John Calvin Commentary 2 Corinthians 2

I had written to you. As he had said a little before, that he delayed coming to them so that he might not come a second time in sorrow and with severity (2 Corinthians 2:1), so now he also lets them know that he came the first time in sadness by a letter, that they might not have occasion to feel this severity when he was present with them.

Therefore, they have no ground to complain of that former sadness, in which he desired to promote their welfare. He even goes a step further by stating that, when writing, he did not wish to cause them grief or to give any expression of displeasure, but, on the contrary, to give proof of his attachment and affection towards them. In this way, if there was any degree of keenness in the letter, he does not merely soften it, but even shows graciousness and gentleness.

When, however, he confesses afterwards what he here denies, he appears to contradict himself. I answer that there is no inconsistency, for he does not later confess that it was his ultimate object to grieve the Corinthians, but that this was the means by which he endeavored to lead them to true joy. However, before stating this, he speaks here simply about his design. He passes over in silence, or delays mentioning for a short time, the means which were not so agreeable.

Having confidence. This confidence he exercises towards the Corinthians so that they, in turn, may be persuaded of his friendly disposition. For he who hates is envious; but where joy is shared, there must, in that case, be perfect love. If, however, the Corinthians are not in accordance with Paul’s opinion and judgment concerning them, they shamefully disappoint him.

For out of much affliction here he presents another reason in order to soften the harshness he had employed. For those who smilingly take delight in seeing others weep, since by this they reveal their cruelty, cannot and should not be tolerated. Paul, however, declares that his feeling was very different. “Intensity of grief,” he says, “has extorted from me everything that I have written.”

Who would not excuse, and receive favorably, what springs from such a state of mind, especially as it was not on his own account or through his own fault that he suffered grief? Furthermore, he does not express his grief in order to relieve himself by burdening them, but rather for the purpose of showing his affection for them. For these reasons, it was not fitting for the Corinthians to be offended at this somewhat severe reproof.

He adds tears—which, in a brave and magnanimous man, are a sign of intense grief. Hence we see from what emotions of mind pious and holy admonitions and reproofs must necessarily proceed. For there are many noisy reprovers who, by declaiming, or rather, fulminating against vices, display a surprising ardor of zeal, while meanwhile their minds are at ease, so that it might seem as if they exercised their throat and lungs merely for sport.

It is, however, the mark of a pious pastor to weep within himself before he calls upon others to weep, to feel tortured in silent musings before he shows any sign of displeasure, and to keep within his own heart more grief than he causes to others. We must also take notice of Paul’s tears, which, by their abundance, show tenderness of heart, but it is of a more heroic character than the iron-hearted hardness of the Stoics. For the more tender the affections of love are, they are all the more praiseworthy.

The adverb more abundantly may be explained in a comparative sense; in that case, it would be a tacit complaint that the Corinthians do not make an equal return regarding affection, since they love only coldly one who ardently loves them. I take it, however, in a simpler way, as meaning that Paul commends his affection towards them, so that this assurance may soften any harshness that might be in his words.

But if any one. Here is a third reason to alleviate the offense — that he had grief in common with them, and that the cause of it came from another source. “We have,” he says, “been equally grieved, and another is to blame for it.” At the same time, he speaks of that person, too, somewhat mildly when he says, if any one — not affirming the matter, but rather leaving it in suspense.

This passage, however, is understood by some as if Paul meant to say: “He who has caused me grief, has given offense to you also; for you should have felt grieved along with me, and yet I have been left almost to grieve alone. For I do not wish to say so absolutely — that I may not put the blame upon you all.” In this way, the second clause would contain a correction of the first.

Chrysostom’s interpretation, however, is much more suitable; for he reads it as one continuous sentence — “He has not grieved me alone, but almost all of you. And as to my saying in part, I do so so that I do not bear too hard upon him.” I differ from Chrysostom merely in the clause in part, for I understand it as meaning in some measure. I am aware that Ambrose understands it as meaning — part of the saints, since the Church of the Corinthians was divided; but that is more ingenious than solid.

Sufficient. He now extends kindness even to the man who had sinned more grievously than the others, and on whose account his anger had been kindled against them all, since they had connived at his crime. In his showing indulgence even to one who was deserving of severer punishment, the Corinthians have a striking example to convince them of how much he disliked excessive harshness. It is true that he does not act this way merely for the sake of the Corinthians, but because he was naturally of a forgiving temper; but still, in this instance of mildness, the Corinthians could not help but perceive his remarkable kind disposition. In addition to this, he does not merely show himself indulgent, but exhorts others to receive him into favor, with the same mildness.

Let us, however, consider these things in a little more detail. He refers to the man who had defiled himself by an incestuous marriage with his mother-in-law. As the iniquity was not to be tolerated, Paul had ordered that the man be excommunicated. He had also severely reproved the Corinthians because they had for so long encouraged that enormity by their concealment and tolerance. It appears from this passage that he had been brought to repentance after being admonished by the Church. Therefore, Paul orders that he be forgiven and also supported with consolation.

This passage should be carefully observed, as it shows us with what equity and clemency the discipline of the Church should be regulated, so that there is no undue severity. Strictness is needed, so that the wicked are not made more daring by impunity, which is rightly called an enticement to vice.

But on the other hand, as there is a danger of the person who is chastised becoming discouraged, moderation must be used in this—so that the Church will be prepared to extend forgiveness as soon as it is fully satisfied with his penitence. In this area, I find that the ancient bishops lacked wisdom; and indeed they should not be excused, but on the contrary, we should instead note their error, so that we may learn to avoid it.

Paul is satisfied with the repentance of the offender, so that a reconciliation may take place with the Church. They, on the other hand, by disregarding his repentance, have issued canons regarding repentance for three years, for seven years, and in some cases for life. By these canons, they exclude poor, unhappy men from the fellowship of the Church.

And, in this way, the offender is either further alienated from the Church or is induced to practice hypocrisy. But even if the enactment were more plausible, this consideration would, in my view, be enough to condemn it—that it is contrary to the rule of the Holy Spirit, which the Apostle prescribes here.

Lest such an one should be swallowed up by overmuch sorrow. The purpose of excommunication, regarding its effect on the offender, is this: that, overpowered by a sense of his sin, he might be humbled before God and the Church, and might seek pardon with sincere sorrow for his sin and confession of guilt. The man who has been brought to this state is now more in need of consolation than of severe reproof.

Hence, if you continue to deal with him harshly, it will be — not discipline, but cruel domineering. Hence, we must carefully guard against pushing them beyond this limit.

For nothing is more dangerous than to give Satan a handle to tempt an offender to despair. Indeed, we provide Satan with weapons whenever we leave without consolation those who are genuinely distressed by the awareness of their sin.