https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/401/815/case.html1.
The very first Congress, at its Second Session, proceeded to implement its power, the Act of March 26, 1790, 1 Stat. 103. That statute, among other things, stated,
"And the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States.
Congress' authority to define these matters was repeatedly affirmed by SCOTUS, including in Rogers v Bellei, 1970, in which cause for revocation of natural born citizenship due to lack of subsequent residency in the US was reaffirmed.
I don't know if that is your paraphrase or not, but a couple comments about it.
The case labeled Bellei a naturalized citizen. Anybody who reads the case will see that. SCOTUS held that Congress had the power to revoke citizenship of a naturalized citizen. The dissent (it was a 5-4 case) argued that Congress power of naturalization is exhausted once it grants citizenship, and that it was unconstitutional to strip naturalized citizen Bellei of his citizenship.
Taking the paraphrase literally, does it strike you as odd that Congress can revoke natural born citizenship? Where does one find THAT power in the constitution? I mean, can Congress write a law that says all citizens born before April 1, 1958, are no longer citizens?