31. Listen also to what I
have to say on this other expression which has been adduced, viz.,
“Christ, who redeemed us from the curse of the
law.”1727
My view
of this passage is that
Moses, that illustrious
servant of
God,
committed to those who wished to have the right vision,
1728
| 1728
Recte videre. But perhaps we should read “recte
vivere,” to lead a righteous life. |
an
emblematic
1729
| 1729 The
phrase is imaginariam legem.On this expression
there is a note in Migne, which is worth quoting, to this effect:
Archelaus calls the Old Testament an emblematic or imaginary
law, because it was the type or image of a future new law.
So, too, Petrus de Vineis, more than once in his Epistles, calls a
messenger or legate a homo imaginarius, as Du Cange
observes in his Glossary, because he represents the person by
whom he is sent, and, as it were, reflects his image. This word
is also used in a similar manner by the old interpreter of Evagrius the
monk, in the Disputation between Theophilus, bishop of Alexandria,
and Simon the Jew, ch. 13, where the Sabbath is called the
requies imaginaria of that seventh day on which God
rested. Hence Archelaus, in his answer to the presbyter Diodorus,
ch xli. beneath, devotes himself to proving that the Old Testament is
not to he rejected, because, like a mirror, it gives us a true image of
the new law. |
law, and also a
real
law. Thus, to take an example, after
God had made the
world,
and all things that are in it, in the space of six days, He
rested on
the seventh day from all His works; by which statement I do not mean to
affirm that He
rested because He was fatigued, but that He did so as
having brought to its
perfection every creature which He had
resolved
to introduce. And yet in the sequel it,
the new law,
says: “My
Father worketh hitherto, and I
work.”
1730
Does that
mean, then, that He is still making
heaven, or sun, or man, or
animals,
or
trees, or any such thing? Nay; but the meaning is, that when
these visible objects were perfectly
finished, He
rested from that
kind
of
work; while, however, He still continues to
work at objects
invisible with an inward mode of action,
1731
| 1731
Reading “invisibilia autem et intrinsecus.” The Codex
Casinensis has “invisibili autem et trinsecus.” |
and
saves men. In like manner,
then, the legislator desires also that every individual amongst us
should be
devoted unceasingly to this
kind of
work, even as
God Himself
is; and he enjoins us consequently to
rest continuously from secular
things, and to engage in no
worldly sort of
work whatsoever; and this
is called our
Sabbath. This also he added in the
law, that
nothing senseless
1732
| 1732
Absurdam, standing probably for ἄτοπον, which may also be =
flagitious. |
should be
done but that we should be careful and direct our
life in accordance
with what is just and
righteous. Now this
law was suspended over
men, discharging most sharply its
curse against those who might
transgress it. But because its subjects, too, were but men, and
because, as happens also frequently with us, controversies arose and
injuries were
inflicted, the
law likewise at once, and with the
severest equity, made any wrong that was done return upon the head of the
wrong-doer;
1733
| 1733
The codex reads, “ultionem fecerat retorquebat.” We
adopt either “ultionem quam fecerat retorquebat,” or
“ultionem fecit retorqueri.” |
so that, for
instance, if a
poor man was
minded to
gather a bundle of
wood upon the
Sabbath, he was placed under the
curse of the
law, and exposed to the
penalty of instant
death.
1734
The men, therefore, who had been
brought up with the Egyptians were thus severely pressed by the
restrictive
power of the
law, and they were unable to bear the
penalties and the
curses of the
law. But, again, He who is ever
the Saviour, our
Lord Jesus Christ, came and
delivered those men from
these pains and
curses of the
law, forgiving them their offences.
And He indeed did not deal with them as
Moses did, putting the
severities of the
law in force, and granting indulgence to no man for
any
offence; but He declared that if any man
suffered an injury at the
hands of his neighbour, he was to
forgive him not once only, nor even
twice or thrice, nor only seven times, but even unto seventy times
seven;
1735
but that, on
the other
hand, if after all this the offender still continued to do
such wrong, he ought then, as the last resource, to be brought under
the
law of
Moses, and that no further pardon should be granted to the
man who would thus persist in wrong-doing, even after having been
forgiven unto seventy times seven. And He bestowed His
forgiveness not only on a
transgressor of such a character as that, but
even on one who did
offence to the Son of man. But if a man dealt
thus with the
Holy Spirit, He made him subject to two
curses,—namely, to that of the
law of
Moses, and to that of His
own
law; to the
law of
Moses in
truth in this present
life, but to His
own
law at the time of the
judgment: for His word is this:
“It shall not be
forgiven him, neither in this
world, neither in
the
world to come.”
1736
There is the
law of
Moses, thus,
that in this
world gives pardon to no
such person; and there is
the
law of
Christ that
punishes in the future
world. From this,
therefore, mark how He confirms the
law, not only not destroying it,
but fulfilling it. Thus, then, He
redeemed them from that
curse
of the
law which
belongs to the present
life; and from this fact has
come the appellation “the
curse of the
law.” This is
the whole account
which needs be given of that mode of
speech. But, again, why the
law is called the “
strength of
sin,” we shall at once explain in brief to the
best of our
ability. Now it is written that “the
law is not made for a
righteous man, but for the
lawless and
disobedient, for the
ungodly and
for
sinners.”
1737
In these times, then, before
Moses, there was no written
law for
transgressors; whence also
Pharaoh,
not knowing the
strength of
sin,
transgressed in the way of afflicting
the
children of
Israel with
unrighteous burdens, and
despised the
Godhead, not only himself, but also all who were with him. But,
not to make any round-about statement, I shall explain the matter
briefly as follows. There were certain persons of the Egyptian
race mingling with the people of
Moses, when that people was under his
rule in the
desert; and when
Moses had taken his position on the mount,
with the purpose of receiving the
law, the impatient people, I do not
mean those who were the true
Israel, but those who had been intermixed
with the Egyptians,
1738
| 1738
This is one of those passages in which we detect the tendency of
many of the early fathers to adopt the peculiar opinions of the Jewish
rabbis on difficult points of Scripture. See also the
Disputation between Theophilus of Alexandria and the Jew Simon,
ch. 13. In accordance with the opinion propounded here by
Archelaus, we find, for instance, in the Scemoth Rabba, p. 157,
col. 1, that the making of the golden calf is ascribed to the Egyptian
proselytes. See the note in Migne. [The passage is a note
of antiquity and in so far of authenticity.] |
set up a
calf as their
god, in
accordance with their ancient
custom of worshipping
idols, with the
notion that by such means they might
secure themselves against ever
having to pay the proper penalties for their
iniquities.
1739
| 1739
The text is in quo nec scelerum pœnas
aliquando rependeret. |
Thus
were they altogether ignorant of the
strength of their
sin. But
when
Moses returned (from the mount) and found that out, he issued
orders that those men should be put to
death with the
sword. From
that occasion a beginning was made in the correct perception of the
strength of
sin on the part of these persons through the
instrumentality of the
law of Moses, and for that reason the law has
been called the “strength of sin.”
E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
