--- title: "Commentary on Corinthians, Volume 2" author: "John Calvin" translator: "John Pringle" languages: [en] shelf: "Commentaries" section: 16 of 49 url: https://scriptura.si/works/john-calvin-commentary-on-corinthians-volume-2/16/ cite: "John Calvin, tr. John Pringle, Commentary on Corinthians, Volume 2, section 16. Scriptura (scriptura.si), https://scriptura.si/works/john-calvin-commentary-on-corinthians-volume-2/16/" --- # Commentary on Corinthians, Volume 2 *John Calvin, tr. John Pringle* Calvin on Second Corinthians, continuing the first volume. ## 16. 2 Corinthians 1:23-2:2 Source: https://scriptura.si/works/john-calvin-commentary-on-corinthians-volume-2/16/ · cite a paragraph as https://scriptura.si/works/john-calvin-commentary-on-corinthians-volume-2/16/#p-N [¶0] 2 Corinthians 1:23-24 23. Moreover I call God for a record upon my soul, that to spare you I came not as yet unto Corinth. 23. Ego autem testem invoco Deum in animam meam, quod parcens vobis nondum venerim Corinthum. 24. Not for that we have dominion over your faith, but are helpers of your joy: for by faith ye stand. 24. Non quod dominemur fidei vestrae, sed adiutores sumus gaudii vestri: fide enim statis. 2 Corinthians 2:1-2 1. But I determined this with myself, that I would not come again to you in heaviness. 1. Decreveram autem hoc in me ipso, non amplius venire in tristitia ad vos. 2. For if I make you sorry, who is he then that maketh me glad, but the same which is made sorry by me? 2. Si enim ego contristo vos: et quis est qui me exhilaret, nisi is qui erit tristitia affectus ex me? [¶1] 23. I call God for a witness. He now begins to assign a reason for his change of purpose; for hitherto he has merely repelled calumny. When, however, he says that he spared them, he indirectly throws back the blame upon them, and thus shows them that it would be unfair if he were put to grief through their fault, but that it would be much more unfair if they should permit this; but most of all unfair if they should give their assent to so base a calumny, as in that case they would be substituting in their place an innocent person, as if he had been guilty of their sin. Now he spared them in this respect, that if he had come he would have been constrained to reprove them more severely, while he wished rather that they should of their own accord repent previously to his arrival, that there might be no occasion for a harsher remedy, which is a signal evidence of more than paternal lenity. For how much forbearance there was in shunning this necessity, when he had just ground of provocation! [¶2] He makes use, also, of an oath, that he may not seem to have contrived something to serve a particular purpose. For the matter in itself was of no small importance, and it was of great consequence that he should be entirely free from all suspicion of falsehood and pretence. Now there are two things that make an oath lawful and pious — the occasion and the disposition. The occasion I refer to is, where an oath is not employed rashly, that is, in mere trifles, or even in matters of small importance, but only where there is a call for it. The disposition I refer to is, where there is not so much regard had to private advantage, as concern felt for the glory of God, and the advantage of the brethren: For this end must always be kept in view, that our oaths may promote the honor of God, and promote also the advantage of our neighbours in a matter that is befitting. [¶3] The form of the oath must also be observed — first, that he calls God to witness; and, secondly, that he says upon my soul For in matters that are doubtful and obscure, where man’s knowledge fails, we have recourse to God, that he, who alone is truth, may bear testimony to the truth. But the man that appeals to God as his witness, calls upon him at the same time to be an avenger of perjury, in the event of his declaring what is false. This is what is meant by the phrase upon my soul. “I do not object to his inflicting punishment upon me, if I am guilty of falsehood.” Although, however, this is not always expressed in so many words, it is, notwithstanding, to be understood. For [¶4] if we are unfaithful, God remaineth faithful and will not deny himself (2 Timothy 2:13.) [¶5] He will not suffer, therefore, the profanation of his name to go unpunished. [¶6] 24. Not that we exercise dominion He anticipates an objection that might be brought forward. “What! Do you then act so tyrannically as to be formidable in your very look? Such were not the gravity of a Christian pastor, but the cruelty of a savage tyrant.” He answers this objection first indirectly, by declaring that matters are not so; and afterwards directly, by showing that the very circumstance, that he had been constrained to treat them more harshly, was owing to his fatherly affection. When he says that he does not exercise dominion over their faith, he intimates, that such a power is unjust and intolerable — nay more, is tyranny in the Church. For faith ought to be altogether exempt, and to the utmost extent free, from the yoke of men. We must, however, observe, who it is that speaks, for if ever there was a single individual of mortals, that had authority to claim for himself such a dominion, Paul assuredly was worthy of such a privilege. Yet he acknowledges, that it does not belong to him. Hence we infer, that faith owns no subjection except to the word of God, and that it is not at all in subjection to human control. Erasmus has observed in his Annotations, that by supplying the Greek particle ἕνεκα, it may be understood in this way — Not that we exercise dominion over you — with respect to your faith — a rendering which amounts almost to the same thing. For he intimates, that there is no spiritual dominion, except that of God only. This always remains a settled point — pastors have no peculiar dominion over men’s consciences, inasmuch as they are ministers, not lords. (1 Peter 5:3.) [¶7] What then does he leave to himself and others? He calls them helpers of their joy — by which term I understand happiness. At the same time he employs the term joy as opposed to the terror which tyrants awaken through means of their cruelty, and also false prophets, resembling tyrants, that rule with rigor and authority, as we read in Ezekiel 34:4. He argues from contraries, that he did by no means usurp dominion over the Corinthians, inasmuch as he endeavored rather to maintain them in the possession of a peace that was free, and full of joy. [¶8] For by faith ye stand. As to the reason why he adds this, others either pass it over altogether in silence, or they do not explain it with sufficient distinctness. For my part, I am of opinion that he here again argues from contraries. For if the nature and effect of faith be such that we lean, in order that we may stand, it is absurd to speak of faith as being subject to men. Thus he removes that unjust dominion, with which, he had a little before declared, he was not chargeable. ### 2 Corinthians 2:1 [¶10] 1 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. The word ἔκρινα (I determined) must be rendered in the pluperfect tense, for, when assigning a reason for the delay that had occurred, he explains what had been his intention previously. [¶11] 2. For if I make you sorry Here we have the proof of the foregoing statement. No one willingly occasions sorrow to himself. Now Paul says, that he has such a fellow-feeling with the Corinthians, that he cannot feel joyful, unless he sees them happy. Nay 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 — so that we do not rejoice in the welfare of the Church, as were becoming. ### 2 Corinthians 2:3-5 [¶13] 2 Corinthians 2:3-5 3. And I wrote this same unto you, lest, when I came, I should have sorrow from them of whom I ought to rejoice; having confidence in you all, that my joy is the joy of you all. 3. Et scripseram vobis hoc, ne veniens tristitiam super tristitiam haberem, a quibus oportebat me gaudere: fiduciam habens de vobis omnibus, quod meum gaudium vestrum omnium sit. 4. For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote unto you with many tears; not that ye should be grieved, but that ye might know the love which I have more abundantly unto you. 4. Ex multa enim afflictione et angustia cordis scripsi vobis per multas lacrimas: non ut contristaremini, sed ut caritatem cognosceretis, quam habeo abundantius erga vos. 5. But if any have caused grief, he hath not grieved me, but in part: that I may not overcharge you all. 5. Si quis autem contristavit, non me contristavit, sed ex parte: ut ne vos omnes gravem. [¶14] 3. 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. [¶15] 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. If, however, the Corinthians are not in accordance with Paul’s opinion and judgment as to them, they shamefully disappoint him. [¶16] 4. 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. [¶17] 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, so that it might seem as if they exercised their throat and sides by way of sport. It is, however, the part of a pious pastor, to weep within himself, before he calls upon others to weep: to feel tortured in silent musings, before he shows any 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. For the more tender the affections of love are, they are so much the more praiseworthy. [¶18] 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. [¶19] 5. 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.” 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.