John Chrysostom

Next, he sets on foot yet another argument to prove the superiority also from a fresh ground. What then is this argument? That based upon duration, saying, "For if that which passeth away was with glory, much more that which remaineth is in glory." For the one ceased, but the other abideth continually.

Homily 7 on 2 Corinthians ↗

Theophylact of Ohrid

He presents another syllogism. If the law that was ceasing and subject to abolition was given in glory, then how much more shall the law that is unshakeable and eternal – the New Testament – be in glory.

Commentary on 2 Corinthians ↗

Thomas Aquinas

Then he assigns the cause of this when he says, For if what faded away came with glory, what is permanent must have much more glory. His reasoning is thus: that which was given to pass away is nothing in relation to that which is given to remain always. If, therefore, the Old Testament, which is rendered void, is done away with: "But when the perfect comes, the imperfect will pass away" (1 Cor. 13:10). For with glory the ministry of Moses came, at least with a particular glory. …

Commentary on 2 Corinthians ↗