John Calvin Commentary 2 Corinthians 3:6

"who also made us sufficient as ministers of a new covenant; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life." — 2 Corinthians 3:6 (ASV)

Who hath made us competent. He had acknowledged himself to be altogether useless. Now he declares that, by the grace of God, he has been qualified for an office for which he was previously unqualified. From this we infer its magnitude and difficulty, as it can be undertaken by no one who has not been previously prepared and fashioned for it by God. It is also the Apostle’s intention to extol the dignity of the gospel. At the same time, there is no doubt that he indirectly exposes the poverty of those who boasted in lofty terms of their endowments, while they were not furnished with even a single drop of heavenly grace.

Not of the letter but of the spirit. He now continues the comparison between the law and the gospel, which he had previously touched upon. It is uncertain, however, whether he was led into this discussion from seeing that there were certain perverse devotees of the law at Corinth, or whether he was prompted by something else to enter upon it.

For my part, as I see no evidence that the false apostles had confounded the law and the gospel there, I am rather of the opinion that his reason was different. Since he was dealing with lifeless declaimers who endeavored to obtain applause through mere empty talk, and since he saw that the ears of the Corinthians were captivated with such glitter, he desired to show them what constituted the chief excellence of the gospel and the chief praise of its ministers.

He makes this excellence and praise consist in the efficacy of the Spirit. A comparison between the law and the gospel was particularly well-suited to demonstrate this point. This, it appears to me, is the reason why he began to discuss it.

However, there is no doubt that by the term letter, he means the Old Testament, just as by the term spirit he means the gospel. For after calling himself a minister of the New Testament, he immediately adds, by way of explanation, that he is a minister of the spirit, and contrasts the letter with the spirit. We must now inquire into the reason for this designation.

The interpretation devised by Origen has become widely circulated—namely, that by the letter we should understand the grammatical and genuine meaning of Scripture, or the literal sense (as they call it), and that by the spirit is meant the allegorical meaning, which is commonly considered to be the spiritual meaning.

Accordingly, for several centuries, nothing was more commonly said or more generally received than this: that Paul here provides us with a key for expounding Scripture by allegories, while nothing is further from his intention.

For by the term letter he means outward preaching that does not reach the heart; and, on the other hand, by spirit he means living doctrine that worketh effectually (1 Thessalonians 2:13) on human minds, through the grace of the Spirit.

By the term letter, therefore, is meant literal preaching—that is, dead and ineffectual preaching, perceived only by the ear. By the term spirit, on the other hand, is meant spiritual doctrine—that is, what is not merely uttered with the mouth, but effectually makes its way to human souls with a living feeling.

For Paul had in mind the passage in Jeremiah, which I quoted a little earlier (Jeremiah 31:31), where the Lord says that His law had been proclaimed merely with the mouth and therefore had been of short duration, because the people did not embrace it in their heart. And He promises the Spirit of regeneration under the reign of Christ to write His gospel (that is, the new covenant) upon their hearts.

Paul now boasts that the accomplishment of that prophecy can be seen in his preaching, so that the Corinthians may perceive how worthless the loquacity of those vain boasters is, who make incessant noise while lacking the efficacy of the Spirit.

It is asked, however, whether God, under the Old Testament, merely spoke externally and did not also speak inwardly to the hearts of the pious by His Spirit. I answer:

1. Paul here considers what belonged distinctively to the law. For although God then worked by His Spirit, that working did not originate from the ministry of Moses but from the grace of Christ, as it is said in John 1:17:

   The law was given by Moses;
   but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

   True, indeed, the grace of God did not lie dormant during all that time, but it is sufficient that it was not a benefit belonging to the law. For Moses had discharged his office when he had delivered the doctrine of life to the people, adding threats and promises. For this reason, he gives the law the name of the letter, because it is in itself a dead preaching; but he calls the gospel spirit, because the ministry of the gospel is living, indeed, lifegiving.

2. These things are not affirmed absolutely concerning either the law or the gospel, but rather in respect of the contrast between the two; for even the gospel is not always spirit. When, however, we compare the two, it is truly and properly affirmed that the nature of the law is to teach people literally, so that it does not reach further than the ear; and that, on the other hand, the nature of the gospel is to teach spiritually, because it is the instrument of Christ’s grace. This depends on the appointment of God, who has deemed it appropriate to manifest the efficacy of His Spirit more clearly in the gospel than in the law, for it is His work exclusively to teach human minds effectually.

When Paul, however, calls himself a Minister of the Spirit, he does not mean by this that the grace of the Holy Spirit and His influence were tied to his preaching, so that he could, whenever he pleased, breathe out the Spirit along with the utterance of his voice. He simply means that Christ blessed his ministry and thus accomplished what was predicted concerning the gospel.

It is one thing for Christ to connect His influence with a person’s doctrine, and quite another for the person’s doctrine to have such efficacy of itself. We are, then, Ministers of the Spirit, not as if we held Him enclosed within us, or captive, as it were—not as if we could at our pleasure confer His grace upon all, or upon whomever we pleased—but because Christ, through our instrumentality, illuminates human minds, renews their hearts, and, in short, regenerates them completely.

It is because of such a connection and bond of union between Christ’s grace and human effort that, in many cases, what belongs exclusively to the Lord is ascribed to the minister. For in that case, we do not look merely to the individual, but to the entire dispensation of the gospel, which consists, on the one hand, of the secret influence of Christ, and, on the other, of human outward efforts.

For the letter killeth. This passage was mistakenly perverted, first by Origen and afterward by others, to a false meaning. From this arose a very pernicious error—that of imagining that the perusal of Scripture would be not merely useless, but even injurious, unless it were drawn out into allegories.

This error was the source of many evils. For not only was liberty allowed for adulterating the genuine meaning of Scripture, but the more audacity anyone had in this manner of acting, the more eminent an interpreter of Scripture he was considered.

Thus, many of the ancients recklessly played with the sacred word of God, as if it were a ball to be tossed to and fro. As a consequence of this, heretics also had greater power to trouble the Church. For since it had become common practice to make any passage mean whatever one might choose, there was no frenzy so absurd or monstrous that could not be brought forward under some pretext of allegory.

Even good men themselves were carried headlong into devising many mistaken opinions, led astray by a fondness for allegory.

The meaning of this passage, however, is as follows: if the word of God is simply uttered with the mouth, it is an occasion of death, and it is lifegiving only when it is received with the heart. The terms letter and spirit, therefore, do not refer to the interpretation of the word, but to its influence and fruit. Why the doctrine merely strikes the ear without reaching the heart, we shall see shortly.