Augustine of Hippo : Now Paul says that Christ will profit them nothing if they are circumcised, that is, in the physical way that his opponents wanted, namely, to put their hope of salvation in circumcising their flesh. For Paul himself circumcised Timothy as a young man when he was already a Christian. This he did [to avoid] scandalizing his own people, not at all in dissimulation but from that indifference which made him say "circumcision is nothing, uncircumcision is nothing." For circumcision is no impediment to the one who does not believe that his salvation lies in it. — EPISTLE TO THE Galatians 41 [1B.5.1-3] Jerome : His statement, "I, Paul, say to you," implies that the words are to be accepted not as Paul's alone but as God's. — EPISTLE TO THE Galatians 2.5.2 Jerome : The letter that he wrote to the Romans was addressed to believers from both Jewish and Gentile backgrounds.… But writing to the Galatians he argues differently, since they belonged not to the circumcision party but to the believing Gentiles. — EPISTLE TO THE Galatians 2.5.2 Jerome : (Verse 2.) Behold, I, Paul, say to you: if you are circumcised, Christ will be of no benefit to you. In the Gospel, the Savior speaks to his disciples. Whoever listens to you, listens to me; whoever welcomes you, welcomes me (Luke 10:16). And the Apostle testifies, saying: I live, yet not I, but Christ lives in me (Galatians 2:20); and elsewhere: Do you seek a proof of Christ speaking in me? (2 Corinthians 13:3) From which it is clearly proven what he now says: Behold, I Paul say to you, not as if only Paul's words are to be received, but the Lord's. For when he had already stated in his first letter to the Corinthians: Now to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord (I Cor. 7:10); and immediately added: But to the rest I, not the Lord, say (Ibid., 12), so that his authority would not be considered insignificant: I think, he says, that I also have the spirit of God, so that by speaking in the spirit and in Christ, he who imitates the prophets would not be considered contemptible, saying: Thus says the Lord Almighty. But something greater will be made of what was said: Behold, I Paul say to you: if you are circumcised, Christ profits you nothing, if joined with the law, in which it says: Paul, an apostle not from men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and the rest: so that hearing, they are moved not so much by the authority of the sender as by that of the one who sends. Someone may say: The opposite of what is written in this passage is what is written to the Romans: Circumcision indeed profits, if you keep the law (Rom. II, 25); and below: What, then, is greater for the Jew, or what is the advantage of circumcision? By all means, it is first because the words of God were entrusted to them (Ibid., 1, 2). For if Christ is of no benefit to those who are circumcised, how does circumcision benefit those who keep the Law? This question is solved by this response, namely, that the Epistle written to the Romans is addressed to those who believed from both the Jews and the Gentiles, and Paul did this so that neither group would be offended, so that each people would possess their own privilege, and so that the Gentiles would not be circumcised and the circumcised would not have to be uncircumcised. But when he wrote to the Galatians, he used a different argument. For they were not of circumcision, but from the Gentiles who believed. And circumcision could not profit them who would return to the elements of the Law after the grace of the Gospel. And in the Acts of the Apostles (Acts XV) it narrates the story: when certain men arose from circumcision and asserted that those who believed from the Gentiles must be circumcised and keep the law of Moses, the elders who were in Jerusalem and the apostles gathered together and determined by letters that no yoke of the Law should be imposed on them, nor should they observe any longer except to keep themselves from idols, and from blood, and from fornication, or as it is written in some manuscripts, and from what is strangled. And so that there be no doubt, that circumcision is of no use, but rather, on account of those who believed from the Jews, he tempered his judgment on circumcision to the Romans, gradually descending to the later letters of the Epistles, he showed that neither circumcision nor uncircumcision have any value, saying: Circumcision therefore is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the observation of God's commandments (I Cor. VII, 19). For circumcision is nothing to such an extent that it profited nothing even to the Israelite house boasting of circumcision, as the prophet says: All the uncircumcised nations in flesh, but the house of Israel in uncircumcision of the heart (Ezech. XLIV, 9), and Melchisedec, who was uncircumcised, blessed Abraham who was circumcised. For as it says: If you are circumcised (Gen. XLIV); it is such, as if he wanted to say, if you are circumcised in the flesh. Which in another place he does not call circumcision, but mutilation, saying: See mutilation. For we are the circumcision, who serve God in the spirit, and boast in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh (Philippians III, 2, 3). He does not have confidence in the flesh, who expects all benefit from Christ, and does not sow in the flesh, so as to reap corruption from the flesh; but in the spirit, from which eternal life is generated. A more subtle thought must be considered: If you are circumcised, Christ is of no benefit to you. Not only does circumcision itself not profit those who are circumcised, but even if they seem to have other virtues apart from circumcision in Christ, they will perish completely after having faith in Christ and being circumcised. So what then? Did circumcision profit Timothy nothing? By all means greatly. For he was not circumcised in order to consider that he could obtain any advantage from circumcision itself, but rather to benefit others. A Jew became a Jew in order to convert the Jews to the faith of Christ through their circumcision. However, circumcision is not profitable, since it is considered to bring something of its own usefulness. — Commentary on Galatians John Chrysostom : Lo, what a threat! reasonably then did he anathematize even angels. How then shall Christ profit them nothing? for he has not supported this by argument, but only declared it, the credence due to his authority, compensating, as it were, for all subsequent proof. Wherefore he sets out by saying, "Behold, I Paul say unto you," which is the expression of one who has confidence in what he asserts. We will subjoin what we can ourselves as to how Christ shall profit nothing them who are circumcised. He that is circumcised is circumcised for fear of the Law, and he who fears the Law, distrusts the power of grace, and he who distrusts can receive no benefit from that which is distrusted. Or again thus, he that is circumcised makes the Law of force; but thus considering it to be of force and yet transgressing it in the greater part while keeping it in the lesser, he puts himself again under the curse. But how can he be saved who submits himself to the curse, and repels the liberty which is of Faith? If one may say what seems a paradox, such an one believes neither Christ nor the Law, but stands between them, desiring to benefit both by one and the other, whereas he will reap fruit from neither. Having said that Christ shall profit them nothing, he lays down the proof of it shortly and sententiously. — Homily on Galatians 5 Oecumenius : "Behold, I Paul." He used the authority of the name instead of any proof. "Christ will profit you nothing." Why? Because the one who is circumcised, as is clear, despises the grace of Christ and believes that he will be justified by the law. Therefore he who does not trust in Christ would not even take advantage himself. — Commentary on Galatians Tertullian : Writing also to the Galatians, he inveighs against such men as observed and defend circumcision and the (Mosaic) law. Thus runs Hebion's heresy. — The Prescription Against Heretics Tertullian : Even if, for certain, the apostle had granted pardon of fornication to that Corinthian, it would be another instance of his once for all contravening his own practice to meet the requirement of the time. He circumcised Timotheus alone, and yet did away with circumcision. — On Modesty