John Chrysostom

"But I say, Did not Israel know?" For what if they heard, he means, but did not know what was said, nor understand that these were the persons sent? Are they not to be forgiven for their ignorance? By no means. For Isaiah had described their character in the words, "How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the Gospel of peace." And before him the Lawgiver himself. Hence he proceeds. …

Homily on Romans 18 ↗

Theophylact of Ohrid

I raise again a new objection: if the apostles preached, but the Jews did not understand, do they not deserve to be excused? He resolves this objection as well. They, he says, should have understood that Christ was being preached, if not from anything else, then at least from the honor that the Gentiles were deemed worthy of. They saw that idolaters were suddenly deemed worthy of such blessings, and therefore should have been moved to emulation and concluded that this is the very people of whom Moses spoke. …

Commentary on Romans ↗

Clement of Alexandria

And the same apostle owns that he bears witness to the Jews, "that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. For, being ignorant of God's righteousness, and seeking to establish their own, they have not submitted themselves to the righteousness of God." For they did not know and do the will of the law; but what they supposed, that they thought the law wished. And they did not believe the law as prophesying, but the bare word; and they followed through fear, not through disposition and faith. …

The Stromata Book 2 ↗

Thomas Aquinas

Then when he says, but I say: has not Israel known, he shows that they were inexcusable, because of the knowledge they had from the law and the prophets. First, he raises the question, saying: but I say: has not Israel, i.e., the Jewish people, known the things which pertain to the mystery of Christ and to the calling of the gentiles and the fall of the Jews? …

Commentary on Romans ↗