Thomas Aquinas Commentary 2 Corinthians 12:14-19

"Behold, this is the third time I am ready to come to you; and I will not be a burden to you: for I seek not yours, but you: for the children ought not to lay up for the parents, but the parents for the children. And I will most gladly spend and be spent for your souls. If I love you more abundantly, am I loved the less? But be it so, I did not myself burden you; but, being crafty, I caught you with guile. Did I take advantage of you by any one of them whom I have sent unto you? I exhorted Titus, and I sent the brother with him. Did Titus take any advantage of you? walked we not in the same spirit? [walked we] not in the same steps? Ye think all this time that we are excusing ourselves unto you. In the sight of God speak we in Christ. But all things, beloved, [are] for your edifying." — 2 Corinthians 12:14-19 (ASV)

Here, the Apostle shows that he is worthy of commendation for the good things he intends to do. He does three things:

1. He states his resolution concerning the future good he intends to do.
2. He gives the reason for this resolution (verse 14c).
3. He applies a simile to his reason (verse 14d).

Regarding the first point, it should be noted that sometimes people refuse a gift at one time so they can receive a larger one more boldly at a later time. So that the Corinthians would not suppose something like this about the Apostle—namely, that he refused to take anything from them the first time so that he could receive more the second time—he says that he not only did this in the past but is also prepared to do the same in the future. This is why he says, "Here for the third time I am ready to come to you. And I will not be a burden."

It is as if he is saying: Not even then will I burden you by taking what is yours. As Scripture says, So I refrained and will refrain from burdening you in any way (2 Corinthians 11:9), and, I hold fast my righteousness, and will not let it go (Job 27:6).

Paul says he is "ready to come" for a third time, not that he "is coming" for a third time, because although he was prepared to go to them three times, he only went twice. He was prepared to go the first time, and he went, and they were converted. He was ready a second time but was prevented on account of their sin, which is what he apologized for at the beginning of this letter. Now he was ready to go a third time, and he went. Therefore, he went twice but was ready to go three times.

Next, Paul gives the reason for this good resolution when he says, "for I seek not what is yours but you." The reasoning is this: it is clear that an artisan plans his work according to the goal he has in mind. When preachers preach, some intend to gain revenue and temporal goods, and consequently, they arrange and direct all their preaching toward this end. Others intend the salvation of souls, and as a result, they arrange their preaching in whatever way they consider most effective for that salvation.

Therefore, because the Apostle in his preaching aimed at the salvation of the Corinthians—and he saw that it was beneficial to take no payment from them, both to shame the false apostles and because the Corinthians themselves were covetous—he refused to take any. This is why he gives this reason: I will not burden you by taking anything, because through my preaching I do not seek what is yours, but you. Your salvation is what I aim to secure: Not that I seek the gift; but I seek the fruit (Philippians 4:17).

This is why the Lord said to the apostles, I will make you fishers of men (Matthew 4:19), not of money. This is also prefigured in Genesis 47, where we read that Joseph brought the Egyptians into the service of the king, because a good preacher should be focused on converting believers to the service of Christ.

Paul applies a simile to this reasoning when he says, "for children ought not to lay up for their parents, but parents for their children." In this, he does three things:

1. He presents the simile.
2. He applies it (verse 15).
3. He criticizes their ingratitude (verse 15b).

Paul says, therefore, "I do not seek what is yours," and this is made clear by a simile. We observe that natural parents should save for their children, because children ought not to save for their parents, but parents for their children. Therefore, since I am your spiritual father and you are my children, I do not want you to provide for me, but for me to provide for you.

But a question arises here concerning natural parents, for it says in Exodus 20:12, Honor your father and your mother, which includes providing for their needs. Therefore, are children bound to save for their parents? I answer that this precept requires children to provide for and help their parents in their time of need, but not to accumulate and save wealth for them. Saving and accumulating wealth concerns the future.

In the natural order, children succeed their parents, not the other way around, except in some tragic cases. Therefore, the love of parents naturally leads them to save for their children. It is in this sense that the Apostle speaks. In Exodus 20, however, the Lord is speaking about helping parents in a time of necessity.

Another question arises from the statement that children should not save for their parents, but parents for their children. Since prelates are our spiritual fathers, does it seem that princes and others do wrong when they give their wealth to prelates? I answer that they gave wealth to prelates not for the prelates themselves, but for the poor. This is what the Lord teaches: Lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consumes and where thieves do not break in and steal (Matthew 6:20). Therefore, wealth is given to prelates to be distributors to the poor.

Then Paul applies the simile, in which he proposed two things. The first is that children should not save for their parents, which is now clear. The second is that parents should save for and give to their children. Regarding this, he says that because he is their father, he is ready to give to them. This is what he means when he says, "I will most gladly spend" good things on you—not only spiritual goods, by preaching and setting an example, but even temporal goods. He did this, since he preached to them and served them with the financial support of other churches.

Every prelate should provide these three things to his subjects. This is why the Lord said to Peter three times, Feed my sheep (John 21:17)—that is, feed them by word, feed them by example, and feed them by temporal support.

Not only will I give those things to you, he says, but I am ready to die for your salvation. This is why he adds, "and be spent for your souls." As Scripture says, Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends (John 15:13); He laid down his life for us; and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren (1 John 3:16); and, The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep (John 10:11).

Then Paul criticizes their ingratitude when he asks, If I love you the more, am I to be loved the less? It is as if he is saying: I will gladly be spent for you, even though you are ungrateful, because although I love you more, I am loved less. This comparison can be explained in two ways.

First, it can be read this way: although I love you more than the other apostles do, I am loved less by you than the false apostles are, whom you love more than me. Thus it is clear that I love you more than they do, because I seek only your salvation, while they seek only your possessions.

Alternatively, it can be read this way: although I love you more than I love the other churches, I am nevertheless loved less by you than by the other churches. As he says elsewhere, For God is my witness, how I yearn for you all with the affection of Christ Jesus (Philippians 1:8). That he loved the Corinthians more than the other churches is clear from the fact that he worked harder for them, for we love more that for which we labor more.

Then, when Paul says, "But granting that I myself did not burden you," he addresses a potential suspicion. In this section, he does three things:

1. He states the suspicion.
2. He refutes it (verse 17).
3. He gives the reason for the refutation (verse 19).

Their suspicion might be that the reason he did not take anything for himself was so that others could take more from them. Therefore, he says, "But granting"—that is, even if we grant that I myself, in my own person and with those who were with me, did not burden you by taking anything—that, as you believed, "I was crafty and took you in by deceit," meaning, that I took much more of your possessions through other people. But this is false, because he has done nothing by deceit: For our appeal does not spring from error or uncleanness, nor is it made with guile (1 Thessalonians 2:3). For he was an Israelite indeed, in whom there was no guile (John 1:47).

Paul then refutes this suspicion when he asks, Did I take advantage of you through any of those whom I sent to you? He does this first in a general way, and second, in a specific way. Generally, he argues that if he had wanted to take anything from you through others, he would have sent people who could acquire these things. But did he take advantage of them by using his messengers to extort their possessions? It is as if he is saying: No. We have taken advantage of no one (2 Corinthians 7:2); That no man transgress, and wrong his brother in this matter (1 Thessalonians 4:16).

He refutes their suspicion in a specific way when he says, "I urged Titus to go, and sent the brother with him." It is as if he is saying: None of those whom I sent to you took advantage of you. For I sent Titus to you with earnest requests. This is what he means: "I urged Titus to go, and sent the brother with him"—namely, Barnabas or Luke. As it says, With him—namely Titus—we are sending the brother—namely one of those mentioned—who is famous among all the churches for his preaching of the gospel (2 Corinthians 8:18). But did Titus take advantage of you? It is as if he is saying: No. But thanks be to God who puts the same earnest care for you into the heart of Titus (2 Corinthians 8:16).

He proves that Titus did not take advantage of them by showing that Titus was of the same mind as the Apostle, and he mentions two points of similarity. First, in their spirit; this is why he asks, Did we not act in the same spirit?—that is, did we not have the same will? Or, were we not inspired by the same Spirit to act well and correctly? As it is written, Since we have the same spirit of faith as he had who wrote, ‘I believed, and so I spoke,’ we too believe, and so we speak (2 Corinthians 4:13).

Second, he points to their work; this is why he asks, Did we not take the same steps?—that is, were we not committed to the same works? This means walking in the steps of Christ, for Paul walks in the steps of Christ: I have kept his way—namely, Christ’s—and have not turned aside (Job 23:11). And, Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps (1 Peter 2:21). And Titus follows Paul's steps: Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ (1 Corinthians 11:1). Therefore, if Titus agrees with Paul in will and in work, and Paul has not taken advantage of them and does not intend to, the conclusion is clear. That he did not take advantage of them is clear from Matthew 7:16: By their fruits you shall know them.

Then he adds the reason that refutes their opinion. First, he states their opinion; second, he refutes it (verse 19). Their opinion was that the Apostle, as someone guilty and at fault, was writing this entire letter to defend himself, and that his words were not true but were merely invented for his own justification. Therefore, he states their opinion, saying, Have you been thinking all along—that is, from the beginning of this letter—that we have been defending ourselves before you? This implies they thought the words of this letter were not true but were fabricated as an excuse.

But Paul refutes this. A person who makes excuses in that way has two characteristics: one is that he uses fabrications, not true words; the other is that he is unwilling to suffer the loss of reputation and glory. It is especially because of the loss of reputation that such people make excuses. But neither of these is true of the Apostle. Therefore, their opinion is false.

That neither of these is true of Paul is clear, because he does not use false words. He proves this first by God’s testimony, because it is in the sight of God that they are speaking. It is as if he is saying: God is my witness that I speak the truth. Even now, behold, my witness is in heaven (Job 16:19). Second, he proves it by the testimony of Christ, because they have been speaking in Christ—that is, through Christ, in whom there is no falsehood: But as men of sincerity, as commissioned by God, in the sight of God we speak in Christ (2 Corinthians 2:17).

Furthermore, they do not seek their own glory or fear the loss of reputation, because everything Paul has said about his revelations and tribulations, he does or says for their upbuilding—namely, so that they may continue in virtue and expel the false apostles. As it is written, Let us then pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding (Romans 14:19), and, Let all things be done for edification (1 Corinthians 14:26). For, This voice has come for your sake, not for mine (John 12:30).