried out with the mouth of exalted teaching. This is Isaac, the son of the chosen father. For the word Abraham in our language means "chosen father with laughter." Hagar, which means paroikia, that is, dwelling, or wandering, or delay, gives birth to Ishmael. He only hears the commandments of God, but does not fulfill them. He is a wild man, bloodthirsty, and running through the wilderness. He is an enemy of all his brethren born of the free woman, and he opposes them with a hostile face. Nor is it surprising that the Old Testament, which is from Mount Sinai in Arabia and near what is now Jerusalem, was established and written. Yet it is not eternal, since a settlement differs from an everlasting possession. The name of Mount Sinai means trial or experience, and the word Arabia has the meaning of West or fall. Conversely, the Jerusalem above, which is free and is the mother of the saints, shows that this Jerusalem of the present time is below. It is sunk into a low and deepest place. There are some who understand the two covenants in another way. They say that divine Scripture, both old and new, is understood as either slave woman or free woman according to the difference of meaning and judgment among those who read it. Those who even now serve the letter and have the spirit of fear unto bondage, these interpreters consider born of Hagar the Egyptian. Those who ascend to the higher meaning and desire to understand what is written allegorically, they call sons of Sarah. In our language Sarah means "ruling," arcousa, that is, governing, princeps in the feminine. According to them, they do this from a necessity of this sort. It would be unjust to affirm that Moses and all the prophets came from the maidservant, while certain Gentiles came from the free woman. For this reason it is better, according to the difference in the degree of understanding, as we said above, to regard some as slaves and others as free. This applies not only among those who belong to the Church. Even in one and the same person, he may be thought a son of the slave woman so long as he follows the literal sense. But when his heart burns as Jesus explains the Scripture, and when at the breaking of bread he sees Him whom he had not seen before (Lk. 24:31), then he too may be called a son of Sarah. Marcion and Manichaeus did not wish to remove from their collection of sacred books the passage in which the Apostle says, "These things are allegorical," and so forth. They thought that these words could be left against us, in the sense that the Law must be understood otherwise than it is written. Certainly, the Law must be understood allegorically. We also acknowledge this, and the Apostle teaches it. Yet it must not be understood according to the reader's desire, but according to the absolutely binding meaning of the Writer. By this very thing Marcion and Manichaeus are defeated, precisely by what they intended to use against us. For Moses, the servant of God, wrote spiritually. At the same time the Apostle also teaches this, though they themselves consider him the herald of another Christ and a better God.

This accords with what is taking place among us. There, there is one father, but two mothers and two sons. So here there is one God, but two covenants and two peoples. Hagar is the figure of the first covenant, and Sarah of the second. For the old Law was given from Mount Sinai, and near that mountain dwells the race of Hagar. That mountain corresponds to this earthly Jerusalem. Sarah, however, is the figure of the heavenly city, whose sons we are called. It is free, that is, it does not bear the yoke of the Law. The earthly Jerusalem is enslaved, and so are those subject to the Law. The Apostle also points to a prophecy that accords with this prefiguration.

Thus it bore, as it were, the character of servile origin. "And corresponds to the present Jerusalem." The Law was given for Israel, which descended from Abraham according to the flesh. Thus Jerusalem, which served this Law, signified the servile and fleshly condition of the Jewish people.

Perhaps he was also adapting himself in part to the methods by which his opponents acted. St. John Chrysostom says: "Since the patriarch Abraham was held in great honor among the Jews, the Apostle shows that the figures began in him. In him too the present events were foreshadowed. First he shows that the Galatians are sons of Abraham. But since the sons of this patriarch did not have equal dignity, for one was born of a bondwoman and the other of a freewoman, he then says that they are not only sons of Abraham. They are such sons as his free and noble-born son was." "Therefore do not be troubled that you were not born of Abraham according to the flesh. For you are kin to him precisely because you were not born of him according to the flesh. Birth according to the flesh does not increase dignity, but diminishes it. By contrast, birth not according to the flesh is a wondrous and spiritual birth. Only those who themselves have been born from above beget in this way." It is worth noting that Sinai in the language of the Arabs is called Hagar. According to St. John Chrysostom's explanation, "Hagar was called a bondwoman, and Mount Sinai in the language of the same land likewise means a bondwoman." "The Jerusalem above is the Church, and those born in her are not slaves." "She is the Jerusalem above because she is heavenly in her perfections and powers, and by her close union with heaven. With heaven she forms one whole and within herself forms heavenly citizens. She is free and gives birth to the free. If we bind ourselves to the Law, we shall become unfree and renounce the mother who bore us. At the same time this suggested: you also were and are such. Why then bind yourselves?" (Bishop Theophan).

He shows that such a comparison is not arbitrary. The thought of Hagar necessarily leads to the legislation of Sinai. For this he uses the name by which Sinai is called in Arabia, that is, among the Hagarenes. He also uses the topographical relation between Sinai and Jerusalem, the center of life under the Law and of all the powers that governed it. How does the name Hagar inevitably suggest the thought of the Law? It does so because "Sinai in the language of the Arabs is called Hagar" (Oecumenius, blessed Theophylact). For Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia. Sinai, in Arabia, among the inhabitants of Arabia, the descendants of Hagar, bears the name Hagar. Therefore, when one remembers Hagar, one recalls Sinai. And when one recalls Sinai, one also remembers the legislation of Sinai. Chrysostom explains this connection of names and combination of ideas as follows: "The slave woman was called Hagar. And Mount Sinai, in the language of that country, also signifies a slave woman." The Vulgate and others do not read, "For Hagar is Mount Sinai," but, without Hagar, "For Sinai is a mountain in Arabia." The thought is that Mount Sinai is in Arabia, where the Hagarenes live, the descendants of Hagar. Thus, at the thought of Sinai, one thinks also of Arabia. From Arabia one passes to its inhabitants, the Hagarenes, and from them to Hagar. Conversely, by the same path, from Hagar one passes from thought to thought until reaching Sinai and the legislation of Sinai. However one explains it, one must hold this thought: according to the Apostle, the relation of Hagar to Sinai is providential. Therefore, when he points to the reflection of the character of the Sinai Law in Hagar's properties, he acts in accordance with God's intentions. How does Sinai topographically point to Jerusalem, the center of subjection to the Law? "It corresponds to the present Jerusalem." It corresponds, systoichei: "That mountain corresponds to this earthly Jerusalem" (blessed Theodoret). "It is akin to it and closely points to it" (Chrysostom). One may also say that it stands opposite it, face to face. About half a day's journey from Mount Sinai begins a level plain, stretching as far as the mountains of Judea, where Jerusalem immediately stands. Thus, if one were raised above this plain and looked south, his gaze would rest on Sinai. If he turned north, he would meet Jerusalem. In between, nothing would hold the attention. Sinai seems to escort one toward Jerusalem, and Jerusalem toward Sinai. In this respect another word of Chrysostom is not far from the truth: "Jerusalem, even by its location, is not set at a great distance from this mountain, whose name signifies a slave woman." The actual distance between them is twelve days' journey. This is how Sinai corresponds to Jerusalem. God so arranged it that the legislation of Sinai found its seat in Jerusalem and reigns there. By all this, the Apostle seems to say, we must be instructed. All this is an indication to us by the finger of God. "And she is in bondage with her children." Who is in bondage or slavery, being in a state beneath a yoke? One may understand Hagar with her offspring, the Law with those under the Law, and Jerusalem with its inhabitants and the inhabitants of all Judea. For Jerusalem is Judea's metropolis, or civic mother. In the original it is not clear to what these words should be referred exclusively. But since Jerusalem stands immediately before, and the following discourse is also about Jerusalem, though about the Jerusalem opposed to the present one, it is closer to refer them to Jerusalem. The slavery of Jerusalem is understood here not as civic slavery, not that it was then under Roman power. It is religious and moral slavery to the Law. Its burden was felt most keenly in Jerusalem, which was full of such zealots for the Law as the Pharisees and, among them, the Zealots. The Apostle himself more than once experienced this weight. Later he also suffered because he refused to be enslaved like them.