[216] [Paul's motive in this passage is probably not what Chrysostom says, but, on the contrary, to show how desperately bad their state was.--G.A.]
[217] ["The word aer which is commonly confined to the region of the air, may be extended to all that supra-terrestrial but sub-celestial region which seems to be, if not the abode, at least the haunt of evil spirits, cf. Job i. 7."--Ellicott.--G.A.]
[218] Chrysostom understands the words according to the order in which they stand in the original text, emen tekna phusei orges, "we were natural" or "genuine children of wrath," referring "by nature" not to "we were" but to "children." To say that we were by "nature" under wrath, might have seemed all one with saying that God created Adam under wrath. When then we so speak, we must take the word "nature" in S. Augustine's sense, not to mean our literal nature, but "as referring to our birth." "In eo quod dixi, naturâ esse malæ animæ nullo modo queunt,' si quæritur quomodo accipiamus quod ait Apostolus, Fuimus et nos naturâ filii iroe, &c.'" respondemus, naturam in his verbis meis me intelligi voluisse illam, quæ proprie natura dicitur, in quâ sine vitiis creati sumus. Nam ista propter originem natura appellatur, quæ origo utique habet vitium, quod est contra naturam. August. Retract. i. 15. §. 6. vid, also de Lib. Arb. iii. 54.] "That man is a born subject of wrath from birth, an object of the divine condemnation, is not at all a doctrine of the Apostle, according to whom man by his actual sin falls under the wrath of God, inasmuch as he becomes subject to and follows the inborn principle of sin in opposition to his moral will which he likewise by nature bears in himself. Certainly man is born with this natural sinful quality, i.e., with the principle of sin, by the awakening and development of which the moral will is vanquished (Rom. vii. cf. John iii. 6.) It is not, however, the mere fact of this inborn presence having its basis in his flesh that in and of itself makes him a child of wrath, but he only becomes so when that constitution of his moral nature, that mingling of the two opposite principles in his natural disposition has brought about the victory of the sin-principle, which however is the case with every one."--Meyer.--G.A.]
[219] [Dia ten pollen agapen autou: "namely, in order to satisfy it."--Meyer.--G.A.]
[220] [This is Meyer's view. He says: "By virtue of the dynamic connection of Christ with believers as the head with its body their revivification is objectively comprehended in His." Ellicott says; "Though the simple meaning of sunegeiren and sunekathisen seems to confine their reference to what is future and objective; still as sunezoopoiesen though primarily spiritual and present may have a physical and future reference, so here a present spiritual resurrection and enthronement may be alluded to."--G.A.]
[221] ["Confirmatory explanation of the truth and justice of the expression, the exceeding riches of His grace' by a recurrence to the statement made parenthetically in verse 5."--Ellicott.--G.A.]
[222] [Meyer objects to this interpretation saying: "How violent is this taking to pieces of the text, since ouk ex humon and ouk ex ergon present themselves in a manner alike natural and weighty as elements belonging to one flow of the discourse! The touto refers to the salvation just designated as regards its specific mode." So substantially Ellicott.--G.A.]
[223] [This is not the object of Paul in the statement of v. 10, but as Meyer says: "Ver. 10is the reason assigned for the immediately preceding ouk ex humon...kauchesetai. For if we are God's handiwork our salvation cannot be of our own acquiring, and if we are created in Christ unto good works how could the merit of our works be the cause of our salvation or the subject of our boasting?"--G.A.]
[224] [God, before we were created in Christ, made ready for us, prepared a sphere of moral action or (to use the simile of Chrysostom) a road, with the intent that we should walk in it. This sphere, this road was good works, erga agatha."--Ellicott.--G.A.]
Homily V.
Chapter II. Verses 11, 12
"Wherefore remember, that aforetime ye the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; that ye were at that time separate from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of the promise, having no hope, and without God in the world."
There are many things to show the loving-kindness of God. First, the fact, that by Himself He hath saved us, and by Himself through such a method as this. Secondly, that He hath saved us, as being what we were. Thirdly, that He hath exalted us to the place where we are. For all these things both contain in themselves the greatest demonstration of His loving-kindness, and they are the very subjects which Paul is now agitating in his Epistle. He had been saying, that when we were dead through our trespasses, and children of wrath, He saved us; He is now telling us further, to whom He hath made us equal. "Wherefore," saith he, "remember;" because it is usual with us, one and all, when we are raised from a state of great meanness to corresponding, or perhaps a greater, dignity, not so much as even to retain any recollection of our former condition, being nourished in this our new glory. On this account it is that he says, "Wherefore remember."--"Wherefore." Why, "wherefore?" [225] Because we have been created unto good works, and this were sufficient to induce us to cultivate virtue; "remember,"--for that remembrance is sufficient to make us grateful to our Benefactor,--"that ye were aforetime Gentiles." Observe how he lowers the superior advantages of the Jews and admires the disadvantages of the Gentiles; disadvantage indeed it was not, but he is arguing with each respectively from their character and manner of life.
"Who are called Uncircumcision." [226]
The honor then of the Jews is in names, their perogative is in the flesh. For uncircumcision is nothing, and circumcision is nothing.
"By that which is called," saith he, "Circumcision in the flesh made by hands, that ye were at that time separate from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of the promise, having no hope, and without God in the world. [227]
Ye, saith he, who were thus called by the Jews. But why when he is about to show that the benefit bestowed upon them consisted in this, in having fellowship with Israel, does he disparage the Israelitish prerogative? He does not disparage it. In essential points he enhances it, but only in these points, in which they had no fellowship, he disparages it. For further on he says, "Ye are fellow-citizens of the saints and of the household of God." Mark, how far he is from disparaging it. These points, saith he, are indifferent. Never think, saith he, that because ye happen not to be circumcised, and are now in uncircumcision, that there is any difference in this. No, the real trouble was this, the being "without Christ," the being "aliens from the commonwealth of Israel." Whereas this circumcision is not "the commonwealth." Again, the being strangers from the covenants of promise, the having no hope to come, the being without God in this world, all these were parts of their condition. He was speaking of heavenly things; he speaks also of those which are upon earth; since the Jews had a great opinion of these. Thus also Christ in comforting His disciples, after saying, "Blessed are they that have been persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven," adds the lesser point of consolation, "for so," saith He, "persecuted they the prophets which were before you." (Matt. v. 10-12.) For this, compared with the greatness of the other, is far less, yet in regard to the being nigh, and believing, it is great and sufficient, and has much force. This then was the sharing in the commonwealth. His word is not, "separated," but "alienated from the commonwealth." His word is not, "ye took no interest in," but, "ye had not so much as any part in, and were strangers." The expressions are most emphatic, and indicate the separation to be very wide. Because the Israelites themselves were without this commonwealth, not however as aliens, but as indifferent to it, and they fell from the covenants, not however as strangers, but as unworthy.
But what were "the covenants of the promise?" "To thee and to thy seed," saith He, "will I give this land," (Gen. xvii. 8.) and whatever else He promised.
"Having no hope," he adds, "and without God." Though gods indeed they worshipped, but they were no gods: "for an idol is not any thing." (1 Cor. x. 19.)
Ver. 13-15. "But now, [228] in Christ Jesus, ye that once were far off, are made nigh in the blood of Christ. For He is our peace, who made both one, and brake down the middle wall of partition, having abolished in His flesh the enmity."
Is this then the great privilege, it may be said, that we are admitted into the commonwealth of the Jews? What art thou saying? "He hath summed up all things that are in heaven, and that are in earth," and now dost thou tell us about Israelites? Yes, he would say. Those higher privileges we must apprehend by faith; these, by the things themselves. "But now," saith he, "in Christ Jesus, ye that once were far off, are made nigh," in reference to the commonwealth. For the "far off," and the "nigh," are matters of will and choice only.
"For He [229] is our peace, Who made both one."
What is this, "both one?" He does not mean this, that He hath raised us to that high descent of theirs, but that he hath raised both us and them to a yet higher. Only that the blessing to us is greater, because to these it had been promised, and they were nearer than we; to us it had not been promised, and we were farther off than they. Therefore it is that he says, "And that the Gentiles might glorify God for His mercy." (Rom. xv. 9.) The promise indeed He gave to the Israelites, but they were unworthy; to us He gave no promise, nay, we were even strangers, we had nothing in common with them; yet hath He made us one, not by knitting us to them, but by knitting both them and us together into one. I will give you an illustration. Let us suppose there to be two statues, the one of silver, the other of lead, and then that both shall be melted down, and that the two shall come out gold. Behold, thus hath He made the two one. Or put the case again in another way. Let the two be, one a slave, the other an adopted son: and let both offend Him, the one as a disinherited child, the other as a fugitive, and one who never knew a father. Then let both be made heirs, both trueborn sons. Behold, they are exalted to one and the same dignity, the two are become one, the one coming from a longer, the other from a nearer distance, and the slave becoming more noble than he was before he offended.
"And brake down," he proceeds, "the middle wall of partition."
What the middle wall of partition is, he interprets by saying, "the enmity having abolished in His flesh, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances." Some indeed affirm that he means the wall of the Jews against the Greeks, because it did not allow the Jews to hold intercourse with the Greeks. To me, however, this does not seem to be the meaning, but rather that he calls "the enmity in the flesh," a middle wall, in that it is a common barrier, cutting us off alike from God. [230] As the Prophet says, "Your iniquities separate between you and Me;" (Isa. lix. 2.) for that enmity which He had both against Jews and Gentiles was, as it were, a middle wall. And this, whilst the law existed, was not only not abolished, but rather was strengthened; "for the law," saith the Apostle, "worketh wrath." (Rom. iv. 15.) Just in the same way then as when he says in that passage, "the law worketh wrath," he does not ascribe the whole of this effect to the law itself, but it is to be understood, that it is because we have transgressed it; so also in this place he calls it a middle wall, because through being disobeyed it wrought enmity. The law was a hedge, but this it was made for the sake of security, and for this reason was called "a hedge," to the intent that it might form an inclosure. For listen again to the Prophet, where he says, "I made a trench about it." (Isa. v. 2.) And again, "Thou hast broken down her fences, so that all they which pass by the way do pluck her." (Ps. lxxx. 12.) Here therefore it means security and so again, "I will take away the hedge thereof, and it shall be trodden down." (Isa. v. 5.) And again, "He gave them the law for a defence." (Isa. viii. 20.) And again, "The Lord executeth righteous acts and made known His ways unto Israel." (Ps. ciii. 6, 7.) It became, however, a middle wall, no longer establishing them in security, but cutting them off from God. Such then is the middle wall of partition formed out of the hedge. And to explain what this is, he subjoins, "the enmity in His flesh having abolished, the law of commandments."