2 corinthians 2 commentary

2 CORITHIAS 2 COMMETARY
Edited by Glenn Pease
1 So I made up my mind that I would not make
another painful visit to you.
1. BARES, But I determined this with myself - I made up my mind on this
point; I formed this resolution in regard to my course.
That I would not come again to you in heaviness - In grief (νηλύπ enēlup). “I
would not come, if I could avoid it, in circumstances which 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 endeavor to remove these evils
before I came, 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 an epistle. 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 it was from love to them, and a desire that
his visit should be mutually agreeable, compare the notes, 2Co_1:23.
2. CLARKE, But I determined this - The apostle continues to give farther
reasons why he did not visit them at the proposed time. Because of the scandals that
were among them he could not see them comfortably; and therefore he determined not
to see them at all till he had reason to believe that those evils were put away.
3. GILL, But I determined with myself,.... The apostle having removed the charge
of levity and inconstancy brought against him, goes on to excuse his delay in coming to
them, and to soften the severity, which some thought too much, he had used in his
former epistle: he determined with himself, he took up a resolution within his own
breast some time ago, says he,
that I would not come again to you in heaviness; that he would not come with
sorrow and heaviness, bewailing their sins not repented of, and by sharp reproofs and
censures, which in such a case would be necessary, be the cause of grief and trouble to
them; wherefore he determined to wait their repentance and amendment before he came
again. The word again, may be connected with the phrase in heaviness; and the sense

be, that in his former epistle, which was a sort of coming to them, he made them heavy
and sorry, by sharply rebuking them for some disorders that were among them; and
since it has been a settled point with him, that he would not come in heaviness again: or
with the word come; and then the meaning is, as his first coming among them was to
the joy of their souls, so it was a determined case with him, that his second coming
should not be with grief, either to them or himself, or both; and this is the true reason
why he had deferred it so long.
4. HERY, In these verses, 1. The apostle proceeds in giving an account of the reason
why he did not come to Corinth, as was expected; namely, because he was unwilling to
grieve them, or be grieved by them, 2Co_2:1, 2Co_2:2. He had determined not to come
to them in heaviness, which yet he would have done had he come and found scandal
among them not duly animadverted upon: this would have been cause of grief both to
him and them, for their sorrow or joy at meeting would have been mutual. If he had
made them sorry, that would have been a sorrow to himself, for there would have been
none to have made him glad. But his desire was to have a cheerful meeting with them,
and not to have it embittered by any unhappy occasion of disagreeing.
5. JAMISO, 2Co_2:1-17. Reason why he had not visited them on his way to
Macedonia; The incestuous person ought now to be forgiven; His anxiety to hear
tidings of their state from Titus, and his joy when at last the good news reaches him.
with myself — in contrast to “you” (2Co_1:23). The same antithesis between Paul
and them appears in 2Co_2:2.
not come again ... in heaviness — “sorrow”; implying that he had already paid
them one visit in sorrow since his coming for the first time to Corinth. At that visit he
had warned them “he would not spare if he should come again” (see on 2Co_13:2;
compare 2Co_12:14; 2Co_13:1). See on Introduction to the first Epistle. The “in
heaviness” implies mutual pain; they grieving him, and he them. Compare 2Co_2:2, “I
make you sorry,” and 2Co_2:5, “If any have caused grief (sorrow).” In this verse he
accounts for having postponed his visit, following up 2Co_1:23.
6. CALVI, But I had determined Whoever it was that divided the chapters, made
here a foolish division. For now at length the Apostle explains, in what manner he
had spared them. “I had determined,” says he, “not to come to you any more in
sorrow,” or in other words, to occasion you sorrow by my coming. For he had come
once by an Epistle, by means of which he had severely pained them. Hence, so long
as they had not repented, he was unwilling to come to them, lest he should be
constrained to grieve them again, when present with them, for he chose rather to
give them longer time for repentance. 311 The word ἔκρινα (I determined) must be
rendered in the pluperfect tense, 312 for, when assigning a reason for the delay that
had occurred, he explains what had been his intention previously.
7. PULPIT COMMETARY, But I determined this. The division of chapters is
here unfortunate, since this and the next three verses belong to the paragraph which
began at 2 Corinthians 1:23. The verb means, literally, I judged, but is rightly
rendered determined, as in 1 Corinthians 2:2; 1 Corinthians 7:37. He is

contrasting his final decision with his original desire, mentioned in 2 Corinthians
1:15. With myself; rather, for myself; as the best course which I could take. That I
would net come again to you in heaviness. The again in the true reading is not
placed immediately before the verb, but it seems (as Theodoret says) to belong to it,
so that the meaning is not that I would not pay you a second sad visit, but that
my second visit to you should not be a sad one. There have been interminable
discussions, founded on this expression and on 2 Corinthians 13:1, as to whether St.
Paul had up to the time of writing this letter visited Corinth twice or only once.
There is no question that only one visit is recorded in the Acts (Acts 18:1-18)
previous to the one which he paid to this Church after this Epistle had been sent
(Acts 20:2, Acts 20:3). If he paid them a second brief, sad, and unrecorded visit, it
can only have been during his long stay in Ephesus (Acts 19:8, Acts 19:10). But the
possibility of this does not seem to be recognized in Acts 20:31, where he speaks of
his work at Ephesus night and day during this period. The assumption of such a
visit, as we shall see, is not necessitated by 2 Corinthians 13:1, but in any case we
know nothing whatever about the details of the visit, even if there was one, and the
question, being supremely unimportant, is hardly worth the time which has been
spent upon it. If he had paid such a visit, it would be almost unaccountable that
there should be no reference to it in the First Epistle, and here in 2 Corinthians 1:19
he refers only to one occasion on which he had preached Christ in Corinth. Each
fresh review of the circumstances convinces me more strongly that the notion of
three visits to Corinth, of which one is unrecorded, is a needless and mistaken
inference, due to unimaginative literalism in interpreting one or two phrases, and
encumbered with difficulties on every side. In heaviness. The expression applies as
much to the Corinthians as to himself, he did not wish his second visit to Corinth to
be a painful one.
8. Alan Redpath writes, “Personally, I would rather have the spiritual gift of bringing life
to one broken heart than the ability to preach a thousand sermons. Indeed, any public
ministry which has not at its heart something of the tenderness which has come because
of the personal experience of what Paul calls “The sufferings of Christ” is lacking in the
one thing that really matters.”
9. REV. F. W. ROBERTSON, M.A.,
He was not one of those who love to be censors of
the faults of others. There are some who are ever finding
fault : a certain appearance of superiority is thereby
gained, for blame implies the power oi scanning from a
height. There are political faultfinders who lament over
the evil of the times, and demagogues who blame every
power that is. There are ecclesiastical faultfinders who can
see no good anywhere in the Church, they can only expose
abuses. There are social faultfinders,, who are ever on the
watch for error, who complain of cant and shams, and who
yet provide no remedy. There are religious faultfinders
who lecture the poor, or form themselves into associations,

in which they rival the inquisitors of old. Now all this was
contrary to the spirit of St. Paul. Charity with him was
not a fine word: it was a part of his very being: he had
that love which thinketh no evil, which re'oiceth not in
iniquity, but in the truth, which beareth, believeth, hopeth
all things. It pained him to inflict the censure which
would give pain to others : i{ to spare you I came not as
yet unto Corinth.
Whenever you find a man trying to believe, and to make others
believe, himself to be necessary to their salvation and progress,
saying, Except ye be circumcised, except ye believe what I
teach, or except I baptize you, ye cannot be saved, there
you have a priest, whether he be called minister, clergy-man,
or layman. But whenever you find a man anxious
and striving to make men independent of himself, yea, in-dependent
of all men ; desiring to help them — not to rest
on his authority, but — to stand on their own faith, not his ;
that they may be elevated, instructed, and educated ; wish-ing
for the blessed time to come when his services shall be
unnecessary, and the prophecy be fulfilled — They shall no
more teach every man his brother, saying, Know ye the
Lord; for all shall know Him from the least to the greatest,
— there you have the Christian minister, the servant, the
helper of your joy.
The second reason St. Paul alleges for not coming to
Corinth is apparently a selfish one : to spare himself pain
And he distinctly says, he had written to pain them, in
order that he might have joy. Very selfish, as at first it
sounds : but if we look closely into it, it only sheds a
brighter and fresher light upon the exquisite unselfishness
and delicacy of St. Paul's character. He desired to save
himself pain, because it gave them pain. He desired joy
for himself, because his joy was theirs. He will not separate
himself from them for a moment : he will not be the
master, and they the school : it is not I and you, but we ;
(i my joy is your joy, as your grief was my grief. And
so knit together are we beloved, — minister and congre-gation
!

2 For if I grieve you, who is left to make me glad
but you whom I have grieved?
1. BARES, For if I make you sorry - “If when I should come among you, I
should be called on to inflict sorrow by punishing your offending brethren by an act of
severe discipline as soon as I came, who would there be to give me comfort but those
very persons whom I had affected with grief? How little prepared would they be to make
me happy, and to comfort me, amidst the deep sorrow which I should have caused by an
act of severe discipline. After such an act - an act that would spread sorrow through the
whole church, how could I expect that comfort which I should desire to find among you.
The whole church would be affected with grief; and though I might be sustained by the
sound part of the church, yet my visit would be attended with painful circumstances. I
resolved, therefore, to remove all cause of difficulty, if possible, before I came, that my
visit might be pleasant to us all.” The idea is, that there was such a sympathy between
him and them; that he was so attached to them, that he could not expect to be happy
unless they were happy; that though he might be conscious he was only discharging a
duty, and that God would sustain him in it, yet that it would mar the pleasure of his visit,
and destroy all his anticipated happiness by the general grief.
2. CLARKE, For if I make you sorry - Should he have come and used his
apostolical authority, in inflicting punishment upon the transgressors, this would have
been a common cause of distress. And though he might expect that the sound part of the
Church would be a cause of consolation to him, yet as all would be overwhelmed with
trouble at the punishment of the transgressors, he could not rejoice to see those whom
he loved in distress.
3. GILL, For if I make you sorry,.... That is, should he come among them, and be
the means of fresh grief and sorrow:
who is he then that maketh me glad? such was his love and affection for them, and
sympathy with them, that should they be grieved, he should grieve also; they were the
only persons he could take any delight in at Corinth; wherefore should they be in
heaviness, he would be so too, and then what pleasure would he have in being among
them? since not a man of them would be in a condition and capacity to make him
cheerful:
but the same which is made sorry by me. The Ethiopic version without any
authority reads this clause, except he whom I have made glad; but the apostle is to be
understood either of some particular man, the incestuous person, who had been made
sorry, by that awful punishment of being delivered up to Satan, inflicted on him; or else
the singular number being put for the plural collectively, is to be understood of all the
members of the church at Corinth, who had been greatly grieved by the sharp reproofs
he had given them; and therefore unless this trouble was removed, he could not expect

to have much comfort and pleasure with them.
4. BI, Gladness for sadness
I. Self-improvement is preceded by dissatisfaction with self. This is true of all self-improvement.
We find it so in education. And other things being equal, that child will
learn most rapidly who is most sorry when it cannot master its task. The same statement
applies to improvement in mechanical skill and in so-called ornate accomplishments.
Certainly there is desire to excel, but that implies dissatisfaction with present
attainments. The principle is equally applicable in the moral and spiritual sphere. In this
sphere there can be no upward progress without repentance. Search for a new master in
this realm presupposes dissatisfaction with the old. There is a discontent that is
praiseworthy. A passing reference to the other side of the same truth will more clearly
show this principle. Arid the other side is—He rarely makes any advancement who is
opinionated, self-satisfied. Men have to be roused out of their contentment.
II. The “sorrow” of the pupil is the “gladness” of the teacher—provided, of course, that
the “sorrow” of the scholar be in connection with the teacher’s special function. Failure,
through waywardness to do right, always brings “sorrow” to the partially educated child.
But as often as the child manifests “sorrow” at its failure, just as often is its mother made
“glad.” And the highest “gladness” which the Christian teacher knows comes not through
him who passes an eulogium upon his sermons, but from him whom the sermons have
made “sorry” on account of sin. (J. S. Swan.)
5. JAMISO, For — proof that he shrinks from causing them sorrow (“heaviness”).
if I — The “I” is emphatic. Some detractor may say that this (2Co_2:1) is not my
reason for not coming as I proposed; since I showed no scruple in causing “heaviness,”
or sorrow, in my Epistle (the first Epistle to the Corinthians). But I answer, If I be the
one to cause you sorrow, it is not that I have any pleasure in doing so. Nay, my object
was that he “who was made sorry by me” (namely, the Corinthians in general, 2Co_2:3;
but with tacit reference to the incestuous person in particular) should repent, and so
“make me glad,” as has actually taken place; “for ... who is he then that?” etc.
6. CALVI, For if I make you sorry Here we have the proof of the foregoing
statement. o one willingly occasions sorrow to himself. ow Paul says, that he has
such a fellow-feeling with the Corinthians, 313 that he cannot feel joyful, unless he
sees them happy. ay more, he declares that they were the source and the authors of
his joy — which they could not be, if they were themselves sorrowful. If this
disposition prevail in pastors, it will be the best restraint, to keep them back from
alarming with terrors those minds, which they ought rather to have encouraged by
means of a cheerful affability. For from this arises an excessively morose harshness
314 — so that we do not rejoice in the welfare of the Church, as were becoming.
7. PULPIT COMMETARY, For if I make you sorry. The verse may be rendered.
For if I pain you, who then is it that gladdens me except he who is being pained by
me? The I being expressed in the original, is emphatic, and the verse has none of
the strange selfish meaning which has been assigned to it, namely, that St. Paul
thought the grief which he had caused to be amply compensated for by the

pleasure he received from that grief. It has the much simpler meaning that he was
unwilling to pain those who gladdened him, and therefore would not pay them a
visit which could only be painful on both sides, when the normal relation between
them should be one of joy on both sides, as he has already said (2 Corinthians 1:24).
The singular, he who is being pained by me, does not refer to the offender, but to
the Corinthians collectively. Who is he then, etc.? The then in the original is
classically and elegantly expressed by καὶ, and (comp. James 2:4).
3 I wrote as I did, so that when I came I would not
be distressed by those who should have made me
rejoice. I had confidence in all of you, that you
would all share my joy.
1. BARES, And I wrote this same unto you - The words “this same” (τοτο
ατ (toutoauto) refer to what he had written to them in the former Epistle, particularly
to what he had written in regard to the incestuous person, requiring them to
excommunicate him. Probably the expression also includes the commands in his former
Epistle 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 ... - Lest I should 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 - Lest I should
have grief in the church. Lest the conduct of the church, and the abuses which prevail in
it should give me sorrow. I should be grieved with the existence of these evils; and I
should be obliged to resort to measures which 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, that thus all that was painful might be avoided when he came among them.
2. CLARKE, And I wrote this same unto you - This I particularly marked in my

first epistle to you; earnestly desiring your reformation, lest, if I came before this had
taken place, I must have come with a rod, and have inflicted punishment on the
transgressors. See 1Co_5:1-13.
My joy is the joy of you all - I know that ye wish my comfort as much as I wish
yours.
3. GILL, And I wrote this same unto you,.... Not what he had written in the
preceding verse, or in 2Co_1:23, where he says, that his not coming to them as yet was to
spare them; but what he had written to them in his former epistle, concerning the
excommunication of the incestuous man, which had so much grieved both him and
them; and this the apostle chose rather to order by writing, than in person; hoping to
hear of their repentance and amendment, before he came among them:
lest, says he,
when I came, or should come,
I should have sorrow from them of whom I ought to rejoice; some copies and
the Complutensian edition read, sorrow upon sorrow; and so does the Vulgate Latin
version, which seems to be transcribed from Phi_2:27, that is, he took this method of
sending a reproving letter, in order to bring them to a sense and acknowledgment of sin;
lest should he come in person, some would have been a grief and trouble to him, having
fallen into sin not repented of; who ought to have been matter of rejoicing to him, as
being the seals of his apostleship, and his work in the Lord: and this step he was the
more encouraged to take, through the confidence he had of them,
having confidence in you all; being fully persuaded of their affection for him, and
opinion of him:
that my joy is the joy of you all; that their joy and grief were mutual and common;
that what he rejoiced in, they did likewise; and what was displeasing to him was
displeasing to them; and therefore upon the first hint given, he took care to remove the
occasion of such displeasure, that their mutual comfort might take place; assuring them,
and of which they might be assured, that it was no joy to him to grieve them; he could
have none when theirs was gone; his ultimate view in writing to them in the manner he
had, was not to grieve, but to bring them to repentance and reformation, which issued in
the mutual joy of him and them.
4. HERY, He tells them it was to the same intent that he wrote his former epistle,
2Co_2:3, 2Co_2:4. (1) That he might not have sorrow from those of whom he ought to
rejoice; and that he had written to them in confidence of their doing what was requisite,
in order to their benefit and his comfort. The particular thing referred to, as appears by
the following verses, was the case of the incestuous person about whom he had written
in the first epistle, ch. 5. Nor was the apostle disappointed in his expectation. (2.) He
assures them that he did not design to grieve them, but to testify his love to them, and
that he wrote to them with much anguish and affliction in his own heart, and with great
affection to them. He had written with tears, that they might know his abundant love to
them. Note, [1.] Even in reproofs, admonitions, and acts of discipline, faithful ministers
show their love. [2.] Needful censures, and the exercise of church-discipline towards

offenders, are a grief to tender-spirited ministers, and are administered with regret.
5. JAMISO, I wrote this same unto you — namely, that I would not come to
you then (2Co_2:1), as, if I were to come then, it would have to be “in heaviness”
(causing sorrow both to him and them, owing to their impenitent state). He refers to the
first Epistle (compare 1Co_16:7; compare 1Co_4:19, 1Co_4:21; 1Co_5:2-7, 1Co_5:13).
sorrow from them of whom I ought to rejoice — that is, sorrow from their
impenitence, when he ought, on the contrary, to have joy from their penitent obedience.
The latter happy effect was produced by his first Epistle, whereas the former would have
been the result, had he then visited them as he had originally proposed.
having confidence ... that my joy is the joy of you all — trusting that you, too,
would feel that there was sufficient reason for the postponement, if it interfered with our
mutual joy [Alford]. The communion of saints, he feels confident in them “ALL” (his
charity overlooking, for the moment the small section of his detractors at Corinth, 1Co_
13:7), will make his joy (2Co_2:2) their joy.
6. CALVI, I had written to you. As he had said a little before, that he delayed
coming to them, in order that he might not come a second time in sorrow and with
severity, (2 Corinthians 2:1,) so now also he lets them know, that he came the first
time in sadness by an Epistle, that they might not have occasion to feel this severity
when he was present with them. Hence they have no ground to complain of that
former sadness, in which he was desirous to consult their welfare. He goes even a
step farther, by stating that, when writing, he did not wish to occasion 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 Epistle, he does not merely soften it, but even shows amiableness
and suavity. 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 come afterwards to confess, that it was his ultimate object to grieve the
Corinthians, but that this was the means, by which he endeavored to conduct them
to true joy. Previously, however, to his stating this, he speaks here simply as to his
design. He passes over in silence, or delays mentioning for a little the means, which
were not so agreeable.
Having confidence This confidence he exercises towards the Corinthians, that they
may thus in their turn be persuaded of his friendly disposition. For he that hates, is
envious; but where joy is felt in common, there must in that case be perfect love. 315
If, however, the Corinthians are not in accordance with Paul’s opinion and
judgment as to them, they shamefully disappoint him.
7. PULPIT COMMETARY, And I wrote this same unto you. And I wrote. He
meets the tacit objection. If you shrink from causing us pain, why then did you write
to us in terms so severe? The I wrote may be what is called the epistolary aorist,
and will then be equivalent to our I write: What I write to you now has the very
object of sparing you a painful visit. If the aorist has its more ordinary sense, it

refers to the First, and not to the present Epistle; and this seems the better view, for
the I wrote in 2 Corinthians 2:9 certainly refers to the First Epistle. This same
thing; namely, exactly what I have written (whether in this or in the former Epistle).
The words, this very thing, may also, in the original, menu for this very reason,
as in 2 Peter 1:5, and like the εἰς τοῦτο in 2 Peter 1:9. Unto you. These words should
be omitted, with א, A, B, C. When I came. The emphasis lies in these words. He
preferred that his letter, rather than his personal visit, should cause pain. In you all.
It is true that in the Corinthian Church St. Paul had bitter and unscrupulous
opponents, but he will not believe even that they desired his personal unhappiness.
At any rate, if there were any such, he will net believe that they exist, since love
believeth all things, hopeth all things (1 Corinthians 13:7).
8. HOMILIES BY J.R. THOMSO
2 Corinthians 2:3, 2 Corinthians 2:4
Sympathy in grief and joy.
How far from a formal or mechanical ministry was that of the apostle! He entered
into the circumstances and the feelings of those for whom he had laboured. othing
which affected their interests was indifferent to him. Some in his position would
have said, We have done our duty; it is no affair of ours how they act; why should
we trouble ourselves regarding them? ot so St. Paul. When the Corinthians acted
unworthily, his sensitive heart was distressed; when they repented, that heart
bounded with joy. This was not altogether the effect of natural temperament; it was
the fruit of true fellowship of spirit with his Lord.
I. THE SPIRIT OF SYMPATHY IS THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST AD OF
CHRISTIAITY. In the earthly life of our Saviour we behold evidences of this
spirit. He rejoiced in men's joys; he wept by the grave of his friend; he sighed and
groaned when he met with instances of unspirituality and unbelief. It was pity
which brought him first to earth and then to the cross of Calvary. Similarly with the
precepts of the ew Testament. The lesson is often virtually repeated, Rejoice with
those who do rejoice, and weep with those who weep.
II. THE SPIRIT OF SYMPATHY IS SOMETIMES THE OCCASIO OF
SORROW.
1. The spectacle of a professing Christian falling into sin awakens commiseration
and distress in the mind of every true follower of Christ.
2. The spectacle of a Christian conniving at sin, or regarding it with comparative
unconcern, is painful in the extreme to one solicitous for Christian purity.
3. Sorrow, from whatever cause, awakens sorrow in a mind sensitive as was that of
Paul.

III. THE SPIRIT OF SYMPATHY IS SOMETIMES THE OCCASIO OF JOY.
Even amidst personal difficulties and opposition encountered in his ministry Paul
was not indifferent to the joys of his converts. And when those whose conduct had
pained him came to a better mind and afforded him satisfaction, he rejoiced with
them in their happiness. If there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one
sinner that repenteth, surely he most resembles the Father of spirits and his
immediate attendants whose heart is lifted up with exhilaration and delight by
anything that manifests the growth and victory of the Divine kingdom upon earth.—
T.
4 For I wrote you out of great distress and
anguish of heart and with many tears, not to
grieve you but to let you know the depth of my
love for you.
1. BARES, 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 meets 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 which 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 man; and the necessity of
administering reproof and discipline is often as painful to him who does it, as it is to
those who are the subjects of it.
And anguish of heart - The word rendered “anguish” (συνοχ 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 unto 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 evinced. With all his strength of mind,
and all His courage and readiness to face danger, Paul was not ashamed to weep; and
especially if he had any occasion of censuring his Christian brethren, or administering
discipline; compare Phi_3:18; Act_20:31. This is also a specimen of the manner in which
Paul met the faults of his Christian brethren. It was not with bitter denunciation. It was
not with sarcasm and ridicule. It was not by emblazoning those faults abroad to others.
It was not with the 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 of administering 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. Any man will receive an
admonition kindly, if he who administers it does it weeping; and the heart of an offender
will be melted, if he who attempts to reprove him comes to him with tears. How happy
would it be if all who attempt to reprove should do it with Paul’s spirit. How happy, if all
discipline should be administered in the church in his manner. But, we may add, how
seldom is this done! How few are there who feel themselves called on to reprove an
offending brother, or to charge a brother with heresy or crime, that do it with tears!
Not that ye should be grieved - It was not my object to give you pain.
But that ye might know the love ... - This was one of the best evidences 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 suffer 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 he who affectionately admonishes him of his sin and danger.
2. CLARKE, For out of much affliction, etc. - It is very likely that the apostle’s
enemies had represented him as a harsh, austere, authoritative man; who was better
pleased with inflicting wounds than in healing them. But he vindicates himself from this
charge by solemnly asserting that this was the most painful part of his office; and that
the writing of his first epistle to them cost him much affliction and anguish of heart, and
many tears.
3. GILL, For out of much affliction and anguish of heart,.... Being greatly
pressed in his spirit, and grieved at his heart, for the abominable iniquities among them,
which they seemed to take no notice of, and to be unconcerned about, yea, rather to be
puffed up with:
I wrote to you with many tears; as signs and expressions of, and by which were
vented, the inward anguish and distress of his soul; and the letter he sent to them in
some measure bore witness to it: which was written,
not that you should be grieved; that is, not merely for the sake of grieving of them,
in which he took no pleasure; not but that the apostle designed and desired to affect
their minds with a holy grief and godly sorrow for sin, and hereby their amendment; but
his chief view was, next to their spiritual good, and God's glory, to express the greatness
of his love to them: as he says,
that ye might know the love which I have more abundantly unto you; as his
love was very vehement towards them, he was desirous they should know it, and how
exceeding abundant it was; and that it was even greater towards them, than to others;
and he thought he could not give a greater proof and evidence of it, than by reproving

them faithfully, and that sharply too, as the necessity of the case required.
4. RWP, Anguish (sunochēs). Ablative case after ek (out of). Old word from
sunechō, to hold together. So contraction of heart (Cicero, contractio animi), a spiritual
angina pectoris. In N.T. only here and Luk_21:25.
With many tears (diapollōndakruōn). He dictated that letter “through tears”
(accompanied by tears). Paul was a man of heart. He writes to the Philippians with
weeping (klaiōn) over the enemies of the Cross of Christ (Phi_3:18). He twice mentions
his tears in his speech at Miletus (Act_20:19-31).
But that ye might know the love (allatēnagapēnhinagnōte). Proleptic position of
agapēn and ingressive second aorist active subjunctive gnōte, come to know.
5. JAMISO, So far from my change of purpose being due to “lightness” (2Co_
1:17), I wrote my letter to you (2Co_2:3) “out of much affliction (Greek, ‘trouble’) and
anguish of heart, and with many tears.”
not that ye should be grieved — Translate, “be made sorry,” to accord with the
translation, 2Co_2:2. My ultimate and main object was, “not that ye might be made
sorry,” but that through sorrow you might be led to repentance, and so to joy,
redounding both to you and me (2Co_2:2, 2Co_2:3). I made you sorry before going to
you, that when I went it might not be necessary. He is easily made sorry, who is
admonished by a friend himself weeping [Bengel].
that ye might know the love — of which it is a proof to rebuke sins openly and in
season [Estius], (Psa_141:5; Pro_27:6). “Love” is the source from which sincere reproof
springs; that the Corinthians might ultimately recognize this as his motive, was the
apostle’s aim.
which I have more abundantly unto you — who have been particularly
committed to me by God (Act_18:10; 1Co_4:15; 1Co_9:2).
6. CALVI, For out of much affliction Here he brings forward another reason
with the view of softening the harshness which he had employed. For those who
smilingly take delight in seeing others weep, inasmuch as they discover thereby their
cruelty, cannot and ought not to be borne with. Paul, however, declares that his
feeling was very different. “Intensity of grief,” says he, “has extorted from me every
thing that I have written.” Who would not excuse, and take in good part what
springs from such a temper of mind, more especially as it was not on his own
account or through his own fault, that he suffered grief, and farther, he does not
give vent to his grief, with the view of lightning himself by burdening them, but
rather, for the purpose of shewing his affection for them? On these accounts, it did
not become the Corinthians to be offended at this somewhat severe reproof.
He adds, tears — which, in a man that is brave and magnanimous are a token of
intense grief. Hence we see, from what emotions of mind pious and holy admonitions
and reproofs must of necessity proceed. For there are many noisy reprovers, who,

by declaiming, or rather, fulminating against vices, display a surprising ardour of
zeal, while in the mean time they are at ease in their mind, 316 so that it might seem
as if they exercised their throat and sides 317 by way of sport. It is, however, the
part of a pious pastor, to weep within himself, before he calls upon others to weep:
318 to feel tortured in silent musings, before he shows any token of displeasure; and
to keep within his own breast more grief, than he causes to others. We must, also,
take notice of Paul’s tears, which, by their abundance, shew tenderness of heart, but
it is of a more heroical character than was the iron-hearted hardness of the Stoics.
319 For the more tender the affections of love are, they are so much the more
praiseworthy.
The adverb more abundantly may be explained in a comparative sense; and, in that
case, it would be a tacit complaint — that the Corinthians do not make an equal
return in respect of affection, inasmuch as they love but coldly one by whom they
are ardently loved. I take it, however, in a more simple way, as meaning that Paul
commends his affection towards them, in order that this assurance may soften down
every thing of harshness that might be in his words.
7. PULPIT COMMETARY, For. He proceeds to assign the anguish which his
First Epistle had caused him as a proof of his confidence that, as a body, they loved
him as he loved them. If they had regarded each other with indifference, his letter
would not have been written to them, as it were. in his heart's blood. Out of much
affliction and anguish of heart. The word for anguish means contraction,
pressure, spasm (Luke 21:25). The expression may seem far too strong to be
accounted for by the tone of the first letter. Hence some have supposed that he is
referring to some other letter now last; and others that ch. 10-13. of this letter,
where the whole tone of affection and tenderness suddenly changes into one of
impassioned irony and indignation, really belonged to this intermediate letter. There
is no need, however, for these hypotheses. In 1Co 5:1-6:11 he had spoken of the
errors of the Church with strong reprobation, and the anguish with which he wrote
the letter may have been all the more deeply felt because, in expressing it, he put on
his feelings a strong restraint. With many tears. I wrote out of anguish, and that
anguish showed itself through the tears which bathed my cheeks as I wrote. Such
tears, says Calvin, show weakness, but a weakness more heroic than would have
been the iron apathy of a Stoic. It must, however, be remembered that, in ancient
times, and in Southern and Eastern lands, men yielded to tears more readily than
among orthern nations, who take pride in suppressing as far as possible all
outward signs of emotion. In Homer the bravest heroes do not blush to weep in
public, and the nervous, afflicted temperament of St. Paul seems to have been often
overwhelmed with weeping (Acts 20:19, Acts 20:31; 2 Timothy 1:4). ot that ye
should be grieved. The not, by a common Hebrew idiom, means not only, not
exclusively. His object in inflicting pain was not the pain itself, but the results of
godly repentance which it produced (2 Corinthians 7:11). The love. In the Greek
this word is placed very emphatically at the beginning of the clause. More
abundantly. I loved you more than I loved other converts, and the abundance of my
love will give you a measure of the pain I felt. The Philippians were St. Paul's best-beloved
converts; but next to them he seems to have felt more personal tenderness

for the members of this inflated, wayward, erring Church than for any other
community, just as a father sometimes loves best his least-deserving son. There was
something in the brightness and keenness of the Greek nature which won over St.
Paul, in spite of its many faults.
8. HOMILIES BY J.R. THOMSO
2 Corinthians 2:3, 2 Corinthians 2:4
Sympathy in grief and joy.
How far from a formal or mechanical ministry was that of the apostle! He entered
into the circumstances and the feelings of those for whom he had laboured. othing
which affected their interests was indifferent to him. Some in his position would
have said, We have done our duty; it is no affair of ours how they act; why should
we trouble ourselves regarding them? ot so St. Paul. When the Corinthians acted
unworthily, his sensitive heart was distressed; when they repented, that heart
bounded with joy. This was not altogether the effect of natural temperament; it was
the fruit of true fellowship of spirit with his Lord.
I. THE SPIRIT OF SYMPATHY IS THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST AD OF
CHRISTIAITY. In the earthly life of our Saviour we behold evidences of this
spirit. He rejoiced in men's joys; he wept by the grave of his friend; he sighed and
groaned when he met with instances of unspirituality and unbelief. It was pity
which brought him first to earth and then to the cross of Calvary. Similarly with the
precepts of the ew Testament. The lesson is often virtually repeated, Rejoice with
those who do rejoice, and weep with those who weep.
II. THE SPIRIT OF SYMPATHY IS SOMETIMES THE OCCASIO OF
SORROW.
1. The spectacle of a professing Christian falling into sin awakens commiseration
and distress in the mind of every true follower of Christ.
2. The spectacle of a Christian conniving at sin, or regarding it with comparative
unconcern, is painful in the extreme to one solicitous for Christian purity.
3. Sorrow, from whatever cause, awakens sorrow in a mind sensitive as was that of
Paul.
III. THE SPIRIT OF SYMPATHY IS SOMETIMES THE OCCASIO OF JOY.
Even amidst personal difficulties and opposition encountered in his ministry Paul
was not indifferent to the joys of his converts. And when those whose conduct had
pained him came to a better mind and afforded him satisfaction, he rejoiced with
them in their happiness. If there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one
sinner that repenteth, surely he most resembles the Father of spirits and his

immediate attendants whose heart is lifted up with exhilaration and delight by
anything that manifests the growth and victory of the Divine kingdom upon earth.—
T.
Forgiveness for the Offender
5 If anyone has caused grief, he has not so much
grieved me as he has grieved all of you to some
extent—not to put it too severely.
1. BARES, If any have caused grief - There is doubtless 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 brethren in a church should not be put on
the records of sessions, and churches, and presbyteries, to be handed down to posterity?
Paul does not here either expressly refer to such a person. He makes his remark general,
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 note all that he said in regard to him was as tender as possible, and suited, 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;” he had pained the hearts of his brethren.
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 common cause of grief; and I have no interest in it which 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 (πιβαρ' epibarō)
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 deeply pained,
with the conduct of the individual referred to; and with 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; and 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 seen occasion not to bear hard on the whole
church, but to be ready to commend them for their promptness in removing the cause of

the offence.
2. CLARKE, But, if any have caused grief - Here he seems to refer particularly
to the cause of the incestuous person.
Grieved me, but in part - I cannot help thinking that the εκμερους and απομερους,
which we render in part, and which the apostle uses so frequently in these epistles, are to
be referred to the people. A part of them had acknowledged the apostle, 2Co_1:14; and
here, a part of them had given him cause of grief; and therefore he immediately adds,
that I may not overcharge you all; as only a part of you has put me to pain, (viz. the
transgressor, and those who had taken his part), it would be unreasonable that I should
load you all, επιβαρωπαντας.μας, with the blame which attaches to that party alone.
3. GILL, But if any have caused grief,.... The incestuous person is here manifestly
designed, though he is not named, who had been the cause and occasion of much grief
and sorrow, both to himself and others; for the apostle is not to be understood, as
though he doubted whether he had caused grief or not, but rather takes it for granted, as
a certain point; if, seeing, or although he has caused grief:
he hath not grieved me but in part; or in some measure; as it has reflected
dishonour on God and his ways, truths and ordinances; and has brought trouble upon
himself, and the church of which he is a member; for the apostle now rejoiced, that he
was truly humbled for his sin, and sincerely, and in an evangelical manner, repented of
it; his grief was over, and it was as if it was not; and the offence he took was now wholly
removed: besides, though this man did grieve him, it was but in part; he was not the sole
cause of his grief: they also greatly added to it by their unconcernedness of him, and
negligence in reproving him, though he takes notice only of this single man:
that I may not overcharge you all; bear hard upon them, aggravate their sin, and
increase their trouble: or thus, that man has not grieved me only, but in some measure
all of you; for the phrase all you, may be considered, not in connection with the word
overcharge, but with the word grieved; and the reading and sense of the whole be
this, he hath not grieved me, but in part, or in some measure; or as the Syriac reads it,
לכלכון קליל בציר , almost all of you: but this, as if he should say, I do but just mention,
would not dwell upon it, that I may not overcharge him, or be thought to be
overbearing, or should aggravate his sin and sorrow: for,
4. HERY, In these verses the apostle treats concerning the incestuous person who
had been excommunicated, which seems to be one principal cause of his writing this
epistle. Here observe, 1. He tells them that the crime of that person had grieved him in
part; and that he was grieved also with a part of them, who, notwithstanding this
scandal had been found among them, were puffed up and had not mourned, 1Co_5:2.
However, he was unwilling to lay too heavy a charge upon the whole church, especially
seeing they had cleared themselves in that matter by observing the directions he had
formerly given them. 2. He tells them that the punishment which had been inflicted
upon this offender was sufficient, 2Co_2:6. The desired effect was obtained, for the man
was humbled, and they had shown the proof of their obedience to his directions.

5. JAMISO, grief ... grieved — Translate as before, “sorrow ... made sorry.” The
“any” is a delicate way of referring to the incestuous person.
not ... me, but in part — He has grieved me only in part (compare 2Co_1:14; Rom_
11:25), that is, I am not the sole party aggrieved; most of you, also, were aggrieved.
that I may not overcharge — that I may not unduly lay the weight of the charge on
you all, which I should do, if I made myself to be the sole party aggrieved. Alford
punctuates, “He hath not made sorry me, but in part (that I press not too heavily;
namely, on him) you all.” Thus “you all” is in contrast to “me”; and “in part” is explained
in the parenthetical clause.
5B. F. W. ROBERTSON, It was not to pain them merely, that he
wrote, but because joy, deep and permanent, was impos-sible
without pain; as the extraction of a thorn by a tender
father gives a deeper joy in love to the child. It was
not to inflict sorrow, ie not that ye should be grieved, but
that ye might know the love which I have more abun-dantly
unto you. Again, it was not to save himself pain
merely, that he did not come, but to save them that pain
which would have given him pain. Here there is a canon
for the difficult duty and right, of blame. When, — to what
extent, — how, — shall we discharge that difficult duty, so
rarely done with gracefulness ? To blame is easy enough,
with some it is all of a piece with the hardness of their
temperament; but to do this delicately — how shall we learn
that ? I answer, Love ! and then say what you will ; men
will bear anything if love be there. If not, all blame,
however just, will miss its mark; and St. Paul showed this
in the fourth verse, where love lies at the root of his
censure. Nothing but love can teach us how to understand
such a sentence as this from a higher Heart than his —
He looked round about Him in anger, being grieved at
the hardness of their hearts.
5B. PULPIT COMMENTARY, But if any have caused grief. The word pain or grief
which has been so prominent in the last verses, naturally reminds St. Paul of the person
whose misdoings had caused all this trouble. The any is in the singular. He hath not
grieved me, but in part, etc. Of the various ways of taking this verse, the most tenable
seems to be this: If any one has caused pain, he has not pained me but partly (not to
weigh down too heavily) all of you. St. Paul is denying that the feelings with which he hat
community (2 Corinthians 7:11). The phrase, that I press not too heavily, refers then to
the offender: I will not say outright that he has grieved not me, but all of you, because I
do not wish to bear too hard on him, but I will say that he has grieved you and me alike
to some extent. The phrase, in part, occurs also in Romans 11:25.

6. BI 5-11, The aim of Church discipline
is in the last resort the restoration of the fallen.
The Church has, of course, an interest of its own to guard i it is bound to protest against
all that is inconsistent with its character; it is bound to expel scandals. But the Church’s
protest, its condemnation, its excommunication even, are not ends in themselves; they
are means to that which is really an end in itself, a priceless good which justifies every
extreme of moral severity, the winning again of the sinner through repentance. The
judgment of the Church is the instrument of God’s love, and the moment it is accepted in
the sinful soul it begins to work as a redemptive force. The humiliation it inflicts is that
which God exalts; the sorrow, that which He comforts. But when a scandal comes to
light in a Christian congregation, what is the significance of that movement of feeling
which inevitably takes place? In how many has it the character of goodness and of
severity, of condemnation and compassion, of love and fear, of pity and shame, the only
character that has any virtue in it, to tell for the sinner’s recovery? If you ask nine people
out of ten what a scandal is, they will tell you it is something that makes men talk; and
the talk in nine cases out of ten will be malignant, affected, more interesting to the
talkers than any story of virtue or piety—scandal itself, in short, far more truly than its
theme. Does anybody imagine that gossip is one of the forces that awaken conscience,
and work for the redemption of our fallen brethren? If this is all we can do, in the name
of all that is Christian let us keep silence. Every word spoken about a brother’s sin, that
is not prompted by a Christian conscience, that does not vibrate with the love of a
Christian heart is itself a sin against the mercy and the judgment of Christ. (J. Denney,
B. D.)
Sufficient unto such a man is this punishment.—
Christian punishment and absolution
I. The Christian idea of punishment includes in it—
1. The reformation of the offender (2Co_2:6). The ancient system of law sacrificed
the individual to the society, and feeble philanthropy would sacrifice society to the
individual, whereas Christianity would save both.
2. The purification of society. Sin committed with impunity corrupts the body of
men to which the sinner belongs; and this purification is effected partly by example,
and partly by removal of the evil. The discipline by which this removal was effected
was excommunication, and at that time apostolic excommunication represented to
the world God’s system of punishment.
3. The expression of righteous indignation. For there is a right feeling in human
nature which we call resentment, although in the worst natures it becomes malice. It
existed in Christ Himself. Mark what follows from this. Man is the image of God: so
there is something in God which corresponds with that which we call resentment,
stripped, of course, of all selfishness or fury. So we must not explain away those
words of Scripture, “the wrath of God,” “God is angry with the wicked every day,”
“the wrath of God is revealed from heaven.” These sayings contain a deep and an
awful truth. If the wrath of God be only a figure, His love must be but a figure too.
II. The Christian idea of absolution. Forgiveness is one thing, absolution is another.
Absolution is the authoritative declaration of forgiveness. When Christ said, “Son, be of

good cheer; thy sins be forgiven thee,” He did not forgive him; he was forgiven already,
but He declared his forgiveness. Now the case before us is a distinct instance of
ecclesiastical absolution. St. Paul says, “I forgive.” This is absolution; man’s declaration
of God’s forgiveness—man speaking in God’s stead.
1. Consider the use of absolution. It was to save from remorse, and is here
considered as a “comfort.”
2. This absolution was representative—
(1) Of the forgiveness of God. St. Paul forgave the sinner “in the person,” that is
in the stead “of Christ.” Thus, as the punishment of man is representative of the
punishment and wrath of God, so the absolution of man is representative of the
forgiveness of God.
(2) Of the Christian congregation: “for your sakes.” Every member, therefore, of
that congregation was forgiving the sinner; it was his right to do so, and it was in
his name that St. Paul spoke; nay, because each member had forgiven, St. Paul
forgave. Absolution therefore is not a priestly prerogative. It belongs to man, and
to the minister because he stands as the representative of purified humanity.
Who does not know how the unforgivingness of society in branding men and
women as outcasts makes their case hopeless? Men bind his sins—her crimes—
on earth, and they remain bound. Now every man has this power individually.
For years the thought of his deceit, and the dread of his brother, had weighed on
Jacob’s heart, and when Esau forgave him, it was as if he “had seen the face of
God.” When we treat the guilty with tenderness, hope rises in them towards God;
their hearts say, “They love us; will not God forgive and love us too?” (F. W.
Robertson, M. A.)
Ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest such a one should be
swallowed up with overmuch sorrow.—
Overmuch sorrow
I. When sorrow is overmuch. It is notorious that Overmuch sorrow for sin is not the
ordinary case of the world,
1. When it is fed by a mistaken cause. If a man thinketh that a duty which is no duty,
and then sorrow for omitting it, such sorrow is all too much, because it is undue, and
caused by error. Many fearful Christians are troubled about food, clothes, thoughts,
and words, thinking or fearing that all is sinful which is lawful, and that unavoidable
infirmities are heinous sins.
2. When it hurteth and overwhelmeth nature itself, and destroyeth bodily health or
understanding. God would not have us hurt our neighbour, nor have us destroy or
hurt ourselves.
II. How overmuch sorrow doth swallow a man up.
1. It often overthrows the sober use of reason, so that a man’s judgment is corrupted
by it. A man in anger, fear, or trouble thinks not of things as they are, but as his
passions represent them.
2. It disableth a man to govern his thoughts, and ungoverned thoughts must needs
be both sinful and very troublesome. You may almost as easily keep the leaves of

trees in quietness and order in a blustering wind, as the thoughts of one in troubling
passions.
3. It would swallow up faith itself, and greatly hindereth its exercise.
4. It yet more hindereth hope.
5. It swalloweth up all comfortable sense of the love of God, and thereby hindereth
the soul from loving Him. And in this it is an adversary to the very life of holiness.
6. It is a false and injurious judge of all the word and works of God, and of all His
mercies and corrections. Whatever such an one reads or hears, he thinks it all makes
against him.
7. It is an enemy to thankfulness.
8. It is quite contrary to the joy in the Holy Ghost. Yea, and the peace in which God’s
kingdom much consisteth.
9. It is much contrary to the very tenor of the gospel, which is glad tidings of pardon
and everlasting joy.
10. It greatly advantageth Satan, whose design is to describe God to us as like
himself, who is a malicious enemy.
11. It unfits men for all profitable meditation. The more they muse, the more they
are overwhelmed. And it turneth prayer into mere complaint, instead of child-like,
believing supplications.
12. It is a distemper which maketh all sufferings more heavy.
III. What are the causes of it?
1. With very many it arises from distemper or weakness of the body, and by it the
soul is greatly disabled to any comfortable sense.
2. But usually other causes go before this disease of melancholy. And one of the most
common is sinful impatience, a want of sufficient submission to the will of God.
3. The guilt of some wilful sin; when conscience is convinced, yet the sin is beloved
and yet feared. God’s wrath doth terrify, yet not enough to lead to the overcoming of
sin.
4. Ignorance and mistakes in matters which peace and comforts are concerned.
(1) Ignorance of the tenor of the gospel.
(2) Mistakes about the use of sorrow for sin, and about the nature of hardness of
heart.
(3) Ignorance of ourselves, not knowing the sincerity which God hath given us.
(4) Failure to fetch comfort from bare probabilities, when we get not certainty.
(5) Ignorance of other men, many think, by our preaching and writing, that we
are much better than we are.
(6) Unskilful teachers cause the perplexities of many.
IV. What is the cure?
1. Look not on the sinful part of your troubles, either as better or worse than indeed
it is.

2. Give not way to a habit of peevish impatience.
3. Set yourselves more diligently than ever to overcome the inordinate love of the
world.
4. If you are not satisfied that God alone, Christ alone, heaven alone, is enough for
you, as matter of felicity and full content, go, study the case better, and you may be
convinced.
5. Study better how great a sin it is to set our own wills and desires in a discontented
opposition to the wisdom, will, and providence of God, and to make our wills,
instead of His, as gods to ourselves.
6. Study well how great a duty it is wholly to trust God, and our blessed Redeemer,
both with soul and body, and all we have.
7. If you would not be swallowed up with sorrow, swallow not the baits of sinful
pleasure.
8. But if none of the fore-mentioned sins cause your sorrows, but they come from
the mere perplexities of your mind, I will lay down your proper remedies, and that is,
the cure of that ignorance and those errors which cause your troubles.
(1) Many are perplexed about controversies in religion. Directions:
(a) See that you be true to the light and law of nature, which all mankind is
obliged to observe.
(b) As to God’s supernatural revelation, hold to God’s Word, the sacred
Bible.
(c) Yet use with thankfulness the help of men for the understanding and
obeying the Word of God.
(d) Take nothing as necessary to the being of Christianity, and to salvation
which is not recorded in the Scripture, and hath not been held as necessary
by all true Christians in every age and place.
(e) Maintain the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace, with all true
Christians, as such, and live in love in the communion of saints.
(f) Never set a doubtful opinion against a certain truth or duty.
(g) Faithfully serve Christ as far as you have attained, and be true to all the
truth that you know.
(2) If your trouble be about your sins, or want of grace, and spiritual state, digest
well these counsels.
(a) God’s goodness is equal to His greatness.
(b) Christ hath come to save us.
(c). The condition of pardon and life is that we believe Him, and willingly accept of
the mercy which He freely giveth us.
(d) The day of grace is never so past to any sinner but still he may have Christ
and pardon if he will.
(3) But if melancholy have got head, there must be, beside what is said, some
other and proper remedies used.

(a) Avoid your melancholy musings.
(b) Let those thoughts which you have be laid out on the most excellent
things. The infinite goodness of God; the unmeasurable love of Christ; the
unconceivable glory and joy which all the blessed have with Christ.
(c) When you pray, resolve to spend most of your time in thanksgiving and
praising God.
9. If further the sorrow proceed from some bodily disorder, as it often doth, the
physician must take the place of the preacher. This sorrow must be treated by
medicine and diet. (R. Baxter.)
7. EBC 5-11, CHURCH DISCIPLINE.
IN verses 5-11 (2Co_2:5-11) of this Epistle, St. Paul said a great deal about sorrow, the
sorrow he felt on the one hand, and the sorrow he was reluctant to cause the Corinthians
on the other. In this passage reference is evidently made to the person who was
ultimately responsible for all this trouble. If much in it is indefinite to us, and only leaves
a doubtful impression, it was clear enough for those to whom it was originally
addressed; and that very indefiniteness has its lesson. There are some things to which it
is sufficient, and more than sufficient, to allude; least said is best said. And even when
plain-speaking has been indispensable, a stage arrives at which there is no more to be
gained by it; if the subject must be referred to, the utmost generality of reference is best.
Here the Apostle discusses the case of a person who had done something extremely bad;
but with the sinner’s repentance assured, it is both characteristic and worthy of him that
neither here nor in 2Co_7:1-16. does he mention the name either of offender or offence.
It is perhaps too much to expect students of his writings, who wish to trace out in detail
all the events of his life, and to give-the utmost possible definiteness to all its situations,
to be content with this obscurity; but students of his spirit-Christian people reading the
Bible for practical profit-do not need to perplex them, selves as to this penitent man’s
identity. He may have been the person mentioned in 1Co_5:1-13. who had married his
step-mother; he may have been some one who had been guilty of a personal insult to the
Apostle: the main point is that he was a sinner whom the discipline of the Church had
saved.
The Apostle had been expressing himself about his sorrow with great vehemence, and he
is careful in his very first words to make it plain that the offence which had caused such
sorrow was no personal matter. It concerned the Church as well as him. If any one hath
caused sorrow, he hath not caused sorrow to me, but in part to you all. To say more
than this would he to exaggerate (έπιβαρε9ν). The Church, in point of fact, had not been
moved either as universally or as profoundly as it should have been by the offence of this
wicked man. The penalty imposed upon him, whatever it may have been, had not been
imposed by an unanimous vote, but only by a majority; there were some who
sympathized with him, and would have been less severe. Still, it had brought conviction
of his sin to the offender; he could not brazen it out against such consenting
condemnation as there was; he was overwhelmed with penitential grief. This is why the
Apostle says, Sufficient to such a one is this punishment which was inflicted by the
majority. It has served the purpose of all disciplinary treatment; and having done so,
must now be superseded by an opposite line of action. Contrariwise ye should rather
forgive him and comfort him, lest by any means such a one should be swallowed up with

his overmuch sorrow. In St. Paul’s sentence such a one comes last, with the emphasis
of compassion upon it. He had been such a one, to begin with, as it was a pain and a
shame even to think about; he is such a one, now, as the angels in heaven are rejoicing
over; such a one as the Apostle, having the spirit of Him who received sinners, regards
with pro-roundest pity and yearning; such a one as the Church ought to meet with
pardoning and restoring love, lest grief sink into despair, and the sinner cut himself off
from hope. To prevent such a deplorable result, the Corinthians are by some formal
action (κυρωσαι: cf. Gal_3:15) to forgive him, and receive him again as a brother; and in
their forgiveness and welcome he is to find the pledge of the great love of God.
This whole passage is of interest from the light which it throws upon the discipline of the
Church; or, to use less technical and more correct language, the Christian treatment of
the erring.
It shows us, for one thing, the aim of all discipline: it is, in the last resort, the restoration
of the fallen. The Church has, of course, an interest of its own to guard; it is bound to
protest against all that is inconsistent with its character; it is bound to expel scandals.
But the Church’s protest, its condemnation, its excommunication even, are not ends in
themselves; they are means to that which is really an end in itself, a priceless good which
justifies every extreme of moral severity, the winning again of the sinner through
repentance. The judgment of the Church is the instrument of God’s love, and the
moment it is accepted in the sinful soul it begins to work as a redemptive force. The
humiliation it inflicts is that which God exalts; the sorrow, that which He comforts. But
when a scandal comes to light in a Christian congregation when one of its members is
discovered in a fault gross, palpable, and offensive-what is the significance of that
movement of feeling which inevitably takes place? In how many has it the character of
goodness and of severity, of condemnation and of compassion, of love and fear, of pity
and shame, the only character that has any virtue in it to tell for the sinner’s recovery? If
you ask nine people out of ten what a scandal is, they will tell you it is something which
makes talk; and the talk in nine cases out of ten will be malignant, affected, more
interesting to the talkers than any story of virtue or piety-scandal itself, in short, far
more truly than its theme. Does anybody imagine that gossip is one of the forces that
waken conscience, and work for the redemption of our fallen brethren? If this is all we
can do, in the name of all that is Christian let us keep silence. Every word spoken about a
brother’s sin, that is not prompted by a Christian conscience, that does not vibrate with
the love of a Christian heart, is itself a sin against the mercy and the judgment of Christ.
We see here not only the end of Church discipline, but the force of which it disposes for
the attainment of its end. That force is neither more nor less than the conscience of the
Christian people who constitute the Church: discipline is, in principle, the reaction of
that force against all immorality. In special cases, forms may be necessary for its
exercise, and in the forms in which it is exercised variations may be found expedient,
according to time, place, or degree of moral progress; the congregation as a body, or a
representative committee of it, or its ordained ministers, may be its most suitable
executors; but that on which all alike have to depend for making their proceedings
effective to any Christian intent is the vigor of Christian conscience, and the intensity of
Christian love, in the community as a whole. Where these are wanting, or exist only in an
insignificant degree, disciplinary proceedings are reduced to a mere form; they are legal,
not evangelical; and to be legal in such matters is not Only hypocritical, but insolent.
Instead of rendering a real Christian service to offenders, which by awakening
conscience will lead to penitence and restoration, discipline under such conditions is
equally cruel and unjust.

It is plain also, from the nature of the force which it employs, that discipline is a function
of the Church which is in incessant exercise, and is not called into action only on special
occasions. To limit it to what are technically known as cases of discipline-the formal
treatment of offenders by a Church court, or by any person or persons acting in an
official character is to ignore its real nature, and to give its exercise in these cases a
significance to which it has no claim. The offences against the Christian standard which
can be legally impeached even in Church courts are not one in ten thousand of those
against which the Christian conscience ought energetically to protest; and it is the vigor
with which the ceaseless reaction against evil in every shape is instinctively maintained
which measures the effectiveness of all formal proceedings, and makes them means of
grace to the guilty. The officials of a Church may deal in their official place with offences
against soberness, purity, or honesty; they are bound to deal with them, whether they
like it or not; but their success will depend upon the completeness with which they, and
those whom they represent, have renounced not only the vices which they are judging,
but all that is out of keeping with the mind and spirit of Christ. The drunkard, the
sensualist, the thief, know perfectly well that drunkenness, sensuality, and theft are not
the only sins which mar the soul. They know that there are other vices, just as real if not
so glaring, which are equally fatal to the life of Christ and man, and as completely
disqualify men for acting in Christ’s name. They are conscious that it is not a bona fide
transaction when their sins are impeached by men whose consciences endure with
equanimity the reign of meanness, duplicity, pride, hypocrisy, self-complacency. They
are aware that God is not present where these are dominant, and that God’s power to
judge and save can never come through such channels. Hence the exercise of discipline
in these legal forms is often resented, and often ineffective; and instead of complaining
about what is obviously inevitable, the one thing at which all should aim who wish to
protect the Church from scandals is to cultivate the common conscience, and bring it to
such a degree of purity and vigor, that its spontaneous resentment of evil will enable the
Church practically to dispense with legal forms. This Christian community at Corinth
had a thousand faults; in many points we are tempted to find in it rather a warning than
an example; but I think we may take this as a signal proof that it was really sound at
heart: its condemnation of’ this guilty man fell upon his conscience as the sentence of
God, and brought him in tears to the feet of Christ. No legal proceedings could have
done that: nothing could have done it but a real and passionate sympathy with the
holiness and the love of Christ. Such sympathy is the one subduing, reconciling,
redeeming power in our hands; and Paul might well rejoice, after all his affliction and
anguish of heart, when he found it so unmistakably at work in Corinth. Not so much
formal as instinctive, though not shrinking on occasion from formal proceedings; not
malignant, yet closing itself inexorably against evil; not indulgent to badness, but with
goodness like Christ’s, waiting to be gracious, -this Christian virtue really holds the keys
of the kingdom of heaven, and opens and shuts with the authority of Christ Himself. We
need it in all our Churches today, as much as it was needed in Corinth; we need it that
special acts of discipline may be effective; we need it still more that they may be
unnecessary. Pray for it as for a gift that comprehends every other - the power to
represent Christ, and work His work, in the recovery and restoration of the fallen.
In 2Co_2:9-11, the same subject is continued, but with a slightly different aspect
exposed. Paul had obviously taken the initiative in this matter, though the bulk of the
Church, at his prompting, had acted in a right spirit. Their conduct was in harmony with
his motive in writing to them, which had really been to make proof of their obedience in
all points. But he has already disclaimed either the right or the wish to lord it over them
in their liberty as believers; and here, again, he represents himself rather as following

them in their treatment of the offender, than as pointing out the way. Now to whom ye
forgive anything, I also forgive-so great is my confidence in you: for what I also have
forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, for your sakes have I forgiven it in the presence of
Christ. When he says if I have forgiven anything, he does not mean that his
forgiveness is dubious, or in suspense; what he does is to deprecate the thought that his
forgiveness is the main thing, or that he had been the person principally offended. When
he says for your sakes have I forgiven it, the words are explained by what follows: to
have refused his forgiveness in the circumstances would have been to perpetuate a state
of matters which could only have injured the Church. When he adds that his forgiveness
is bestowed in the presence of Christ, he gives the assurance that it is no complaisance
or formality, but a real acceptance of the offender to peace and friendship again. And we
should not overlook the fact that in this association of Christ, of the Corinthians, and of
himself, in the work of forgiveness and restoration, Paul is really encompassing a
desponding soul with all the grace of earth and heaven. Surely he will not let his grief
become despair, when all around him and above him there is a present and convincing
witness that, though God is intolerant of sin, He is the refuge of the penitent.
The gracious and conciliatory tone of these verses seems to me worthy of special
admiration; and I can only express my astonishment that to some they have appeared
insincere, a vain attempt to cover a defeat with the semblance of victory, a surrender to
the opposition at Corinth, the painfulness of which is ill-disguised by the pretence of
agreement with them. The exposition just given renders the refutation of such a view
unnecessary. We ought rather to regard with reverence and affection the man who knew
how to combine, so strikingly, unflinching principle and the deepest tenderness and
consideration for others; we ought to propose his modesty, his sensitiveness to the
feelings even of opponents, his sympathy with those who had no sympathy with him, as
examples for our imitation. Paul had been deeply moved by what had taken place at
Corinth, possibly he had been deeply injured; but even so his personal interest is kept in
the background; for the obedient loyalty which he wishes to prove is not so much his
interest as theirs to whom he writes. He cares only for others. He cares for the poor soul
who has forfeited his place in the community; he cares for the good name of the Church;
he cares for the honor of Jesus Christ; and he exerts all his power with these interests in
view. If it needs rigor, he can be rigorous; if it needs passion, he can be passionate; if it
needs consideration, graciousness, a conciliatory temper, a willingness to keep out of
sight, he can be depended upon for all these virtues. If they were only affected, Paul
would deserve the praise of a great diplomatist; but it is far easier to believe them real,
and see in them the signs of a great minister of Christ.
The last verse puts the aim of his proceedings in another light: All this, he says, I do,
that no advantage may be gained over us by Satan: for we are not ignorant of his
devices. The important words in the last clause are of the same root; it is as if Paul had
said: Satan is very knowing, and is always on the alert to get the better of us; but we are
not without knowledge of his knowing ways. It was the Apostle’s acquaintance with the
wiles of the devil which made him eager to see the restoration of the penitent sinner duly
carried through. This implies one or two practical truths, with which, by way of
application, this exposition may close.
(1) A scandal in the Church gives the devil an opportunity. When one who has named the
flame of Jesus, and vowed loyal obedience to Him, falls into open sin, it is a chance
offered to the enemy which he is not slow to improve. He uses it to discredit the very
name of Christ: to turn that which ought to be to the world the symbol of the purest
goodness into a synonym of hypocrisy. Christ has committed His honor, if not His

character, to our keeping; and every lapse into vice gives Satan an advantage over Him.
(2) The devil finds his gain in the incompetence of the Church to deal with the evil in the
Spirit of Christ. It is a fine thing for him if he can drive the convicted sinner to despair,
and persuade him that there is no more forgiveness with God. It is a fine thing if he can
prompt those who love little, because they know little of God’s love, to show themselves
rigid, implacable, irreconcilable, even to the penitent. If he can deform the likeness of
Christ into a morose Pharisaism, what an incalculable gain it is! If the disciples of Him
who received sinners look askance on those who have lapsed, and chill the hope of
restoration with cold suspicion and reserve, there will be JOY over it, not in heaven, but
in hell. And not only this, but the opposite is a device of the devil, of which we ought not
to be ignorant. There is hardly a sin that some one has not an interest in extenuating.
Even the incestuous person in Corinth had his defenders: there were some who were
puffed up, and gloried in what he had done as an assertion of Christian liberty. The devil
takes advantage of the scandals that occur in the Church to bribe and debauch men’s
consciences; indulgent words are spoken, which are not the voice of Christ’s awful
mercy, but of a miserable self-pity; the strongest and holiest thing in the world, the
redeeming love of God, is adulterated and even confounded with the weakest and basest
thing, the bad man’s immoral forgiveness of himself. And not to mention anything else
under this head, could any one imagine what would please and suit the devil better than
the absolutely unfeeling but extremely interesting gossip which resounds over every
exposure of sin?
(3) But, lastly, the devil finds his advantage in the dissensions of Christians. What an
opportunity he would have had in Corinth, had strained relations continued between the
Apostle and the Church! What opportunities he has everywhere, when tempers are on
edge, and every movement means friction, and every proposal rouses suspicion! The last
prayer Christ prayed for His Church was that they might all be one: to be one in Him is
the final security against the devices of Satan. What a frightful commentary the history
of the Church is on this prayer! What frightful illustrations it furnishes of the devil’s gain
out of the saints’ quarrels! There are plenty of subjects, of course, even in Church life, on
which we may naturally and legitimately differ; but we ought to know better than to let
the differences enter into our souls. At bottom, we should be all one; it is giving
ourselves away to the enemy, if we do not, at all costs, keep the unity of the Spirit in the
bond of peace.
8. CALVI, But if any one. Here is a third reason with the view of alleviating the
offense — that he had grief in common with them, and that the occasion of it came
from another quarter. “We have,” says he, “been alike 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 thing, but rather leaving it in suspense.
This passage, however, is understood by some, as if Paul meant to say: “He that has
given me occasion of grief, has given offense to you also; for you ought to 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 exposition,
however, is much more suitable; for he reads it as one continued sentence — “He
hath not grieved me alone, but almost all of you. And as to my saying in part, I do so
in order that I may not bear too hard upon him.” 320 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, inasmuch as
the Church of the Corinthians was divided; but that is more ingenious than solid.
9. PULPIT COMMETARY, Restoring the backslider.
I. CHURCH DISCIPLIE SHOULD BE ADMIISTERED BY THE CHURCH.
This punishment which was inflicted by the many (2 Corinthians 2:6). ot by an
individual, be he the pope himself, nor by priests or clergy, but by the whole body of
the individual Church or a majority of its members. A Christian has a right to be
judged by his peers.
II. CHURCH DISCIPLIE SHOULD EVER HAVE I VIEW RESTORATIO.
Its object is not to punish the offender so much as to do him good, and at the same
time to preserve the Church's purity. Church discipline should not be regarded as a
final act towards the backslider, but with it should ever be associated prayers and
hope that the severance may be brief. The Church rejects that she may accept; she
casts out that she may receive back again. So Church discipline should never be of a
character to hinder repentance or to render restoration impossible.
III. CHURCH DISCIPLIE SHOULD BE ADMIISTERED WITH GREAT
DISCRETIO,
1. On the one hand, it may be too slight and not produce suitable effects.
2. On the other, it may be so excessive as to drive the offender to despair.
3. In either case Satan will gain an advantage (2 Corinthians 2:11), which he is ever
seeking and has often found when the Church or its leaders have attempted the
delicate task of discipline. The Church's discipline of persecution and intolerance
has served the devil's purposes admirably in many a dark century. And the
Church's discipline of indifference and false charity has done similar service in
many a century boasting of its light and breadth of thought and liberty.
IV. PEITECE O THE PART OF A OFFEDER IS A STROG
ARGUMET FOR PROMPT RESTORATIO TO FELLOWSHIP. The duty of
restoration is not so fully recognized as it might be. Often it is the predilection of the
powers that be, rather than the condition of the offender, which determines whether
he shall be restored or not. But when the honour of the Church has been vindicated,
and the offender is undoubtedly contrite, the way of duty is clear. A Church which
will not restore then, deserves to be excommunicated itself,
V. RESTORATIO IS OT TO BE TO TOLERATIO, BUT TO LOVE. The love
is to exist whilst the discipline is being inflicted. It is to manifest itself' unreservedly
when discipline is removed. Many are restored to suspicion, coldness, contempt—a
restoration which paves the way for a more fatal fall. If God forgives some

professing Christians as they forgive others (and this is their frequent prayer), their
share of the Divine forgiveness is likely to be a very slender one.—H.
6 The punishment inflicted on him by the
majority is sufficient.
1. BARES, Sufficient to such a man - The incestuous person who had been by
Paul’s direction removed from the church. The object of Paul here is to have him again
restored. For that purpose he says that the punishment which they had inflicted on him
was “sufficient.” It was:
(1) A sufficient expression of the evil of the offence, and of the readiness of the church
to preserve itself pure; and,
(2) It was a sufficient punishment to the offender.
It had accomplished all that he had desired. It had humbled him, and brought him to
repentance; and doubtless led him to put away his “wife”; compare note, 1Co_5:1. As
that had been done, it was proper now that he should be again restored 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 conducts this subject
here with very great tenderness and delicacy. The entire passage from 2Co_2:5 to 2Co_
2:10 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 which would be calculated to wound his feelings,
or to transmit his name to posterity, or to communicate it to other churches. So that
though this Epistle should be read, as Paul doubtless intended, by other churches, and
be transmitted to future times, yet no one would ever be acquainted with the name of the
individual. How different this from the temper of those who would emblazon abroad the
names of offenders, or make a permanent record to carry them down with dishonor to
posterity?
Which was inflicted of many - By the church in its collective capacity; see the note
on 1Co_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” (:πτ'νπλείονων apotōn
pleionōn are not applicable either to a single” bishop, or a single minister, or a
presbytery, or a bench of elders: nor can they be so regarded, except by a forced and
unnatural construction. Paul had directed it to be done by the assembled church 1Co_
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 the

excommunication, and that is a proper way of administering discipline. Whether it
proves, however, that that is the mode which is to be observed in all instances, may
admit of a doubt, as the example of the early churches, in a particular case, does not
prove that that mode has the force of a binding rule on all.
(It cannot fairly be argued from this verse, that the “many” or the whole congregation,
were judicially concerned in the act of excommunication; yet as their concurrence was
essential, in order to carry the sentence into effect, it was “inflicted of many” in a most
emphatic sense. The refusal, on the part of the members of the church, to have any more
social contact with the incestuous man, carried into effect what the apostle had judicially
pronounced. See the supplementary note on 1Co_5:4.)
2. CLARKE, Sufficient to such a man is this punishment - That is, the man
has already suffered sufficiently. Here he gives a proof of his parental tenderness
towards this great transgressor. He had been disowned by the Church; he had deeply
repented; and now the apostle pleads for him.
3. GILL, Sufficient to such a man is this punishment,.... By this punishment is
meant, the excommunication of the incestuous person, or the censure that was laid upon
him by the church: for this
was inflicted by many; not by the pastor only, or by the elders or more eminent
persons in the church, but by the multitude, by the whole congregation, at least υποτων
πλειονων, by the more; the greater, or major part; and not by one, or a few only: in
inflicting this punishment, or laying on this censure in the public manner they did, they
were certainly right, and to be commended; but inasmuch as there appeared signs of
true repentance, it was sufficient, it had answered the purpose for which it was inflicted,
and therefore it was high time to remove it: from whence we learn, that in case of gross
enormities, there ought to be a public excommunication; and that this is to be done by
the vote, and with the consent of the whole church, or the major part of it; and that in
process of time, when the person thus dealt with has given the church satisfaction as to
the truth and genuineness of his repentance, the censure ought to be taken off and he be
cordially received into the communion of the church again. This punishment, or
rebuke, επιτιμια, by many, is the same which the Jews call (e) ברבים התוכחה , a reproof
by many; which is given by many, or in the presence of many.
4. RWP, Punishment (epitimia). Late word for old Greek to epitimion (so papyri),
from epitimaō, to show honour to, to award, to adjudge penalty. Only here in N.T.
By the many (hupotōnpleionōn). By the more, the majority. If Paul refers to the
case in 1Co_5:1-13, they had taken his advice and expelled the offender.
5. JAMISO, Sufficient — without increasing it, which would only drive him to
despair (2Co_2:7), whereas the object of the punishment was, “that (his) spirit might be

saved” in the last day.
to such a man — a milder designation of the offender than if he had been named
[Meyer]. Rather, it expresses estrangement from such a one who had caused such grief
to the Church, and scandal to religion (Act_22:22; 1Co_5:5).
this punishment — His being “delivered to Satan for the destruction of the flesh”;
not only excommunication, but bodily disease (see on 1Co_5:4, 1Co_5:5).
inflicted of many — rather, “by the majority” (the more part of you). Not by an
individual priest, as in the Church of Rome, nor by the bishops and clergy alone, but by
the whole body of the Church.
5B. F. W. ROBERTSON, The Christian idea of punishment includes in it, first,
the Reformation of the Offender.
This is the first and most natural object of punishment ;
and we infer it to have been part of St. Paul's intention,
because when this end had been attained he required that
punishment should cease: Sufficient to such a man is
this punishment. Now herein consists the peculiar spirit
of Christianity, that whereas the ancient system of law
sacrificed the individual to the society, and feeble philan-thropy
would sacrifice society to the individual, Christianity
would save both. It respects the decencies of life and its
rights : it says the injur er must suffer : but it says, too, he
also is a living soul, we must consider him : we must
punish, so that he shall be made not worse, but better.
So it was not only the dignity of the Corinthian Church
that St. Paul thought of: he thought also of the fallen,
guilty state of his spirit who had degraded that Church.
He punished him that his spirit might be saved in the day
of the Lord Jesus.
The second thing included in this idea is the Purification
of Society. Punishment was also necessary for this reason
— that sin committed with impunity corrupts the body of
men to which the sinner belongs. This St. Paul declares
in the First Epistle : A little leaven leaveneth the whole
lump. Now the purification of society is effected partly
by example, and partly by removal of the evil. The
discipline by which this removal was effected was called
excommunication. At that time, apostolic excommunication
represented to the world God's system of punishment. I
do not say that it does so now, for the Church and the

World have become so mixed, Church and State so trench
upon each other's functions, that we know not where the
division is. But I conceive that in early times the Church
discipline was representative of the true idea of punish-ment:
clearly St. Paul thought it was so. He did not
think of extending it beyond the Church, for his idea
of the Church was that of a pure society in the world,
representing what the world should be; and so he does not
require this separation to be rigidly enforced with respect
to worldly men. This point is dwelt on in the fifth chapter
of the First Epistle, in the tenth verse, and also in the thir-teenth
verse of the twelfth chapter. For God judged those
without, while the Church, God's representative, judged
and exhibited this principle of punishment on those within.
These two — to reform, and to serve as an example, are
the only views of punishment which are found in the popular
notion of it. But if we think deeper on the subject, we
shall find, I believe, that there is another idea in punishment
which cannot be lost sight of. It is this — that punishment
is the expression of righteous indignation : God's punish-ment
is the expression of God's indignation, man's punish-ment
is the expression of man's indignation. In the fifth
verse of this chapter, as explained once before, St. Paul!
evidently thought that the guilty man had grieved — that
is, offended — him partly, and partly the whole Church.
Accordingly, their punishment of him was an expression of
their indignation against him, as is clear from the eleventh
verse of the seventh chapter, in which we must mark par-ticularly
the word revenge, and compare it with the text
of Rom. xiii. 4., — a revenger to execute wrath — where
the word is used, not in its evil meaning, but in the sense
of righteous resentment expressing itself in punishment.
For there is a right feeling in human nature which we call
resentment: it exists equally in the best and the worst
natures ; although in the worst, it becomes malice. It
existed in Christ Himself, for it is not a peculiarity of
fallen human nature, but it is an inseparable element of
human nature itself. Now let us mark what follows from
this : Man is the image of God : all spirits are of the same
family. So there is something in God which corresponds
with that which we call resentment, stripped, of course,

2 corinthians 2 commentary

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to 2 corinthians 2 commentary

Similar to 2 corinthians 2 commentary (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (16)

2 corinthians 2 commentary