Omnia facta sunt nova
All things made new
5:16 Itaque nos ex hoc neminem novimus secundum carnem. [n. 187] Et si cognovimus secundum carnem Christum, sed nunc jam non novimus. [n. 189]
5:16 Therefore, henceforth we know no man according to the flesh. [n. 187] And if we have known Christ according to the flesh: but now we know him so no longer. [n. 189]
5:17 Si qua ergo in Christo nova creatura, vetera transierunt: ecce facta sunt omnia nova. [n. 192]
5:17 If then any be in Christ a new creature, the old things are passed away. Behold all things are made new. [n. 192]
187. Posito quomodo sancti praeparant se ad susceptionem gloriae caelestis, placendo Deo et proficiendo proximo, hic consequenter ostendit quomodo praeparant se ad hoc idem, abdicando a se carnalem affectum.
187. Having indicated how the saints prepare themselves for receiving heavenly glory by pleasing God and helping their neighbor, the Apostle then shows how they prepare themselves for the same thing by giving up carnal affection.
Et circa hoc tria facit.
In regard to this he does three things.
Primo ponit abdicationem carnalis affectus;
First, he mentions the putting off of carnal affection;
secundo excludit instantiam, ibi et si cognovimus, etc.;
second, he excludes an objection, at and if we have known;
tertio concludit intentum, ibi si qua ergo in Christo, et cetera.
third, he concludes to what he intended, at if then any be in Christ.
188. Dicit ergo primo: ex quo ergo adeo certi sumus de gloria aeterna, ita quod nos ex hoc neminem secundum carnem novimus.
188. He says, therefore: inasmuch as I am so certain of eternal glory, henceforth we know no man according to the flesh.
Ubi nota, quod secundum carnem est quaedam determinatio, et potest dupliciter exponi, secundum quod dupliciter constructio fieri potest.
Here it should be noted that according to the flesh is a restriction and can be explained in two ways according to the possible connections that can be made.
Uno modo, ut secundum carnem, construatur cum hoc accusativo neminem, et sic exponit Glossa: neminem secundum carnem, id est carnaliter viventem, approbamus. Ex quo enim quilibet debet mori, non approbamus eum, qui carnaliter vivit. Et hoc modo accipitur caro Rom. VIII, 9: vos autem in carne non estis, et cetera. Alio modo: neminem secundum carnem, id est secundum carnales legis observantias viventem, novimus, id est approbamus. Et hoc modo accipitur caro Phil. III, 4: qui confidunt in carne, id est, in carnalibus legis observantiis, et cetera. Tertio: neminem secundum carnem, id est secundum carnis corruptionem, novimus, id est reputamus. Licet enim fideles adhuc carnem corruptibilem gerant, tamen in spe iam habent corpus incorruptibile. Unde non reputant se secundum quod modo carnem corruptibilem habent, sed secundum quod habituri sunt corpus incorruptibile. Hoc modo accipitur caro I Cor. XV, 50: caro et sanguis regnum Dei non possidebunt.
In one way, so according to the flesh is connected with no one. In this case, a Gloss explains it thus: we regard, i.e., approve of no man according to the flesh, i.e., living carnally. This is the way ‘flesh’ is taken in Romans: you are not in the flesh, you are in the Spirit (Rom 8:9). In another way, we regard, i.e., approve of, no man according to the flesh, i.e., living according to the carnal observances of the law. This is the way ‘flesh’ is taken in Philippians: who have confidence in the flesh (Phil 3:4), i.e., the carnal observances of the law. In a third way, we know, i.e., consider, no man according to the flesh, i.e., according to the corruption of the flesh. For although the faithful still have corruptible flesh, yet in hope they already have an incorruptible body. Hence, they do not consider themselves from the point of view that they have corruptible flesh now, but that they shall have an incorruptible body. This is the way flesh is taken in 1 Corinthians: flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor 15:50).
Alio modo potest construi, ut secundum carnem, construatur cum hoc verbo novimus. Et sic est sensus: dico quod ex quo non debemus nobis vivere, sed ei qui pro nobis mortuus est, itaque nos ex hoc neminem secundum carnem novimus, id est non sequimur in aliquo carnalem affectum, nec aliquem hoc modo reputamus. Et hoc modo accipitur illud Deut. XXXIII, 9: qui dixerit patri suo et matri: nescio vos, et cetera. Et sic secundum carnem, refertur ad cognoscentem; sed in prima expositione referebatur ad cognitum.
But according to the flesh can be taken in another way, namely, as connected with the verb, we know. Then the sense is this: I say that inasmuch as we should not live for ourselves but for him who died for us, therefore, henceforth we regard no one according to the flesh, i.e., we do not follow carnal affection in anyone or regard him in this light. This is the way Deuteronomy should be understood: who said of his father and mother: I regard them not (Deut 33:9). In this way, according to the flesh is referred to the knower, but in the first explanation to the object known.
189. Quia vero aliquis posset dare instantiam de Christo, quod saltem cognovisset eum secundum carnem, ideo consequenter hoc removet dicens quod si cognovimus, et cetera.
189. But because someone might insist that he at least knew Christ according to the flesh, he excludes this, saying: if we have known Christ according to the flesh: but now we know him so no longer.
Circa hoc sciendum est quod Manichaeus adducebat verba ista pro se in fulcimentum sui erroris. Ipse enim dicebat Christum non habuisse verum corpus, nec fuisse ex semine David natum. Et sic Augustinus dicit in libro Contra Faustum: si quis contra eum allegaret verbum Apostoli ad Rom. I, 3: qui factus est ei ex semine David secundum carnem, et illud I Tim. III, 16: et manifeste magnum est pietatis sacramentum, quod manifestatum est in carne, etc., et II Tim. II, 8: memor esto dominum Iesum Christum resurrexisse a mortuis ex semine David, etc., respondebat, quod Apostolus aliquando fuerat huius opinionis, scilicet quod fuisset ex semine David et quod verum corpus habuisset, sed postea hanc opinionem mutavit et correxit se hic. Unde dicebat et si cognovimus secundum carnem Christum, id est si fuerimus aliquando huius opinionis, quod Christus habuisset veram carnem, sed nunc iam non novimus, id est modo mutavimus illam opinionem et non credimus ita.
In regard to this it should be noted that Manicheus appealed to those words to support his error. For he said that Christ did not have a true body and was not born of the seed of David. This is the way Augustine puts it in the book, Against Faustus: if anyone alleged against him the words of the Apostle to the Romans, who was descended from David according to the flesh (Rom 1:3), and to Timothy, great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of our religion, which was manifested in the flesh (1 Tim 3:16); remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, descended from David, as preached in my Gospel (2 Tim 2:8), he answered that the Apostle was first of the opinion that he was of the seed of David and that he had a true body, but he changed that opinion later to correct himself; that is why he said, and if we have known Christ according to the flesh, that is, if we were of the opinion that Christ had true flesh, but now we know him so no longer, i.e., we have changed our opinion and no longer believe that.
Quod quidem dupliciter improbat Augustinus. Primo quia de eo, quod falso putamus, nullus dicit novimus, sed opinamur. Cum ergo Apostolus utatur hic hoc verbo cognovimus, videtur quod non aliquando falso putaverit. Secundo quia supra Apostolus dicit neminem novimus secundum carnem. Si ergo verum esset quod dicit Manichaeus, Apostolus nullum cognosceret habere verum corpus, quod est falsum. Est ergo falsum quod Manichaeus dicit.
But Augustine disproves this in two ways. First, because no one says we knew, but we are of the opinion, when speaking of something he falsely held. Therefore, when the Apostle uses the words, have known, it does not seem that he once held something false. Second, because the Apostle says, we know no man according to the flesh. Therefore, if what Manicheus says were true, the Apostle would have known no one to have a true body, which is false. Therefore what Manicheus says is false.
190. Et ideo aliter exponendum secundum veritatem, et dupliciter. Uno modo, ut sumatur hic caro pro corruptione carnis, I Cor. XV, 50: caro et sanguis, etc., et tunc est sensus: et si cognovimus aliquando Christum secundum carnem, id est habere eum carnem corruptibilem ante passionem, sed nunc iam non novimus, scilicet eum habere carnem incorruptibilem, quia Rom. VI, 9 dicitur: Christus resurgens ex mortuis iam non moritur, et cetera.
190. Consequently, it must be explained otherwise according to the truth, and this in two ways. In one way so that flesh is taken for the corruption of the flesh: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable (1 Cor 15:50). Then the sense is this: if we have at one time known Christ according to the flesh, i.e., to have corruptible flesh before the passion, we know him so no longer, namely, that he has corruptible flesh, because it is said: Christ being raised from the dead will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him (Rom 6:9).
Alio modo secundum Glossam, ut si aliquando secundum carnem Christum cognovimus, referatur ad statum Pauli ante conversionem ad Christum; quod vero sequitur sed nunc iam non novimus, referatur ad statum eius post conversionem. Et sic est sensus: et ego et alii Iudaei infideles aliquando, id est ante conversionem meam, cognovimus Christum secundum carnem, id est secundum quod carnaliter opinati sumus de Christo, scilicet eum esse tantum hominem et quod venit tantum ad carnales observantias legis; sed iam, id est postquam conversus sum, non novimus, id est haec opinio cessavit, immo credo quod sit verus Deus et quod non sit colendus per carnales observantias. Unde dicebat Gal. V, v. 2: si circumcidimini, Christus nihil vobis proderit.
In another way according to a Gloss, so that the clause, if we have known Christ according to the flesh, is referred to Paul’s condition before his conversion; then what follows, we know him so no longer, refers to his state after conversion. Then the sense is this: both I and other Jews once, i.e., before my conversion, knew Christ according to the flesh, i.e., according to what we thought of Christ in the law. But now, i.e., after I was converted, we know him so no longer, i.e., this opinion ceased. Indeed I believe that he is true God and that he should not be worshipped with carnal observance. Hence, he said to the Galatians: if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you (Gal 5:2).
191. Potest et aliter exponi, ut hoc quod dicit et si cognovimus, etc., dicat Apostolus in persona omnium apostolorum Christi; et sic videtur respondere ultimae expositioni huius, quod dicitur neminem cognovimus.
191. It can also be explained another way, so that the statement, if we have known Christ according to the flesh, is made by the Apostle in the person of all the apostles of Christ. In this way it seems to correspond to the last explanation of the statement, we know no man.
Unde sciendum est quod Augustinus, exponens illud Io. XVI, 7: expedit vobis, ut ego vadam, ubi ratio Domini ad hoc subditur: si enim non abiero, Paracletus non veniet ad vos, dicit, quod hoc ideo erat, quia discipuli carnaliter amantes Christum afficiebantur ad ipsum, sicut carnalis homo ad carnalem amicum, et sic non poterant elevari ad spiritualem dilectionem, quae etiam pro absente multa facit pati. Ut ergo radicaretur in eis affectus spiritualis, qui est a Spiritu Sancto, et cessaret carnalis, dixit eis Dominus: pax vobis, et cetera. Hoc ergo Apostolus, in persona omnium discipulorum, commemorans dixit et si cognovimus, id est si adhaesimus Christo aliquando, scilicet quando nobiscum erat praesentia corporali, secundum carnem, id est secundum carnalem affectum, sed iam non novimus, id est iam iste affectus cessavit a nobis per Spiritum Sanctum, qui datus est nobis.
Hence it should be noted that when Augustine explains John: it is to your advantage that I go away (John 16:7), where the Lord’s reason is given as being, for if I do not go away, the Counselor will not come to you, he says that this was because the disciples were attracted toward him as a man in the flesh to a friend in the flesh. As a result, they could not be raised to a spiritual love, which causes one to suffer many things even for a person who is absent. Therefore, in order to plant in them a spiritual affection, which is from the Holy Spirit, and root out the carnal one, the Lord said to them: peace be with you (John 20:21). Therefore, the Apostle in the person of all the disciples recalled this and said, if we have known, i.e., if we have clung to Christ at one time, namely, when he was present with us in his bodily presence, according to the flesh, i.e., with carnal love, but now we know him so no longer, i.e., that affection ceased in us by the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us.
192. Consequenter cum dicit si qua igitur in Christo, etc., ex praemissis concludit quemdam effectum esse consecutum, scilicet novitatis in mundo. Et ideo dicit si qua igitur, id est si aliqua, in Christo, id est in fide Christi, vel per Christum, nova creatura est facta. Gal. V, 6: in Christo Iesu neque praeputium, neque circumcisio, et cetera.
192. Then when he says, Therefore if then any be in Christ, he concludes from the foregoing that a certain effect follows, namely, newness in the world. Hence he says, if then any be in Christ, i.e., in the faith of Christ, or through Christ, he is made a new creature: for in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love (Gal 5:6).
Ubi notandum quod innovatio per gratiam dicitur creatura. Creatio enim est motus ex nihilo ad esse. Est autem duplex esse, scilicet esse naturae et esse gratiae. Prima creatio facta fuit quando creaturae ex nihilo productae sunt a Deo in esse naturae, et tunc creatura erat nova, sed tamen per peccatum inveterata est. Thren. III, 4: vetustam fecit pellem meam, et cetera. Oportuit ergo esse novam creationem, per quam producerentur in esse gratiae, quae quidem creatio est ex nihilo, quia qui gratia carent, nihil sunt. I Cor. XIII, v. 2: si noverim mysteria omnia, etc., caritatem autem non habeam, et cetera. Iob XVIII, v. 15: habitent in tabernaculo illius socii eius, qui non est, id est peccati. Augustinus dicit: peccatum enim nihil est, et nihili fiunt homines cum peccant.
Here it should be noted that renewal by grace is called a creature. For creation is a change from nothing to existence. But there are two kinds of existence, namely, of nature and of grace. The first creation was made when creatures were produced by God from nothing to exist in nature; and then the creature was new, but became old by sin: he has made my flesh and my skin waste away (Lam 3:4). Therefore, a new creation was required by which we would be produced to exist in grace. This, too, is a creation from nothing because those who lack grace are nothing: and if I understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing (1 Cor 13:2); in his tent, i.e., of sin, dwells that which is none of his (Job 18:15). Augustine says: for sin is nothing, and men become nothing, when they sin.
Et sic patet, quod infusio gratiae est quaedam creatio.
So it is clear that the infusion of grace is a creation.
193. Si ergo aliqua creatura facta est nova per ipsum, vetera transierunt ei. Hoc quidem sumptum est Lev. XXVI, 10, ubi dicitur: novis supervenientibus vetera proiicietis.
193. If then any creature is made new through him, the old things are passed away. This of course was taken from Leviticus, where it says: and you shall clear out the old to make way for the new (Lev 26:10).
Ex quo sic argumentatur: si omnia nova facta sunt et secundum legem novis supervenientibus vetera sunt proiicienda, ergo si qua creatura est, vetera transierunt ei, id est transire debent ab eo. Vetera autem quae transire debent sunt legalia. Rom. VII, 6: serviamus in novitate Spiritus, et non in vetustate litterae. Item errores gentilium. Is. c. XXVI, 3: vetus error abiit. Item corruptiones peccati. Rom. VI, 6: vetus homo noster, et cetera.
From this he argues thus: if all things have been made new, and according to the law when new things come, the old things shall be cast away, then if there be any new creature, the old things are passed away, i.e., they should pass away from it. But the old things that should pass away are the legal observances: so that we serve not under the old written code but in the new life of the Spirit (Rom 7:6), and in the errors of the gentiles: the old error is gone (Isa 26:3); likewise the corruption of sin: we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the sinful body might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin (Rom 6:6).
Quibus quidem in nobis transeuntibus, virtutes contrariae his vitiis debent in nobis innovari. Apoc. XXI, 5: et dixit qui sedebat in throno: ecce nova facio omnia.
When such things pass from us, the virtues contrary to these vices should be renewed: and he who sat upon the throne said: behold, I make all things new (Rev 21:5).
Reconcilatio per Christum
Reconcilation through Christ
5:18 Omnia autem ex Deo, qui nos reconciliavit sibi per Christum: et dedit nobis ministerium reconciliationis, [n. 194]
5:18 But all things are of God, who has reconciled us to himself by Christ and has given to us the ministry of reconciliation. [n. 194]
5:19 quoniam quidem Deus erat in Christo mundum reconcilians sibi, non reputans illis delicta ipsorum, et posuit in nobis verbum reconciliationis. [n. 198]
5:19 For God indeed was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, not imputing to them their sins. And he has placed in us the word of reconciliation. [n. 198]
5:20 Pro Christo ergo legatione fungimur, tamquam Deo exhortante per nos. Obsecramus pro Christo, reconciliamini Deo. [n. 199]
5:20 For Christ, therefore, we are ambassadors, God as it were exhorting by us; for Christ, we beseech you, be reconciled to God. [n. 199]
5:21 Eum, qui non noverat peccatum, pro nobis peccatum fecit, ut nos efficeremur justitia Dei in ipso. [n. 201]
5:21 Him, who knew no sin, he has made sin for us: that we might be made the justice of God in him. [n. 201]
194. Postquam Apostolus in superioribus tractavit de praemio sanctorum et de praeparatione ad susceptionem eius, hic consequenter agit de causa utriusque.
194. After discussing the saints’ reward and how they prepared themselves to receive it, the Apostle now treats of the cause of both.
Et circa hoc tria facit, quia
And concerning this he does three things.
primo, ostendit auctorem omnium praedictorum esse Deum;
First, he shows that the author of all these things is God;
secundo, commemorat beneficium a Christo collatum, ibi qui reconciliavit, etc.;
second, he recalls the benefit conferred by Christ, at who has reconciled;