ACC ~ Romans 2 v17 - 29

OVERVIEW:

Jewish boasting based on human ancestry has no place in the kingdom of God. Such people are not really Jews, because they have not understood the spiritual meaning of the covenant that God made with Abraham. In reality those who teach the commandments to others break them daily themselves, thereby causing the name of God to be blasphemed among the Gentiles. The only circumcision that is of any value is the spiritual circumcision of the heart. Outward signs mean nothing by themselves. Therefore Gentiles do not need to be physically circumcised, because if they do what is right, it amounts to the same thing. They will even be in a position to condemn the Jews who are circumcised physically but do not do what they know to be right. Some have received both physical and spiritual circumcision, but the two need not go together. Physical circumcision without the spiritual will lead to greater condemnation, but spiritual circumcision even without the physical leads to eternal life.

2:17 | False Boasting

CIRCUMCISION OF THE HEART. ORIGEN: The first thing to notice here is that Paul does not say that the person he is rhetorically addressing is a Jew; only that he calls himself one, which is not at all the same thing. For Paul goes on to teach that the true Jew is the one who is circumcised in secret, i.e., in the heart, who keeps the law in spirit and not according to the letter, whose praise is not from men but from God. But the man who is circumcised visibly in the flesh, observing the law in order to be seen by men, is not a real Jew; such a man only appears to be one. COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.

THREE MEANINGS OF THE NAME JEW. AMBROSIASTER: They are called Jews because it was their ancestral right to be called Israelites. Nevertheless, if we wish to understand everything which is relevant to the case, we must note that the name Jew had three different meanings. First, it meant the children of Abraham, who because of his faith was made the father of many nations. Then it refers to Jacob, who because of his increasing faith was called Israel, for the dignity which began with the father was honored in the sons. Third, they are called Jews not so much because of Judah as because of Christ, who was born of Judah according to the flesh, since in Judah it was made known that he would be in Christ. For it is said: “Judah will be your master,” and: “Judah, your brothers praise you.” This praise was given not to Judah as such but to Christ, whom nowadays all those whom he deigns to call his brethren praise. … The Jews themselves do not understand the meaning of their name and claim that it refers to the human Judah. COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES.

MISUSING THE GIFT OF THE LAW. CHRYSOSTOM: The Jew may boast that he is loved by God and honored above all other men. It seems to me that here Paul is gently mocking their unreasonableness … because they misused this gift … to set themselves up against the rest of mankind and to despise them. HOMILIES ON ROMANS 5.

FALSE PRETENSES. THEODORE OF MOPSUESTIA: This is not to be read as a question, as some people think, but rather as a statement, as if to say: “Not as a true Jew, albeit in secret, but merely claiming to be one and making false pretenses.” PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH.

BOASTING OF ONE’S RELATION WITH GOD. AUGUSTINE: If a Jew boasts in God in the manner called for by grace, which is given not according to the merits of works but freely, his praise would be of God and not of men. … But they thought that they had fulfilled this law of God by their own righteousness, even though they were transgressors of it. And so for them it worked wrath as sin multiplied, committed by those who knew what sin was. Those who did what the law commanded without the help of the Spirit of grace did it through fear of punishment and not out of love for righteousness. THE SPIRIT AND THE LETTER 11.7.

A JEW IN DEED. PELAGIUS: At this point Paul turns to the Jews and says that a man should be a Jew in deed and not merely in name. PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS.

2:18 | Instructed in the Law

THE LAW AS GUIDE. AMBROSIASTER: It is hardly surprising that a Jew should believe, since he has been taught to do so by the law. It is indeed dangerous for him not to believe if he has the law as his guide. COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES.

AN ADVANTAGE OR A DISADVANTAGE. CHRYSOSTOM: What seems to be an advantage—being given the law—may turn out to be a disadvantage if one does not keep the law. Paul states this with great accuracy. He does not say “do” but “know,” nor does he say “follow” but only “approve.” HOMILIES ON ROMANS 6.

APPROVING WHAT IS EXCELLENT. PELAGIUS: The Jew boasts that he alone understands God and knows his will. He approves what is excellent, because what is beneficial by nature is made much more so by the law. PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS.

2:19 | Deprived of the True Light

BLIND GUIDES. CHRYSOSTOM: Paul does not say that the Jews are really guides to the blind, only that they think they are. … Remember what they said in the Gospels to the blind man who had received his sight: “You were born in utter sin, and would you teach us?” HOMILIES ON ROMANS 6.

DEPRIVED OF KNOWLEDGE. PELAGIUS: The blind are those who have been deprived of the light of knowledge. PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS.

2:20 | Knowledge and Truth

THE EMBODIMENT OF TRUTH. THEODORE OF MOPSUESTIA: By “embodiment” is meant not the form but the substance and the knowledge and the truth, like the one “who was in the form of God.” PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH.

TEACHING THE FORM OF TRUTH. AMBROSIASTER: These things are true, because this is the task of the law: to teach the ignorant, to subject the wicked to God, to provoke those who by the worship of idols are ungodly to trust in a better hope by the promise which is given through the law. The teacher of the law is right to glory in these things, because he is teaching the form of truth. But if the teacher does not accept the Expected One whom the law has promised, he glories in vain in the law, to which he is doing harm as long as he rejects the Christ who is promised in the law. In that case he is no more learned than the fools, nor is he a teacher of children, nor is he a light to those who are in the darkness, but rather he is leading all of these into perdition. COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES.

THEY CONDEMN THEMSELVES. CHRYSOSTOM: Paul says that they had knowledge and truth not in their conscience, their actions or their well-doing but in the law. After saying this he repeats what he has already said to the Gentiles: In judging others they condemn themselves. HOMILIES ON ROMANS 6.

KEEP THE LAW IN VIEW. PELAGIUS: One who continually keeps the law in view does not stumble. PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS.

2:21 | Making a Mockery of One’s Faith

ON DOING WHAT ONE PREACHES AGAINST. AMBROSIASTER: This means: “You who complain about the Gentiles because they are without the law and God are accusing yourself, because you do not believe in the Christ promised by the law but find this belief in those you are complaining about.” The Jew does what he preaches should not be done. For by denying the Christ promised to us in the law, he removes faith by false interpretation and thus does what he preaches against. COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES.

AN INDIRECT APPROACH. CHRYSOSTOM: Sometimes Paul speaks more harshly and sometimes more softly. Here he does not attack them directly … but carries on his discourse by way of questions, getting them to give the answers themselves. HOMILIES ON ROMANS 6.

HOLDING THE LAW IN CONTEMPT. PELAGIUS: Paul says to the Jew: If you rely on the law, why do you not obey it? If you glory in God, why do you dishonor him? If you know his will, why do you not do it? If you approve what is excellent, why do you go after what is harmful? Why do you not look for the right way, if you are a guide for the blind? Surely if you saw it you would walk in it! If you are a light for others, why do you not cast off the works of darkness? As an instructor of the foolish, why have you abandoned the fear of the Lord, which is the beginning of wisdom? As a teacher of children, why are you a child in understanding? If you have the standard of knowledge and truth in the law, why do you not follow it yourself, nor by your evil example allow others to follow it? Why does your life not match your teaching, and why does your behavior make a mockery of your faith? Because you have not kept the law it will happen that not only will the law do you no good, it will condemn you for the greater crime of holding it in contempt. PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS.

PRIDE IN THE LAW IS POINTLESS. THEODORET OF CYR: Paul shows here and in the next two verses that the Jews had learned little from the law even if they gloried in the letter of it. When they tried to teach others, their deeds contradicted their words, and their pride in the law was pointless. INTERPRETATION OF THE LETTER TO THE ROMANS.

2:22 | Adulterating God’s Word

ROBBING THE WORD OF ITS MEANING. ORIGEN: These words could equally well be applied to the heretics who call themselves Christians. … Since they rob the Word of God of its true meaning and seduce the minds of their hearers by their perverse interpretation, joining an adulterated kind of faith to the bride of Christ which is the church, this [verse] fits them exactly. COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.

ADULTERERS OF THE WORD. AMBROSIASTER: The Jew adulterates the law by removing the truth of Christ from it and putting lies in his place. In another of his epistles Paul writes: “They are adulterers of God’s Word.” A man is sacrilegious when he denies Christ, whom the law and the prophets call God. Did the Jews ever say, “Thou art God and we did not know it” of God the Father, when the entire law proclaims the authority of God the Father, by whom all things are made? But when the Son of God appeared, what he was was hidden and not revealed until after the resurrection. It was then that it was said of him: “Thou art God and we did not know it.” COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES.

THE MEANING OF ADULTERY. PELAGIUS: There is not just one kind of adultery, for you commit adultery if you give anyone other than God what the soul owes exclusively to him. PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS.

ROBBING TEMPLES. CHRYSOSTOM: It was strictly forbidden for Jews to touch any of the treasures deposited in heathen temples, because they would be defiled. But Paul claims here that the tyranny of greed has persuaded them to disregard the law at this point. HOMILIES ON ROMANS 6.

2:23 | Dishonoring God

PREFERRING PLEASURE. BASIL: If we prefer a life of pleasure to the life of obedience to the commandments, how can we expect a life of blessedness, fellowship with the saints and the delights of the angelic company in the presence of Christ? Such expectations are truly the fantasies of a foolish mind. THE LONG RULES, PREFACE.

REJECTING TESTIMONY TO THE SON. AMBROSIASTER: The breaker of the law is the one who overlooks the meaning of the law, which speaks of the incarnation and divinity of Christ, and dishonors God by not accepting the testimony which he gave concerning his Son. For the Father said: “This is my beloved Son.” COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES.

THREE DIMENSIONS OF DISHONOR. CHRYSOSTOM: Here Paul makes two, or rather three, accusations. First, that they dishonor. Second, that they dishonor that by which they were honored. Third, that they dishonor the One who honored them, which was the depth of ingratitude. And then, so as not to appear to be accusing them off his own bat, he brings in the prophet Isaiah as their accuser. HOMILIES ON ROMANS 6.

THE OFFENSE OF SACRILEGE. PELAGIUS: Sacrilege is something committed only against God, because it is a violation of the sacred. PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS.

2:24 | Blaspheming God

THE NAME BLASPHEMED. TERTULLIAN: There is a blasphemy which we must avoid completely, viz., that any of us should give a pagan good cause for blasphemy by deceit or injury or insult or some other matter justifying complaint. It is that blasphemy in which the Name is deservedly blamed, so that the Lord is deservedly angry. But the words “Because of you my Name is blasphemed” seem to cover every blasphemy. So then, are we all lost, since the whole Roman circus assails the Name, for no fault of ours, with its wicked outcries? Shall we stop being Christians in order for there to be less blasphemy? No! If the blasphemy continues, we will observe our discipline, not abandoning it, as long as we are being approved and not condemned. The blasphemy which affirms our Christian faith by detesting us because of it is in close proximity to martyrdom. To curse us for keeping our discipline is to bless our Name. ON IDOLATRY 14.

THE NAME ADORNED. CYPRIAN: Even if the Jews have been alienated from God, because on their account the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles, nonetheless they are dear to God. Through their discipline the name of the Lord is adorned with praiseworthy testimony. LETTER 13.3.

THE IRONIC TWIST. ORIGEN: What Paul says [in verses 17-23] about the Jews is meant to be taken ironically, since anyone who genuinely relies on the law, glories in God and proves the things which are most useful would be doing the things which are listed here. But [in verse 24] he speaks directly to them, borrowing the words of the prophet Isaiah. COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.

BECAUSE OF YOU. AMBROSIASTER: Isaiah the prophet said this because God’s name was being blasphemed among the Gentiles when the Jews, by their misdeeds, did not observe the things which were handed down to them but instead gave glory to idols. … So also at the time of the apostles, God’s name was being blasphemed in Christ, because the Jews, by denying that Christ was God, were blaspheming the Father also, as the Lord said: “Whoever receives me does not receive me, but him who sent me.” Therefore God was blasphemed among the Gentiles because when they believed in Christ the Jews tried to persuade them not to call Christ “God.” COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES.

TEACHING OTHERS TO BLASPHEME. CHRYSOSTOM: Here Paul makes another double accusation. The Jews not only commit insolence themselves; they even persuade others to do the same. What then is the use of their teaching, if they cannot teach themselves? … But it is much worse than this, for not only do the Jews not teach the law, they actually teach others to blaspheme God, which is the very opposite of the law. HOMILIES ON ROMANS 6.

BLESSING OR BLASPHEMING. [PSEUDO-]CONSTANTIUS: Just as it says that God is “blessed by your good works,” so also he is blasphemed by the Gentiles on account of those who do not live rightly. THE HOLY LETTER OF ST. PAUL TO THE ROMANS.

RELYING ON THE PROPHETS. PELAGIUS: Paul realized that what he was saying was also to be found in the prophets, which is why he quotes them here. PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS.

2:25 | Circumcision and the Law

CIRCUMCISION OF THE HEART. ORIGEN: We must examine carefully what this circumcision is which is of value, and what law this is which is profitable if it is kept, so that when we have understood his meaning we may be circumcised as well. … Paul teaches in the verses which follow that it is not the circumcision of the flesh which he is talking about but the circumcision of the heart, which is made by the Spirit and not according to the letter, and which receives its praise not from men but from God.

Someone might raise the objection that, if it is true that the circumcision which the apostle regards as being profitable is nothing other than the cleansing of the soul and the rejection of all vices, why does he add here that it is profitable only if you keep the law, since circumcision does not exist apart from the observance of the law? It must be understood that circumcision is not just a matter of rejecting wickedness and ceasing from evil; it is also a matter of doing good and carrying out what is perfect. That is what keeping the law means. For there is no perfection in someone who merely desists from evil; rather it is found in him who does what is good.

Circumcision becomes uncircumcision if, after abstaining from evil, you fail to do what is good. For then you are considered to be an unbeliever. Obviously it is not possible for one who has been physically circumcised to get his foreskin back again, and so this text must be understood figuratively. For if the containment of evil which circumcision signifies is not matched by the works of faith, it is regarded as a form of wickedness. Even in the church, if someone is “circumcised” by the grace of baptism and then becomes a transgressor of the law of Christ, the circumcision of baptism is reckoned to him as uncircumcision, because “faith without works is dead.”

Consider also whether in this passage the following interpretation may be accepted, that even after the coming of Christ physical circumcision, observed according to the law, might be said to be of some value to those who keep the law on the same principle as that which obtained at the beginning of our faith, when it was still observed by those who believed in Christ. … Now if this (Christian) circumcision were to be turned into uncircumcision, not only would it be of no benefit to anyone, it would call down even greater judgment on the one who by the circumcision of the flesh appeared to be proclaiming the observance of the law but was in fact breaking it. And this judgment would be given by the one who had not submitted to physical circumcision but who nevertheless did the works of the law. Whether this interpretation is to be accepted or not is up to you, the reader, to decide.

Circumcision was of no value to those who thought they could be justified by it, but it was of value to those who thought that they might not come to Christ if they were forbidden to circumcise their children. For in the beginning there were some who thought of circumcision mainly as a recognizable symbol of their nationality and kept it up for that reason. They might have been hindered from coming to faith if they had been forbidden to do something which they could not do without. Therefore the apostle says this to them, so as not to close the door of faith to them. COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.

CIRCUMCISION AND LAW. CHRYSOSTOM: Paul accepts the value of circumcision in theory but abolishes it in practice. For circumcision is only useful if the person circumcised keeps the law.. . . But a circumcised person who breaks the law is really uncircumcised, and Paul condemns him without hesitation. HOMILIES ON ROMANS 6.

THE VALUE OF CIRCUMCISION. AMBROSIASTER: An opponent might say: “If circumcision is of value, why was it stopped?” It is only of value if you keep the law. Circumcision may be retained therefore, but if it is to be of any value the law must be observed. So why did Paul prohibit what he shows to be of value if the law is observed?

Paul answers by saying that if the law is not kept, the Jew effectively becomes a Gentile. … But to keep the law is to believe in Christ, who was promised to Abraham. Those who are justified by faith have their own merit and are included in the honor shown to the patriarchs. For every mention of salvation in the law refers to Christ. Therefore the man who believes in Christ is the man who keeps the law. But if he does not believe then he is a transgressor of the law because he has not accepted Christ … and it is no advantage for him to be called a son of Abraham. COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES.

NEITHER JEW NOR GENTILE FORCED INTO THE PRACTICE OF THE OTHER. AUGUSTINE: The apostle did not say this as if he favored forcing either the Gentiles to remain uncircumcised or the Jews not to adhere to the traditions of their fathers. Rather, he urged that neither group should be forced into the practice of the other but that each person should have the right, not the obligation, to adhere to his own custom. LYING 5.8.

TRUE CIRCUMCISION. PELAGIUS: Circumcision is of value as a sign if righteousness accompanies it; without righteousness the rest is useless. Or this [verse] may mean that circumcision enabled the Jew to live and escape condemnation in childhood before reaching the age of understanding. Or perhaps, because he set it in the context of the law, it is that … when the circumcision of the flesh ends, the true circumcision of the heart will come. A man breaks the law when he does not follow what is foretold in it. PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS.

2:26 | Circumcision, Visible and Invisible

CIRCUMCISED BY GRACE. ORIGEN: We can apply this lesson to our situation in the church as well. For example, let us say that catechumens are still uncircumcised, i.e., Gentiles, and that believers are circumcised by the grace of baptism. Therefore, if a catechumen who has not yet been circumcised by the grace of baptism keeps the law of Christ, he obeys the precepts and commandments. Will he not by analogy with what is written here judge the one who claims to be a believer but does not keep the precepts and despises the law of Christ and his commands? COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.

BECOMING A SON OF ABRAHAM. AMBROSIASTER: Faith in Christ is the righteousness of the law. … From this it is clear that if a Gentile believes in Christ he becomes a son of Abraham, who is the father of faith. COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES.

UNCIRCUMCISION COUNTED FOR CIRCUMCISION. AUGUSTINE: Gentiles become members of the house of Israel when their uncircumcision is counted for circumcision, inasmuch as they do not display the righteousness of the law by the cutting of the flesh but keep it in charity of heart. THE SPIRIT AND THE LETTER 46.

BECOMING CIRCUMCISED. CHRYSOSTOM: Look how clever Paul is. He does not say that the uncircumcision overcomes circumcision (for that would have angered the Jews who read his letter) but that the uncircumcision has become circumcision. Next he asks what circumcision really is, and he says that it is well-doing, whereas uncircumcision is evil-doing. Having moved the uncircumcised who does good deeds over to the circumcised and having pushed the circumcised man who leads a corrupt life into the ranks of the uncircumcised, Paul states his preference for the physically uncircumcised. HOMILIES ON ROMANS 6.

WHY CIRCUMCISION WAS INSTITUTED. PELAGIUS: The visible needs the invisible but not the other way round, because the visible is an image of the invisible, while the invisible is the reality itself. Thus, the circumcision of the flesh needs the circumcision of the heart but not vice versa, because the reality does not need the image. … If circumcision has no value by itself, why was it instituted? First, in order to distinguish the people of God from among the Gentiles. This is why when they were by themselves in the desert they were not circumcised. Or perhaps so that their bodies might be identified in battle. The reason why they were marked in that part of the body was first so that they would not be disfigured in a part of the body which was open to public view, and second, because the promise of grace would make this part of the body honorable through chastity. Or perhaps it was because it signified that Christ would be born from its seed. He was destined to introduce spiritual circumcision, but until he was born, physical circumcision would continue. PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS.

2:27 | Circumcision and the Law

BREAKERS AND KEEPERS OF THE LAW. ORIGEN: The Jew according to the flesh may keep the law, but only the man who is spiritual, who is a Jew in secret, can fulfill it. Insofar as the former is a transgressor of the law, it is the latter who will be his judge. COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.

THE GENTILE WHO BELIEVES. AMBROSIASTER: The Gentile who believes under the guidance of nature condemns the Jew, to whom Christ was promised through the law and who refused to believe in him when he came. For as much as the Gentile is being prepared for glory for having known the Creator of nature by nature alone, so the Jew deserves to be punished all the more because he did not know Christ the Creator, either by nature or by the law. COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES.

TWO TYPES OF UNCIRCUMCISION. CHRYSOSTOM: Here Paul clearly recognizes that there are two types of uncircumcision—one by nature and the other by will. Here he speaks of the physical uncircumcision and goes on to say that if it keeps the law it will judge the circumcision which breaks it. … For this kind of uncircumcision is offended when the law is broken and comes to its defense. … It is not the law which is dishonored but the one who disgraces the law. HOMILIES ON ROMANS 6.

LITERAL AND SPIRITUAL CIRCUMCISION. PELAGIUS: This either means that as long as the Jews continue their literal circumcision they reject the spiritual circumcision, or that they will be judged because they have not followed what the law said, viz., that by believing in Christ they might receive the true circumcision. PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS.

2:28 | Real Circumcision

THE JEW OUTWARDLY VIEWED. CHRYSOSTOM: Here Paul attacks the Judaizers on the ground that much they do is for outward show. HOMILIES ON ROMANS 6.

THE TRUE JEW. PELAGIUS: This is the true Jew, for everything which was previously done externally was but an image of what was meant to happen internally. PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS.

2:29 | Spiritual, Not Literal, Circumcision

BEGINNING INWARDLY. ORIGEN: We must realize that in some people these two things go together while in others they do not. For there are some things which have their beginning inside a man and which proceed from there to the outside, but there are other things which start on the outside and work their way inside. What I mean is this. If chastity begins inside a man, there is no doubt that it will manifest itself on the outside of him as well. For it is hardly possible if someone does not commit adultery in his heart that he should do so in his body. But it does not follow from this that if chastity starts as an outward observance that it will necessarily penetrate to the point of inner continence, so that if someone does not commit adultery in his body it will follow immediately that he does not do so in his heart either. Therefore the circumcision of the inner and the outer man must be understood allegorically as meaning that the inner man should not lust in his heart, nor should the outer man surrender to lust in his body, so that he whom the apostle says is no longer in the flesh but in the Spirit, and who mortifies the deeds of the flesh by the Spirit, may be said to be circumcised in the flesh as well.

It is true that he who has been circumcised has given up a part of his flesh to perdition and kept a part of it unharmed. The part that is lost is, I think, what is referred to in the following text: “All flesh is grass, and all its glory is as the flower of the field.” But the flesh which is retained is, I think, a type of that flesh of which it is said: “All flesh shall see the salvation of God.” It is the task of those ears which can hear to determine which is which. COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.

SPIRIT AND LETTER. HILARY OF POITIERS: The apostle testifies without any hesitation that those who walk according to the teaching of Christ—in the spirit, not in the letter—are the Israel of God. THE TRINITY 5.28.

THE FORESKIN OF YOUR HEART. AMBROSIASTER: It is clear why Paul denies that the circumcision of the flesh has any merit with God. For Abraham was not justified because he was circumcised; rather, he was justified because he believed, and afterward he was circumcised. It is the circumcision of the heart which is praiseworthy before God. To circumcise the heart means to cut out error and recognize the Creator. And because the circumcision of the heart was to come in the future, first Moses said: “Circumcise the hardness of your heart,” and Jeremiah also: “Circumcise the foreskin of your heart.” He said this to Jews who were following idols. For there is a veil over the heart which the one who is converted to God circumcises, because faith removes the cloud of error and grants those who are perfect knowledge of God in the mystery of the Trinity, which was unknown in earlier times. The praise of this circumcision is from God but is hidden to men, for it is the merit of the heart which God looks for, not that of the flesh. But the praise of the Jews is from men, for they glory in the circumcision of the flesh, which comes from their ancestors. COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES.

SETTING ASIDE EXTERNAL OBSERVANCES. CHRYSOSTOM: By saying this Paul sets aside everything which is merely of the body. For the circumcision is external, and so are the sabbaths, the sacrifices and the purifications. … The Gentile who does right is more praiseworthy than the Jew who breaks the law. When this is agreed upon, the circumcision of the flesh must be set aside, and the need for a good life is everywhere demonstrated. HOMILIES ON ROMANS 6.

THE WORKS OF THE LAW. THEODORE OF MOPSUESTIA: “Spiritual” here does not refer to the Holy Spirit. For Paul is not talking about those who have been put right by grace but is referring above all to those outside the faith who do the works of the law and who show themselves to be better than those transgressors who are under the law. PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH.

UNDERSTANDING THE LAW ACCORDING TO THE SPIRIT. AUGUSTINE: This means that the law should be understood according to the Spirit, and not according to what the letter says. This pertains especially to those who have interpreted circumcision more according to the flesh than according to the Spirit. AUGUSTINE ON ROMANS 11.

CIRCUMCISION OF THE HEART. PELAGIUS: This is foretold in the law: “And the Lord your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your offspring, so that you will love the Lord your God,” and again: “Circumcise yourselves to the Lord, and remove the foreskin of your heart,” not according to the letter of the law but according to the New Testament, which examines the inner secrets which only God can see. PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS.