What the middle wall of partition is, he interprets by saying, “the enmity having abolished in His flesh, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances.” Some indeed affirm that he means the wall of the Jews against the Greeks, because it did not allow the Jews to hold intercourse with the Greeks. To me, however, this does not seem to be the meaning, but rather that he calls “the enmity in the flesh,” a middle wall, in that it is a common barrier, cutting us off alike from God. As the Prophet says, “Your iniquities separate between you and Me;” for that enmity which He had both against Jews and Gentiles was, as it were, a middle wall. And this, while the law existed, was not only not abolished, but rather was strengthened; “for the law,” says the Apostle, “works wrath.” Just in the same way then as when he says in that passage, “the law works wrath,” he does not ascribe the whole of this effect to the law itself, but it is to be understood, that it is because we have transgressed it; so also in this place he calls it a middle wall, because through being disobeyed it wrought enmity. The law was a hedge, but this it was made for the sake of security, and for this reason was called “a hedge,” to the intent that it might form an inclosure. For listen again to the Prophet, where he says, “I made a trench about it.” And again, “You have broken down her fences, so that all they which pass by the way do pluck her.” Here therefore it means security and so again, “I will take away the hedge thereof, and it shall be trodden down.” And again, “He gave them the law for a defence.” And again, “The Lord executes righteous acts and made known His ways unto Israel.” It became, however, a middle wall, no longer establishing them in security, but cutting them off from God. Such then is the middle wall of partition formed out of the hedge. And to explain what this is, he subjoins, “the enmity in His flesh having abolished, the law of commandments.”
How so? In that He was slain and dissolved the enmity therein. And not in this way only but also by keeping it. But what then, if we are released from the former transgression, and yet are again compelled to keep it? Then were the case the same over again, whereas He has destroyed the very law itself. For he says, “Having abolished the law of commandments contained in ordinances.” Oh! amazing loving-kindness! He gave us a law that we should keep it, and when we kept it not, and ought to have been punished, He even abrogated the law itself. As if a man, who, having committed a child to a schoolmaster, if he should turn out disobedient, should set him at liberty even from the schoolmaster, and take him away. How great loving-kindness were this! What is meant by,
“Having abolished by ordinances?”
For he makes a wide distinction between “commandments” and “ordinances.” He either then means “faith,” calling that an “ordinance,” (for by faith alone He saved us,) or he means “precept,” such as Christ gave, when He said, “But I say unto you, that you are not to be angry at all.” That is to say, “If you shall believe that God raised Him from the dead, you shall be saved.” And again, “The word is near you, in your mouth, and in your heart. Say not, Who shall ascend into heaven, or who shall descend into the abyss?” or, who has “brought Him again from the dead?” Instead of a certain manner of life, He brought in faith. For that He might not save us to no purpose, He both Himself underwent the penalty, and also required of men the faith that is by doctrines.
“That he might create in Himself of the two, one new man.”
Observe thou, that it is not that the Gentile has become a Jew, but that both the one and the other are entered into another condition. It was not with a view of merely making this last other than he was, but rather, in order to create the two anew. And well does he on all occasions employ the word “create,” and does not say “change,” in order to point out the power of what was done, and that even though the creation be invisible, yet it is no less a creation than that is, and that we ought not henceforward start away from this, as from natural things.
“That He might in Himself of the two.”
That is, by Himself. He gave not this charge to another, but Himself, by Himself, melted both the one and the other, and produced a glorious one, and one greater than the first creation; and that one, first, was Himself. For this is the meaning of “in Himself.” He Himself first gave the type and example. Laying hold on the one hand of the Jew, and on the other of the Gentile, and Himself being in the midst, He blended them together, made all the estrangement which existed between them to disappear, and fashioned them anew from above by fire and by water; no longer with water and earth, but with water and fire. He became a Jew by circumcision, He became accursed, He became a Gentile without the law, and was over both Gentiles and Jews.
“One new man,” says he, “so making peace.”
Peace for them both towards God, and towards each other. For so long as they continued still Jews and Gentiles, they could not have been reconciled. And had they not been delivered each from his own peculiar condition, they would not have arrived at another and a higher one. For the Jew is then united to the Gentile when he becomes a believer. It is like persons being in a house, with two chambers below, and one large and grand one above: they would not be able to see each other, till they had got above.
“Making peace,” more especially towards God; for this the context shows, for what says he?
Ver. 16. “And might reconcile them both in one body unto God through the Cross.”
He says, not merely “might reconcile,” (καταλλάξῃ) but “might reconcile thoroughly” (ἀ ποκαταλλάξῃ) indicating that heretofore human nature had been easily reconciled, as, e.g., in the case of the saints and before the time of the Law.
“In one body,” says he, and that His own, “unto God.” How is this effected? By Himself, he means, suffering the due penalty.
“Through the cross having slain the enmity thereby.”
Nothing can be more decisive, nothing more expressive than these words. His death, says the Apostle, has “slain” the enmity. He has “wounded” and “killed” it, not by giving charge to another, nor by what He wrought only, but also by what He suffered. He does not say “having dissolved,” he does say “having cancelled,” but what is stronger than all, “having slain,” so that it never should rise again. How then is it that it does rise again? From our exceeding depravity. For as long as we abide in the body of Christ, as long as we are united, it rises not again, but lies dead; or rather that former enmity never rises again at all. But if we breed another, it is no longer because of Him, who has destroyed and put to death the former one. It is thou, forsooth, that travailest with a fresh one. “For the mind of the flesh,” says he, “is enmity against God;” if we are in nothing carnally-minded, there will be no fresh enmity produced, but that “peace” shall remain.
Source: Homilies on Ephesians (New Advent)