Thomas Aquinas Commentary Galatians 1:6-10

"I marvel that ye are so quickly removing from him that called you in the grace of Christ unto a different gospel; which is not another [gospel] only there are some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach unto you any gospel other than that which we preached unto you, let him be anathema. As we have said before, so say I now again, if any man preacheth unto you any gospel other than that which ye received, let him be anathema. For am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? or am I striving to please men? if I were still pleasing men, I should not be a servant of Christ." — Galatians 1:6-10 (ASV)

After the greeting, the message of the epistle follows. In it, the Apostle refutes their error and then admonishes them for their correction: Stand fast and be not held again under the yoke of bondage (Galatians 5:1). He refutes their error in two ways: on the authority of the Gospel's teaching, and by reason, using the Old Testament: O senseless Galatians, who hath bewitched you... ? (Galatians 3:1).

He refutes their error by showing the authority of the Gospel's teaching:

1. By showing their fickleness in lightly dismissing the Gospel's teaching.
2. By commending the authority of the Gospel's teaching, as he suggests that in view of the precious value of what they so lightly regard, their error is seen to be that much greater (Galatians 1:11).

Regarding the first point, he does two things:

1. He elaborates on their guilt.
2. He inflicts a punishment (Galatians 1:8).

Concerning the first point, he elaborates on the guilt of both the misled and their deceivers: ...only there are some that trouble you (Galatians 1:7). As to the guilt of the misled, he does three things:

1. He elaborates on the guilt of those who were misled on account of their fickleness of mind. Hence he says, "I wonder." It is as if to say: Although you are aware of the many good things already mentioned that come to you through Christ, and although I instructed you well, you are nevertheless so far and so completely removed (or "transferred") that you seem to have already forgotten. You are removed so soon—that is, in such a short time. With this word, he alludes to their name, for "Galatia" means "transferred." It is as if to say: You are Galatians because you are so quickly transferred. He that is hasty to give credit is light of heart .
2. He magnifies their guilt by considering what they have abandoned. For if reason withdraws and is removed from evil, it is worthy of praise and does well; but when it departs from the good, it is blameworthy. And this is how they were removed from the good. So he says to them: Although it is amazing that you are so quickly and so far removed, there is an additional reason for wonder: you have removed yourselves from Him—that is, from God—and from faith in Him who called you into the grace of Christ. This means you were called into sharing the eternal good that we have through Christ. As Scripture says, Giving thanks to God who hath called you into his marvelous light (1 Peter 2:9). And again: For it had been better for them not to have known the way of justice than, after they have known it, to turn back from that holy commandment which was delivered to them (2 Peter 2:21).
3. He magnifies their guilt by considering what they have turned to, because they have turned not to good but to evil. Hence he says they turned to another gospel—that is, to the Old Law. The Old Law is a good message only in that it announces some good things, namely, temporal and physical ones: If you be willing and will hearken to me, you shall eat the good things of the land (Isaiah 1:19). Yet it is not completely perfect as the Gospel is, because it does not announce the perfect and highest goods, but small and slight ones.

   The New Law, however, is perfectly and in the full sense a Gospel, that is, a good message, because it announces the greatest goods: heavenly, spiritual, and eternal. And although it is "another gospel" according to the tradition of the deceivers, yet according to my preaching, it is not. For it is different in its promises but not in its typology, because the same reality is contained in the Old Testament and in the New. In the Old, it is present as a figure, but in the New, it is present in its explicit reality. Therefore, it is another gospel if you consider the outward appearances, but regarding the inner substance, it is not another gospel.

Yet while it is not in itself another gospel, it can become another when you consider the guilt of the deceivers. Therefore, in elaborating on their guilt, he says, ...only there are some... that trouble you. These are the deceivers, who corrupt the purity of the understanding with which you were filled with the truth of the faith.

Although the same reality is contained in the Old and New Testaments in terms of inner meaning, as has been said, embracing the Old after accepting the New suggests that the New is not perfect and that the two are different. Hence Paul says, which is not another; only there are some that trouble you. He says this because those deceivers were compelling them to be circumcised after professing faith in the Gospel. By this, they were showing that circumcision is different from Baptism and does something that Baptism cannot do, and for that reason, they are troubling you. I would that they were even cut off who trouble you (Galatians 5:12).

And they do indeed bring you trouble, because they want to pervert the gospel of Christ—that is, the truth of the Gospel's teaching—into the figure of the Law, which is absurd and the greatest of troubles. For a thing ought to be converted into that to which it is ordained. The New Testament and the Gospel of Christ are not ordained to the Old; on the contrary, the Old Law is ordained to the New Law, as a figure is to the truth. Consequently, the figure ought to be converted into the truth, and the Old Law to the Gospel of Christ—not the truth into the figure, or the Gospel of Christ into the Old Law.

This is clear from the way we ordinarily speak. We do not say that a man resembles his image; on the contrary, we say the image resembles the man. They shall be turned to thee and thou shalt not be turned to them (Jeremiah 15:19); The new coming on, you shall cast away the old (Leviticus 26:10).

Then, after elaborating on their guilt, the inflicting of the penalty is set forth when he says, But though we, or an angel from heaven... (Galatians 1:8). In this regard, he does two things:

1. He issues the sentence.
2. He gives a reason for the sentence (Galatians 1:10).

Regarding the first point, he does two things:

1. He presents the authority for his sentence.
2. He passes the sentence (Galatians 1:9).

He shows that his authority for passing sentence is great because it would affect not only the perverters and deceivers, who are subject to him, but also his own equals, like the other apostles, and even those above him, like the angels, if they were guilty of this crime of turning the Gospel into the Old Law. Hence he says that the authority behind the sentence he passes (which is excommunication) has efficacy not only over those who are doing these things, but that even if we—namely, the apostles—or an angel... from heaven, preach a gospel besides that which we have preached, let him be anathema. That is, let him be subject to the sentence we pass.

To clarify the preceding points, three things should be investigated:

1. The meaning of the word anathema. Regarding this, it should be noted that anathema is a Greek word composed of ana, which means "above," and thesis, that is, "a placing," meaning "a placing above." The word arose from an old custom. When the ancients waged war, they sometimes took certain spoils from their enemies that they were unwilling to use for themselves, but instead hung them in a temple or other public place in the city, as if to separate them from the common use of men. Everything so hung up, the Greeks called an anathema.

   From this arose the custom of declaring anything excluded from common use to be "anathematized." Hence, in Joshua 6:17, it is said of Jericho and everything in it that Joshua anathematized it. Consequently, the practice arose even in the Church of declaring "anathema" those who are excluded from the common society of the Church and from partaking of its sacraments.

2. We must seek an explanation for his statement, though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. Here it should be noted that there are three kinds of teachings. The first is that of the philosophers, who arrived at their doctrine with their own reason as their guide. The second is teaching that has been delivered by angels, such as the Old Law, for the Old Law was not issued by a human will but was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator (Galatians 3:19). The third teaching was given directly by God Himself, which is the teaching of the Gospel.

   This is confirmed by Scripture: No man has seen God at any time; the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him (John 1:18); In these days [He] hath spoken to us by his Son (Hebrews 1:2); and Which, having begun to be declared by the Lord, was confirmed unto us by them that heard him (Hebrews 2:3).

   Now, a teaching passed on by a man can be changed and revoked by another man who knows better, just as one philosopher refutes the sayings of another, or by an angel who has a more penetrating knowledge of the truth. Even a teaching handed down by one angel could be replaced by that of a higher angel or by God. But a teaching that comes directly from God can be nullified by neither man nor angel. Therefore, if a man or an angel were to state anything contrary to what has been taught by God, such a statement would not contradict God’s teaching in order to invalidate or destroy it. Rather, God’s teaching would stand against him, because one who speaks this way should be expelled and prevented from sharing his teaching. Hence, the Apostle says that the dignity of the Gospel's teaching, which has come directly from God, is so great that if a man or even an angel preached another Gospel besides the one he has preached among them, he is anathema—that is, he must be rejected and expelled.

3. We must resolve the objections that arise on this point. The first is that since an equal has no authority over his peers, and even less over his superiors, it seems that the Apostle has no power to excommunicate the other apostles, who are his peers, and certainly not the angels, who are his superiors. As Jesus said, He that is the lesser in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he (Matthew 11:11). Therefore, the anathema seems invalid.

   The answer is that the Apostle passed this sentence not on his own authority, but on the authority of the Gospel's teaching, of which he was a minister. It is the authority of the Gospel itself that teaches that whoever says anything contrary to it must be expelled and cast out. As the Lord says, The word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day (John 14:48).

   A second question arises from the words, a gospel besides that which we have preached to you. Does this mean no one may teach or preach anything but what is written in the epistles and Gospels? This seems false, because it is said in 1 Thessalonians 3:10, Praying that we may accomplish those things that are wanting to your faith.

   I answer that nothing is to be taught except what is contained, either implicitly or explicitly, in the Gospels, the epistles, and Sacred Scripture. For Sacred Scripture and the Gospels announce that Christ must be believed in explicitly. Therefore, whatever is contained in them implicitly and fosters their teaching and faith in Christ can be preached and taught. So, when Paul says, besides that which you have received, he means adding something completely alien, as in Revelation 22:18: If any, man shall add to these things, God shall add unto him the plagues written in this book. And also, Neither add anything—that is, anything contrary or alien—nor diminish (Deuteronomy 12:32).

Then, when he says, As we said before, so now I say it again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema, he pronounces his sentence on the evil person. He is saying: As I have said of angels and apostles, so I say of the deceivers. If any deceiver preaches a gospel besides that which you have received from me, let him be anathema—that is, excommunicated. And this is the sentence he passes.

Now, it may be asked whether all heretics are excommunicated by this statement. It seems not, because it is said, A man that is a heretic, after the first and second admonition, avoid (Titus 3:10). I answer that a person might be called a heretic either because he errs solely from ignorance, in which case he is not excommunicated for that reason, or because he errs through obstinacy and tries to subvert others, in which case he falls under the canon of the sentence passed. But whether Paul was passing sentence on heretics at that very moment with these words is open to question, since sentences were later passed against heretics in the Councils. Yet it can be said that perhaps he was showing that they deserved to be excommunicated.

Then, when he says, For do I now persuade men, or God?, he gives the reason for his sentence.

1. He gives the reason for his sentence.
2. He discloses his purpose: Or do I seek to please men? (Galatians 1:10).

For someone might say: "Why do you excommunicate in this manner? Perhaps some are your friends or men of some authority. Therefore, you should not act in this way." But the Apostle answers that one should indeed act this way, because the things I say now are not to gain the favor of men but to please God. This is what he means by "do I now"—that is, after my conversion, or in this epistle—"persuade men?" In other words, "Is it my intention to please men or God?" It is as if to say: The things I do, I do to please God alone. We speak, not as pleasing men, but God (1 Thessalonians 2:4); nor do we speak on the authority of men, but of God.

That I do not seek to please men is clear from my intention and purpose. For I do not seek to please men—that is, it is not my intention in converting people to please them alone, but to do it for the honor of God. This is clear, because if I still sought to please men, as I formerly pleased them, I would not be the servant of Christ. The reason is that the two are opposed. More precisely, I would not be Christ's servant if I were to please men for their own sake, without referring it to God. For if I intend now and then to please men so that I might draw them to God, I do not sin. But if I do it in the first way, I am not the servant of Christ.

This is supported by Scripture: For the bed is straitened, so that one must fall out, and a short covering cannot cover both (Isaiah 28:20); No man can serve two masters. For either he will hate the one and love the other; or he will sustain the one and despise the other (Matthew 6:24); They have been confounded that please men (Psalms 52:6).