The Ignatius Catholic Study Bible New Testament (210 page)

   Interestingly enough, this new perspective on "works of the law" is actually a very old one. The Alexandrian scholar Origen put forth the substance of this interpretation as early as the third century (
Commentary on Romans
8, 7, 6). Saint Jerome connected the phrase with the ceremonial rituals in the fourth century (
Commentary on Galatians
at Gal 3:2), as did his contemporary Ambrosiaster in his Latin commentary on the Pauline epistles (
Commentary on Romans
at Rom 3:28). The same interpretation was made in the fifth century by the Greek scholar and bishop Theodoret of Cyrrhus (
Commentary on Galatians
at Gal 2:15-16). In medieval times, Saint Thomas Aquinas favored this as the primary meaning, asserting that the theme of Galatians "concerns the termination of the Old Testament sacraments" (
Commentary on Galatians
1, 1). Select comments from the founders of Protestantism indicate that Catholic theologians were linking the works of the Law with its ceremonies in the sixteenth century as well (see, e.g., John Calvin,
Commentary on Galatians
at Gal 2:15; Martin Chemnitz,
Examination of the Council of Trent, Concerning Justification
3, 5).

   Thus, in the history of Catholic scholarship, there has consistently been an identification of the "works" of the Mosaic Law with its ritual "ceremonies". That is not to say that this amounts to a consensus position, as many have taken a broader line of interpretation (e.g., St. Augustine,
On the Spirit and the Letter
23). But acceptance of the ceremonial reading remains attractive because it makes excellent sense of Paul's polemical engagement with Jews and Gentiles on the question of salvation and the means of justification. Beyond this, it invites deeper theological reflection on the purpose of these rites in the economy of salvation.

THE THEOLOGICAL MEANING

The theology that underlies the Mosaic ceremonies is rich and manifold. To understand it is to understand better why Paul pits the works of the Law over against faith in Christ. (1) The ceremonial laws expressed a theology of separation that is proper to the Old Covenant. For centuries, works such as circumcision, food restrictions, observance of the Sabbath, etc., functioned as badges of Israel's election that made the Jews a people distinct from the Gentiles. But when Christ came to gather all nations into the fold of the New Covenant, the ceremonial boundaries that divided Israel from the rest of world were set aside as outdated and expired. Because the Church is an international community that includes Jews but does not exclude Gentiles, the rituals exclusive to Judaism are no longer appropriate for marking out the People of God (Rom 1:5, 16; 3:29-30; Gal 3:28). (2) The Mosaic rituals were mere shadows of better things to come in Christ (Col 2:16-17). In other words, the ceremonies of the Law were signs of grace but not sacraments of grace; they pointed the way to the benefits we receive in Christ, but they did not confer those benefits (Heb 7:18-19; 10:1-4). So, for example, circumcision of the flesh prefigured the inward grace that transforms the heart in Baptism (Col 2:11-12). The sacrifices of the Mosaic Law set the stage for the perfect sacrifice of Jesus, which alone effects a true remission of sins (Heb 10:11-18). Festivals such as Passover likewise prepared Israel to receive the true Lamb of God as holy food (1 Cor 5:7-8; 10:16). All the ceremonies, in one way or another, served a prophetic function that was important in the old economy but was no longer necessary once Christ came and fulfilled what had long ago been foreshadowed. (3) The Mosaic ceremonies were symbolic rituals that taught important lessons about divine grace and the inadequacy of human works. In concert with the Mosaic Law as a whole, the ceremonial laws were part of a divine education in humility and the need for grace. Take circumcision, for example. At one level, it is a sign of the righteousness Abraham possessed by faith (Rom 4:11). At another, it is a reminder that God fulfills his plan by grace rather than human works. Recall that circumcision was given (Gen 17:1-17) after Abraham had grown impatient and tried to accomplish by his own efforts (Gen 16:1-6) what only God could do for him by a miracle of grace, namely, give him a son in old age (Gen 15:4). Circumcision, it would seem, was a painful reminder to Abraham of this important lesson. Likewise, Sabbath observance was a weekly reminder that man's work, accomplished in six days, must desist and give way to a celebration of God's works on the seventh day (creation, Ex 20:11; redemption, Deut 5:15). Sacrifice had a pedagogical purpose as well, serving as an ongoing memorial of human weakness and sin (Heb 10:3). On the one hand, God instituted sacrifice to express his desire to be forgiving to his wayward people. On the other, by ordering the continuous cycle of offerings under the Old Covenant, he was driving home the point that man is weak and powerless to avoid transgressions by his own strength and so stands in need of grace and divine mercy.

ALL OF THIS
helps us to bring Paul's teaching into focus. Far from justifying the sinner, the ceremonial "works" declare that man is weak and sinful and in desperate need of God's help. In effect, they show us our needs without meeting our needs. Instead of providing a solution to our problem, they point beyond themselves to the ultimate solution provided by God in the dying and rising of Jesus Christ for our salvation. «
Back to Galatians 3:1.

3:11 He who through faith:
A citation from Hab 2:4. • Habakkuk is assured that, despite the coming invasion of Judea by the Babylonians, the one who clings to the Lord in faith will be given the grace of protection and will survive the catastrophe. From this text Paul hails faith, not observance of the Law, as the foundation of justification (3:21-22; Rom 1:17). 
Back to text.

3:12 He who does them:
A citation from Lev 18:5. • Leviticus promises life to Israel for observing the Torah and shunning the sins of the Gentiles. Yet, as the recurring transgressions of Israel show (Neh 9:29), the Mosaic Law did not come with the grace needed to keep it (Rom 8:4). Paul may be interpreting this passage through the lens of Ezek 20:11, 13, 21, where the Prophet contrasts the Levitical promise of life given at Sinai with the Deuteronomic promises of curse and death issued on the plains of Moab (Ezek 20:25-26). 
Back to text.

3:13 Cursed be every one:
A citation from Deut 21:23. • This refers to the practice of hanging executed criminals on trees to avert the wrath of God (Num 25:4; 2 Sam 21:9). For Paul, Jesus bore the curses pressing down upon Israel when he mounted the Cross (Gal 3:10). This act enabled the blessings of the Abrahamic covenant, held back for centuries because of the curse, to pour forth upon Israel and the world as a result (3:14; CCC 580). The Dead Sea Scrolls likewise associate crucifixion with the curse of Deut 21:22-23. 
Back to text.

3:14 the blessing of Abraham:
I.e., the Spirit, which is the messianic blessing revealed by the Prophets (Is 44:3; Ezek 36:26-27; Joel 2:28). • The exact expression is from Gen 28:4, where Isaac confers the blessing of Abraham upon his son Jacob. This shows that Isaac alone was the bearer of the Abrahamic blessing, not Ishmael or any other of Abraham's sons (Rom 9:7-9). Paul will capitalize on the significance of this in Gal 3:16 and 4:28. 
Back to text.

3:15-18
The major premise of Paul's covenant theology in Galatians, namely, that Israel's failure to keep the
Mosaic
covenant did not relieve God of his prior obligation to fulfill the
Abrahamic
covenant ratified centuries earlier. Since even human covenants are inviolable once they are ratified by oath, the covenant oath that God swore to Abraham is even more so (Gen 22:16-18; Heb 6:13-18). Not even the ratification of subsequent covenants under Moses could alter or annul God's unconditional pledge to bless the world through Abraham's offspring. In effect, then, the Abrahamic covenant both precedes and supercedes the Mosaic covenant that came after it. 
Back to text.

3:15 will:
The term means "testament" or "will" in secular Greek usage but "covenant" in biblical Greek usage. Despite the RSV translation, the biblical sense of "covenant" is probably intended here, since
(1
)Paul uses the term this way in his other writings (Rom 9:4; 11:27; 2 Cor 3:6, 14; Eph 2:12),
(2) 
he uses it this way elsewhere in Galatians (3:17; 4:24), and
(3) 
it is a known fact that a will in Greco-Roman antiquity could be altered or even annulled after the death of the testator who drafted it, which is the very point Paul denies in this verse. For a similar translation issue in Hebrews, see essay:
Will or Covenant?
at Heb 9. 
Back to text.

3:16 and to his offspring:
A reference to Gen 22:18. I • Paul is alluding to the covenant oath that God swore to Abraham to bless all nations through Isaac and his descendants (Sir 44:21; CCC 706). It is significant for Paul that Abraham's other son, Ishmael, was disinherited in the preceding chapter of Genesis and thus excluded from this covenant (Gen 21:1012). Thus, when Paul stresses that the word "offspring" is singular rather than plural, he is
(1)
alluding to the divine election of Isaac over Ishmael in the Genesis narrative (Gal 4:28-31; Rom 9:7-8) and
(2)
implying that Isaac is a type of Christ, so that the act that elicits the promised blessing (the sacrifice of Isaac) prefigures the act that fulfills it (the sacrifice of Jesus).
See note on Rom 8:32
. 
Back to text.