Does Galatians 3:1b talk about the consecration?

O senseless Galatians, who hath bewitched you that you should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been set forth, crucified among you? (DRA)

I bolded the part I’m asking about. Does this refer to the consecration during mass? I ask because I can’t think of another way that the Galatians would have Christ crucified set before their eyes. They weren’t there at Calvary, after all.

It’s a possibility. Some people would say that this suggests the use of images possibly in the form of a crucifix.

It’s also possible that he is simply referring to previous writings/preaching in which the Gospel was proclaimed without holding anything back.

…though this seems a good type for the Eucharist, we must understand its meaning by searching both the verses preceding and proceeding the passage.

St. Paul is addressing the issue of Mosaic Law (inclusive of the Ten Commandments) and the hundreds of Judaic practices. St. Paul emphasizes this on verse 2:

2 This only would I learn of you: Did you receive the Spirit by [size=]the works of the law[/size], or by the hearing of faith?

The relationship here is that we must adhere to the observance of the whole Law (every tenet) or we gain nothing or we allow ourselves to abound in God’s Grace through Faith in Jesus Christ; thusly gaining Salvation through the Salvific Plan. He then proceeds to incorporate Jesus’ Word ("I have other sheep that is not of this fold… I will be One Shepherd and there will be One Fold–(the Church)–he even engages Judaism’s claim to God by asserting that the Gentiles (through their Faith in Jesus) are made descendants of Abraham because through Faith we are all reconciled to God through the Holy Spirit (verses 3-14).

Maran atha!


There may have been some members of the Church at Galatia who, visiting Jerusalem for Passover and Pentecost decades earlier, were eye-witnesses to Jesus’ crucifixion. Although Galatia is not explicitly mentioned, Acts 2:9-10 does mention visitors from “Cappadocia, Pontus, the province of Asia, Pontus, Phrygia, and Pamphylia” which surround Galatia.

The only patristic commentary I could find on Gal 3:1b comes from St. John Chrysostom:

Yet was He not crucified in Galatia, but at Jerusalem. His reason for saying, “among you,” is to declare the power of faith to see events which are at a distance. He says not, “crucified,” but, “openly set forth crucified,” signifying that by the eye of faith they saw more distinctly than some who were present as spectators. For many of the latter received no benefit, but the former, who were not eye-witnesses, yet saw it by faith more clearly. These words convey both praise and blame; praise, for their implicit acceptance of the truth; blame, because Him whom they had seen, for their sakes, stripped naked, transfixed, nailed to the cross, spit upon, mocked, fed with vinegar, upbraided by thieves, pierced with a spear; (for all this is implied in the words, “openly set forth, crucified,”) Him had they left, and betaken themselves to the Law, unshamed by any of those sufferings. Here observe how Paul, leaving all mention of heaven, earth, and sea, every where preaches the power of Christ, bearing about as he did, and holding up His cross: for this is the sum of the Divine love toward us.

There is one reason why I do not believe that this refers to the consecration at mass, and that is that Christ is NOT crucified at mass.

These are all great answers. Thanks, everybody.

No, but Christ is portrayed as crucified – that is, Christ is presented as having died (and having resurrected) in the elements of bread and wine at their consecration. For, as St. Paul said elsewhere, when we eat the bread and drink the cup, we are proclaiming the death of the Lord: we are showing Christ as having died.

Well, see, that’s what I was thinking too, but I’m not a scripture scholar.

Given everybody’s feedback, is it accurate to assert that we can’t rule out the consecration as one interpretation? In other words, we can’t say, “Galatians 3:1b is definitely NOT the consecration.” (I don’t like using a double negative but am not sure how else to phrase it.)

I’ve just read your statement and put it together with your screen name… welcome Home! :extrahappy::extrahappy::extrahappy:

Maran atha!


…as having Sacrificed Himself for the world!

Maran atha!


…I concur; we cannot determine with absolute certainty that there’s not an underlined reference to the Body and Blood! Since Oral Tradition is not fully captured in the Written Tradition we are sometimes left with only a semblance or hint.

Maran atha!


Thank you. It’s good to be home. :heart:

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit