And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:
All Commentaries on Romans 4:11 Go To Romans 4
Thomas Aquinas
AD 1274
Having showed 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 [n. 339], 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 righteousness; secondly, he shows what he obtains from this sign, there [v. 11b; n. 344] at that he might be the father; thirdly, how he obtains it, there [v. 12b; n. 345] at who are not merely. 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). Secondly, he shows what it is a sign of, saying: a seal of the justice of faith, i.e., the justice that comes through faith, which faith is in uncircumcision, i.e., which Abraham had while he was still uncircumcised. 176 21 Aquinas elucidates the meaning of signaculum, which can mean the signet impressing a seal, by pointing to a sigillo, the seal impressed by a signet. As in Latin, however, but the signet and the impression made by the signet can be called the "seal." This makes translation difficult. 343. "Seal" is said in two ways. In one way, a seal [or signet] is a visible sign possessing a likeness to the thing signified, as in Ez (28:12): "You were the signet of perfection, full of wisdom." 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. Secondly, 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" [signaculum] means a sign hiding something which is to be revealed to friends, as is clear in the case of a sigillo:21 "Worthy art thou, who wast 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: The purpose was to make him father, i.e., from the foregoing it comes about that Abraham is the father, of all who believe without being circumcised, 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, namely, that it be reckoned to them also as righteousness, namely, the fact that they believe, just as it was reckoned to Abraham. The power of this fatherhood is indicated in Mt (3:9): "God is able from these stones to raise up children to 177 Abraham." And likewise the father of the circumcised, who derive their origin from him: "Abraham is our father" (Jn 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 merely of the circumcised but also of those who follow the example of the faith which our father Abraham had before he was circumcised, i.e., which Abraham had, while he was still uncircumcised: "If you were Abraham’s children, you would do what Abraham did" (Jn 8:39). 346. Since we are speaking of circumcision, it is fitting to consider three things about it, namely, why it was instituted [n. 347], what power it had [n. 349] and why it was changed [n. 350]. 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 Heb 11: "By faith Abraham was circumcised." 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 178 removed from man’s heart, as Jer (4:4) says: "Circumcise yourself to the Lord, remove the foreskin of your hearts." The third reason was to distinguish the people worshiping 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" (Co1 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 [reatus] of sin are removed by Christ: "In him," namely, Christ, "also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of flesh in the circumcision of Christ" (Col 2:11). Secondly, 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 (Jos 5:2) to signify that spiritual circumcision was to be effected by the Rock, who is Christ, as stated in 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 [of Lombard, col. 1372] says here—the quotation is 179 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 righteousness God’s grace cannot be present. But the Apostle says in Gal (2:21): "If justification were through the law, then Christ died to no purpose." 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 (Rom 5:1). 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 righteousness. 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 righteousness. 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 righteousness. It was merely a sign of righteousness, 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 180 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 [n. 323] 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; secondly, he proves it, there [v. 14; n. 354] at If it is the adherents of the law. 352. First, therefore, the Apostle accepts on the authority of Genesis the promise made to Abraham and his seed that they should inherit 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 23:18). 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" (Ga1 3:16), because in the one in whom it is to be fulfilled Ps 2 (v.8) it is shown that he would inherit the world: "Ask of me and I will make the nations your heritage." Secondarily, it is fulfilled in those who through Christ’s grace are spiritually the seed of Abraham: "The children of the promise are reckoned as descendants" (Rom 181 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 says in Heb (7:19): "The law made nothing perfect." What he asserts is that such a promise was to be fulfilled through the righteousness of faith, because "the saints through faith conquered kingdoms" (Heb 11:33). 354. Then when he says If it is (v.14) he proves his statement: first, in regard to the denial that the promise is to be fulfilled through, the Law; secondly, in regard to the assertion that it is to be fulfilled through the righteousness of faith, there [v. 16; n. 359] at Therefore it is of faith. 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; secondly, he proves it, there [v. 15; n. 356] at For the law. The destruction of the consequent is manifest. 182 355. He says first, therefore, that the promise was not made through the Law. For if it is the adherents of the law who 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 null, i.e., the faith by which Abraham believed God promising Gen (c. 15) as been made futile. But this is not in keeping with what has been stated in 1 Cor (15:17): "If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins." Why it is futile is shown when he adds, and the promise is abolished, i.e., emptied, because it does not produce its effect. But this is contrary to what is stated in Heb (11:11): "She considered him faithful who had promised" and to what is stated in this chapter (v.21): "Fully convinced that God was able to do what he had promised." 356. Then when he says For the law (v. 15) he proves the conditional statement through the effect or result of the Law. First, he proposes the effect or result of the Law; secondly, he proves it, there [v. 15b; n. 358] 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 brings wrath; therefore, if the promise is to be fulfilled through the Law, faith is null and the promise is void. 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 Kg 22:13). 183 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 Ga1 (5:2): "If you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you." 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 Cor (3:6): "The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life," namely, because "the Spirit helps us inwardly in our weakness" (Rom 8:26). 358. Then when he says For where there is no law (v.15b) he shows how it brings wrath, saying: But where there is no law, there is no 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 thy commands" (Ps 119:158). 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 119:119). 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.
