^4:11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the justice of the faith which is in uncircumcision: that he might be the father of all those who believe, being uncircumcised: that unto them also it may be reputed to justice: [n. 341]
^4:12 And he might be the father of circumcision; not to those only who are of the circumcision, but to those also who follow the steps of the faith that is in the uncircumcision of our father Abraham.
^4:13 For not through the law was the promise to Abraham or to his seed, that he should be heir of the world: but through the justice of faith. [n. 351]
^4:14 For if they who are of the law be heirs, faith is made void: the promise is made of no effect. [n. 354]
^4:15 For the law works wrath. For where there is no law, neither is there transgression. [n. 356]

341. Having shown that the blessing of forgiveness of sins is obtained not only in circumcision but also in uncircumcision on the ground that Abraham was justified when he was still uncircumcised, the Apostle now responds to an objection.

For someone could say: if Abraham was justified before circumcision, then he was circumcised without reason and for no purpose.

To exclude this objection,

he first states that circumcision was not the cause but the sign of justice;

second, he shows what he obtains from this sign, at that he might be the father;

third, how he obtains it, at not to those only.

342. In regard to the first he does two things. First, he states that circumcision is a sign: you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskin and it shall be a sign of the covenant between you and me (Gen 17:10).

Second, he shows what it is a sign of, saying: a seal of the justice of the faith, i.e., the justice that comes through faith, which faith is in uncircumcision, i.e., which Abraham had while he was still uncircumcised.

343. Seal is said in two ways. In one way, a seal is a visible sign possessing a likeness to the thing signified, as in Ezekiel: you were the seal of likeness, full of wisdom (Ezek 28:12). Circumcision had this visible likeness to Abraham’s faith. First, in regard to what he believed. For Abraham believed that his seed would be multiplied; hence, it was fitting to receive its sign in the organ of reproduction. Second, in regard to the effect of his faith, namely, the removal of fault, and this is signified by the removal of superfluous skin.

In another way, seal means a sign hiding something which is to be revealed to friends, as is clear in the case of a sigillo: worthy are you, who were slain, to take the scroll and to open its seals (Rev 6:9). Hence, the secret of the Incarnation of Christ from the seed of Abraham was enclosed under the seal of circumcision.

344. Then he shows what follows from what has been said.

For Abraham, still uncircumcised, was justified by faith and later received circumcision. From this he obtains the honor of being the father not only of the circumcised but also of uncircumcised believers. And this is what he says: that he might be the father, i.e., from the foregoing it comes about that Abraham might be the father of all those who believe, being uncircumcised, i.e., who are in the state of uncircumcision. Or Abraham is the father through uncircumcision, i.e., in virtue of what he had in uncircumcision, that unto them also it may be reputed to justice, namely, the fact that they believe, just as it was reckoned to Abraham. The power of this fatherhood is indicated in Matthew: God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham (Matt 3:9). And he might be the father of circumcision, who derive their origin from him: Abraham is our father (John 8:39).

345. Then he shows the manner in which he is the father even of the uncircumcised, namely, by imitation. And this is what he says: that he might be the father . . . not to those only who are of the circumcision, but to those also who follow the steps of the faith that is in the uncircumcision of our father Abraham, i.e., which Abraham had, while he was still uncircumcised: if you were Abraham’s children, you would do what Abraham did (John 8:39).

346. Since we are speaking of circumcision, it is fitting to consider three things about it, namely, why it was instituted, what power it had, and why it was changed.

347. In regard to the first it should be noted that circumcision, just as the other ceremonies of the law, was instituted for two purposes.

First, for divine worship, for which men were disposed in accordance with these ceremonies.

In keeping with this, circumcision had three reasons for being instituted, the first of which was to signify the faith and obedience by which Abraham submitted to God, so that those who accepted the circumcision of Abraham should observe his faith and obedience. For it is stated in Hebrews: by faith Abraham was circumcised (Heb 4:11). Hence, circumcision was instituted to signify his faith in future descendants, as has been stated.

The second reason was to express in a bodily sign something that was to occur spiritually, namely, just as superfluous skin was removed from the organ of reproduction, which is the chief servant of concupiscence, so every superfluous desire should be removed from man’s heart, as Jeremiah says: circumcise yourself to the Lord, remove the foreskin of your hearts (Jer 4:4).

The third reason was to distinguish the people worshipping God from all other people. This is why God commanded circumcision for the children of Israel, who were to dwell among the other nations after first living alone and uncircumcised in the desert.

348. The other purpose of circumcision and all the ceremonies is based on a relation to Christ, to whom they are compared as the figure to the reality and as the members to the body: these are only a shadow of what is to come, but the body belongs to Christ (Col 2:17).

Accordingly, by bodily circumcision is signified the spiritual circumcision to be accomplished by Christ: first in the soul, inasmuch as it is through him that concupiscence and the effects of sin are removed by Christ: in him, namely, Christ, also you were circumcised with a circumcision not made with hands, by putting off the body of flesh in the circumcision of Christ (Col 2:11).

Second, in regard to the body, namely, when in the resurrection all possibility of suffering and death is removed from the bodies of the elect. Hence, circumcision took place on the eighth day, because it signified the eighth era. For the seventh is the era of those who are at rest in Christ, while the other six are the eras during which the world runs its course. Again, circumcision was done with knives of stone (Josh 5:2) to signify that spiritual circumcision was to be effected by the rock, who is Christ, as is said (1 Cor 10:4). However, it was not the general practice to use a knife made of stone.

349. In regard to the second question, namely, what power circumcision had, it should be noted that, as the Gloss says here—the quotation is taken from Bede—during the law, circumcision offered the same curative help against the wound of original sin as baptism is wont to give in the era of revealed grace. This shows that the power of circumcision extended to the removal of original sin.

However, some say that grace was not conferred in circumcision; for without justice God’s grace cannot be present. But the Apostle says in Galatians: if justification were through the law, then Christ died to no purpose (Gal 2:21).

And we can argue in the same way: if justifying grace were through circumcision, Christ died to no purpose. But this cannot be, for sin is never forgiven without grace: justified by his grace we have peace with God (Titus 3:7).

Therefore, others say that grace was conferred in circumcision to produce privative effects, namely, to remove guilt, but not positive effects, namely, the work of justice.

But this does not seem fitting either, for the positive effects of any form precede in the order of nature the privative effects; for example, light does not expel darkness except by illuminating. Similarly, grace expels guilt by producing justice. But if the prior is removed, the subsequent is removed.

Therefore, it is better to say that ex opere operato circumcision did not have effective power either to remove guilt or to produce justice. It was merely a sign of justice, as the Apostle says here. But through faith in Christ, of which circumcision was a sign, it removed original sin and conferred the help of grace to act righteously.

350. In regard to the third question, it is clear from what has been said, why circumcision had to be changed. For it was a sign of something to come. But the same sign does not suit the present, past, and future. Therefore, baptism, as the sign of present grace, produces a more copious and more beneficial effect of grace, because the closer the agent is in time and place, the more effectively it works.

351. Then when he says, for not through the law, he explains his statement that circumcision or any work of the law did not justify in virtue of a divine promise.

In regard to this he does two things:

first, he states his proposition;

second, he proves it, at for if they who are of the law.

352. First, therefore, the Apostle accepts on the authority of Genesis the promise made to Abraham and his seed that he should be heir of the world, i.e., that all the nations of the world would be blessed in him: by you all the families of the earth shall be blessed (Gen 12:3).

He says, and to his seed, because even though this promise was not to be fulfilled in him, it was to be fulfilled in his descendants: by your seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed (Gen 22:18).

But this seed is principally understood as Christ: now the promises were made to Abraham and to his seed. It does not say, ‘and to seeds,’ referring to many, but referring to one (Gal 3:16), because in the one in whom it is to be fulfilled it is shown that he would be heir of the world: ask of me and I will make the nations your heritage (Ps 2:8). Secondarily, it is fulfilled in those who through Christ’s grace are spiritually the seed of Abraham: the children of the promise are accounted for the seed (Rom 9:8). Through Christ they inherit the world, inasmuch as all things are for the glory of the elect: all are yours and you are Christ’s (1 Cor 3:22).

353. In regard to this promise he denies one thing and asserts another.

He denies that such a promise came through the law. This is not said on account of the promise itself, because at the time of the promise the law had not been given, but in reference to the fulfillment of the promise, so that the sense is that such a promise was not made to Abraham as something to be fulfilled through the law, because, as it is said: the law made nothing perfect (Heb 7:19).

What he asserts is that such a promise was to be fulfilled through the justice of faith, because the saints through faith conquered kingdoms (Heb 11:33).

354. Then when he says, for if they, he proves his statement:

first, in regard to the denial that the promise is to be fulfilled through the law;

second, in regard to the assertion that it is to be fulfilled through the justice of faith, at therefore it is of faith (Rom 4:16).

In regard to the first he presents this argument: if the promise made to Abraham were to be fulfilled through the law, Abraham’s faith believing the promise would be null, because the promise made to him would be abolished. But this is not fitting. Therefore, the first.

In regard to this he does two things:

first he presents a conditional statement;

second, he proves it, at for the law.

The destruction of the consequent is manifest.

355. He says first, therefore, that the promise was not made through the law.

For if they who are of the law are to be the heirs, i.e., if, in order to share in the promised inheritance, it is required that one obtain this from observing the law, faith is made void, i.e., the faith has been made futile by which Abraham believed God’s promise in Genesis 15. But this is not in keeping with what has been stated in 1 Corinthians: if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins (1 Cor 15:17).

Why it is futile is shown when he adds, the promise is made of no effect, i.e., emptied, because it does not produce its effect. But this is contrary to what is stated in Hebrews: she considered him faithful who had promised (Heb 11:11) and to what is stated in this chapter: whatsoever he has promised, he is able also to perform (Rom 4:21).

356. Then when he says for the law he proves the conditional statement through the effect or result of the law.

First, he proposes the effect or result of the law;

second, he proves it, at for where there is no law.

357. He proves the conditional thus: If a promise is to be fulfilled through something which prevents its fulfillment, such a promise is void and the faith of believers futile. But the law prevents one from obtaining the inheritance, for the law works wrath; therefore, if the promise is to be fulfilled through the law, faith is made void: the promise is made of no effect.

Now the law is said to bring wrath, i.e., vengeance, because through the law men were made deserving of God’s vengeance: great is the wrath of the Lord that is kindled against us, because our fathers have not obeyed the words of this book, i.e., of the law (2 Kgs 22:13).

But someone might suppose that the law brings wrath as far as legal ceremonies observed in the era of grace are concerned, in line with Galatians: if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you (Gal 5:2). However, what is stated here refers even to moral precepts, not because they command something which makes its observers deserving of God’s wrath, but because the law commands and does not confer the grace to fulfill, according to 2 Corinthians: the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life (2 Cor 3:6), namely, because the Spirit also helpeth our infirmity (Rom 8:26).

358. Then when he says for where there is no law, he shows how it brings wrath, saying: for where there is no law, neither is there transgression, because even though a person, with no law given, could sin by commission against what is naturally just, he is not called a transgressor, unless he violates a law: I looked at the transgressors with disgust, because they did not keep your commands (Ps 118:158). Yet every sinner can be called a transgressor, inasmuch as he transgresses the natural law: I have accounted all the sinners of the earth transgressors (Ps 118:119).

However, it is more grievous to transgress at once the law of nature and the written law than the law of nature alone. Hence, the law having been given without the help of grace, transgression increased and deserved greater wrath.