Albert Barnes Commentary 2 Corinthians 2

Introduction to 2 Corinthians Chapter 2

In this chapter, Paul continues the discussion of the subject which had been introduced in the previous chapter. At the close of that chapter, he had stated the reasons why he had not visited the church at Corinth (see 2 Corinthians 1:23, 2 Corinthians 1:24).

The main reason was that instead of coming to them in that disordered and irregular state, he had preferred to send them an affectionate letter. Had he come to them personally, he would have felt himself called on to exercise the severity of discipline. He chose, therefore, to try what the effect would be of a faithful and kind letter.

In this chapter, he continues with the same subject. He states, therefore, in more detail the reason why he had not come to them (2 Corinthians 2:1–5). The reason was that he resolved not to come to them with severity, if he could avoid it; that his heart was pained even by the necessity of sending such a letter; that he wrote it with much anguish of spirit; yet that he cherished the most tender love for them.

In his former letter (1 Corinthians 5), he had directed them to exercise discipline on the offending person in the church. This had been done according to his direction, and the offender had been suitably punished for his offence. He had been excommunicated; and it would seem that the effect on him had been to induce him to forsake his sin, probably to put away his father's wife, and he had become a sincere penitent.

Paul, therefore, in the next place (2 Corinthians 2:6–11), exhorts them to receive him again into fellowship with the church. The punishment, he says, had been sufficient (2 Corinthians 2:6); they ought now to be kind and forgiving to him, lest he should be overwhelmed with his sorrow (2 Corinthians 2:7). He says that he had forgiven him, as far as he was concerned, and he entreated them to do the same (2 Corinthians 2:10); and says that they ought, by all means, to pursue such a course that Satan could get no advantage of them (2 Corinthians 2:11).

Paul then states his disappointment at Troas in not seeing Titus, from whom he had expected to learn the state of the church at Corinth and the reception of his letter there. But not seeing him there, he had gone on to Macedonia (2 Corinthians 2:12–13).

There, it would seem, he met Titus and learned that his letter had had all the success he could have desired. It had been kindly received, and all that he had wished regarding discipline had been performed (2 Corinthians 2:14). Hearing of this success gives him occasion to thank God for it, as one among many instances in which his efforts to advance his cause had been crowned with success.

God had made him everywhere successful and had made him triumph in Christ in every place. This fact gives him occasion (2 Corinthians 2:15–16) to state the general effect of his preaching and his labours. His efforts, he says, were always acceptable to God—though he could not be ignorant that in some cases the gospel which he preached was the occasion of the aggravated condemnation of those who heard and rejected it.

Yet he had the consolation of reflecting that it was by no fault of his (2 Corinthians 2:17). It was not because he had corrupted the word of God; it was not because he was unfaithful; it was not because he was not sincere. He had a good conscience—a conscience which assured him that he spoke in sincerity and as in the sight of God—though the unhappy effect might be that many would perish under his ministry.

But I determined this with myself. I made up my mind on this point; I formed this resolution regarding my course.

That I would not come again to you in heaviness. In grief (en luphē), I would not come, if I could avoid it, in circumstances that must have grieved both me and you. I would not come while there existed among you such irregularities as must have pained my heart and as must have compelled me to resort to such acts of discipline as would be painful to you.

“I resolved, therefore, to endeavour to remove these evils before I came, so that when I did come, my visit might be mutually agreeable to us both. For that reason, I changed my purpose about visiting you when I heard of those disorders and resolved to send a letter. If that should be successful, then the way would be open for an agreeable visit to you.” This verse, therefore, contains the statement of the principal reason why he had not come to them as he had at first proposed. It was really from no fickleness but from love to them and a desire that his visit should be mutually agreeable. (Compare to 2 Corinthians 1:23).

For if I make you sorry. "If, when I came among you, I were called upon to inflict sorrow by punishing your offending brethren with an act of severe discipline as soon as I arrived, who would there be to comfort me except the very people I had caused to grieve? How unprepared they would be to make me happy and comfort me amidst the deep sorrow I would have caused by an act of severe discipline. After such an act—one that would spread sorrow throughout the whole church—how could I expect the comfort I would desire to find among you?"

"The whole church would be filled with grief; and although I might be supported by the sound part of the church, yet my visit would be accompanied by painful circumstances. Therefore, I resolved to remove all cause of difficulty, if possible, before I came, so that my visit might be pleasant for us all."

The idea is that there was such sympathy between him and them—he was so attached to them—that he could not expect to be happy unless they were happy. Although he might be conscious that he was only discharging a duty and that God would sustain him in it, it would nevertheless mar the pleasure of his visit and destroy all his anticipated happiness because of the general grief.

And I wrote this same unto you. The words "this same" (touto auto) refer to what he had written to them in the former letter, particularly to what he had written regarding the incestuous person, requiring them to excommunicate him. Probably the expression also includes the commands in his former letter to reform their conduct in general, and to put away the abuses and evil practices which prevailed in the church there.

Lest, when I came, etc. For fear that I would be obliged, if I came personally, to exercise the severity of discipline, and thus to diffuse sorrow throughout the entire church.

I should have sorrow from them of whom I ought to rejoice. For fear that I would have grief in the church; for fear that the conduct of the church, and the abuses which prevailed in it, would give me sorrow. I would be grieved by the existence of these evils, and I would be obliged to resort to measures that would be painful to me and to the whole church. Paul sought to avoid this by persuading them before he came to exercise the discipline themselves, and to put away the evil practices which prevailed among them.

Having confidence in you all. Having confidence that this is your general character, that whatever adds to my joy, or promotes my happiness, would give joy to you all.

Paul had enemies in Corinth; he knew that there were some there whose minds were alienated from him, and who were endeavoring to do him injury. Yet he did not doubt that it was the general character of the church that they wished him well, and would desire to make him happy; that what would tend to promote his happiness would also promote theirs; and, therefore, that they would be willing to do anything that would make his visit agreeable to him when he came among them.

He was therefore persuaded that if he wrote them an affectionate letter, they would listen to his injunctions, so that in this way all that was painful might be avoided when he came among them.

For out of much affliction. Possibly Paul's enemies had charged him with being harsh and overbearing. They may have said that there was much needless severity in his letter. He here addresses that, and says that it was with much pain and many tears that he was constrained to write as he did. He was pained at their conduct and at the necessity that existed for such an epistle. This is an eminently beautiful instance of Paul's kindness of heart and his susceptibility to tender impressions. The evil conduct of others gives pain to a good person; and the necessity of administering reproof and discipline is often as painful to the one who does it as it is to those who are the subjects of it.

And anguish of heart. The word rendered "anguish" (sunochē) means, properly, a holding together or shutting up; and then pressure, distress, anguish—an affliction of the heart by which one feels tightened or constrained, such a pressure as great grief causes at the heart.

I wrote to you with many tears. With much weeping and grief that I was constrained to write such a letter. This was an instance of Paul's great tenderness of heart—a trait of character which he uniformly demonstrated.

With all his strength of mind, and all his courage and readiness to face danger, Paul was not ashamed to weep, especially if he had any occasion for censuring his Christian brothers or administering discipline (Acts 20:31).

This is also an example of the manner in which Paul addressed the faults of his Christian brothers. It was not with bitter denunciation. It was not with sarcasm and ridicule. It was not by publicizing those faults to others. It was not with a spirit of rejoicing that they had committed errors and had been guilty of sin. It was not as if he was glad of the opportunity to administer rebuke and took pleasure in denunciation and in the language of reproof.

All this is often done by others, but Paul pursued a different course. He sent an affectionate letter to the offenders themselves, and he did it with many tears. IT WAS DONE WEEPING.

Admonition would always be done right if it was done with tears. Discipline would always be right and would be effectual if it were administered with tears.

Anyone will receive an admonition kindly if the one who administers it does it weeping; and the heart of an offender will be melted if the one who attempts to reprove him comes to him with tears.

How happy it would be if all who attempt to reprove would do it with Paul's spirit! How happy if all discipline would be administered in the church in his manner!

But, we may add, how seldom is this done! How few there are who feel themselves called upon to reprove an offending brother, or to charge a brother with heresy or crime, who do it with tears!

Not that you should be grieved. It was not my object to give you pain.

But that you might know the love, etc. This was one of the best proofs of his great love to them which he could possibly give. It is proof of genuine friendship for another when we faithfully and affectionately admonish him of the error of his course; it is the highest proof of affection when we do it with tears. It is cruelty to allow a brother to remain in sin unadmonished; it is cruel to admonish him of it in a harsh, severe, and authoritative tone; but it is proof of tender attachment when we go to him with tears and entreat him to repent and reform. No one gives higher proof of attachment to another than the one who affectionately admonishes him of his sin and danger.

If any have caused grief. There is undoubtedly here an allusion to the incestuous person. But it is very delicately done. He does not mention him by name. There is not anywhere an allusion to his name, nor is it possible now to know it. Is this not a proof that the names of the offending brothers in a church should not be put on the records of sessions, churches, and presbyteries, to be handed down to posterity?

Paul also does not expressly refer to such a person here. He makes his remark general, so that it might be as tender and kind to the offending brother as possible. They would know whom he meant, but they had already punished him, as Paul supposed, enough; and now all that he said regarding him was as tender as possible, and fitted as much as possible to conciliate his feelings and allay his grief. He did not harshly charge him with sin; he did not use any abusive or severe epithets; but he gently insinuates that he “had caused grief”—that he had pained the hearts of his brothers.

He hath not grieved me, but in part. He has not particularly offended or grieved me. He has grieved me only in common with others, and as a part of the church of Christ. All have a common cause of grief, and I have no interest in it that is not common to you all. I am but one of a great number who have felt the deepest concern on account of his conduct.

That I may not overcharge you all. That I may not bear hard (epibarw) on you all; that I may not accuse you all of having caused me grief. The sense is, “Grief has been produced. I, in common with the church, have been pained, and daily pained, by the conduct of the individual referred to, and by that of his abettors and friends. But I would not charge the whole church with it, or seem to bear hard on them, or overcharge them with lack of zeal for their purity, or unwillingness to remove the evil.” They had shown their willingness to correct the evil by promptly removing the offender when he had directed it.

The sense of this verse should be connected with the verse that follows. The idea is that they had promptly administered sufficient discipline, and that they were not now to be charged severely with having neglected it. Even while Paul said he had been pained and grieved, he had found reasons not to bear hard on the whole church, but to be ready to commend them for their promptness in removing the cause of the offense.