Albert Barnes Commentary 2 Corinthians 2:6

"Sufficient to such a one is this punishment which was [inflicted] by the many;" — 2 Corinthians 2:6 (ASV)

Sufficient to such a man. The incestuous person who had been removed from the church by Paul's direction. Paul's object here is to have him restored again. For that purpose, he says that the punishment they had inflicted on him was "sufficient." It was:

1. A sufficient expression of the evil of the offense, and of the readiness of the church to preserve itself pure; and
2. It was a sufficient punishment for the offender. It had accomplished all that Paul had desired. It had humbled him and brought him to repentance, and doubtless led him to put away his wife. (Compare with the notes on 1 Corinthians 5:1).

Since that had been done, it was now proper that he should be restored again to the privileges of the church. No evil would result from such a restoration, and their duty to their penitent brother demanded it. Mr. Locke has remarked that Paul handles this subject here with very great tenderness and delicacy.

The entire passage, from 2 Corinthians 2:5–10, relates solely to this offending brother; yet he never once mentions his name, nor does he mention his crime. He speaks of him only in the soft terms of "such a one" and "any one." Nor does he use an epithet that would be calculated to wound his feelings, or to transmit his name to posterity, or to communicate it to other churches.

So, although this epistle would be read by other churches, as Paul doubtless intended, and be transmitted to future times, yet no one would ever be acquainted with the name of the individual. How different this is from the temper of those who would blazon abroad the names of offenders, or make a permanent record to carry them down in dishonor to posterity.

Which was inflicted of many. This means by the church in its collective capacity. (See the notes on 1 Corinthians 5:4).

Paul had required the church to administer this act of discipline, and they had promptly done it. It is evident that the whole church was concerned in the administration of the act of discipline, as the words "of many" (upo twn pleionwn) are not applicable either to a single "bishop," or a single minister, or a presbytery, or a bench of elders; nor can they be regarded as such, except by a forced and unnatural construction.

Paul had directed it to be done by the assembled church (1 Corinthians 5:4), and this phrase shows that they had followed his instructions. Locke supposes that the phrase means, "by the majority;" Macknight renders it, "by the greater number;" Bloomfield supposes that it means that the punishment was carried into effect by all.

Doddridge paraphrases it, "by the whole body of your society." The expression proves beyond a doubt that the whole body of the society was concerned in the act of excommunication, and that this is a proper way of administering discipline. Whether it proves, however, that this is the mode to be observed in all instances, admits of doubt, since the example of the early churches in a particular case does not prove that this mode has the force of a binding rule for all.