The Great Commentary (Mossman/Cobb English)

Lest when I came I should have sorrow, I wished by sending you a letter first to rebuke and correct your evil ways, lest I should be forced to do so in person, which would be very painful to me Having confidence in you all, I had complete confidence that you would at once take away whatever might displease me, because you regard my joy as yours, and my grief therefore as yours also. I knew, therefore, that what displeased me would displease you. S. Paul says all this to prepare the Corinthians for his arrival, and to induce them to amend themselves, lest he should be deeply grieved at seeing them not yet amended

He hath not grieved me. The fornicator did not grieve me only. But in part. He grieved, says Anselm, many other good men as well as me ; those, viz., who banished from their society with ignominy the man that I had already excommunicated. THE ABSOLUTION OF THE PENITENT IS Thai I may not overcharge you all. Overcharge you by putting on you the suspicion that there are not many who are grieved on account of the incestuous person. In the First Epistle (v. 2) he seems to have charged them all with consenting to, or with treating lightly, the sin of incest

That ye would confirm your love toward him . By declaring in public assembly of the Church that you once more embrace him as a brother. There is an allusion in the Greek verb to the fixed days of assembly for legal trials or elections, and the Apostle therefore alludes to the fixed days of assembly in the Church, and bids the Corinthians confirm their love then toward the incestuous person by re-admitting him

For to this end also did I write. Viz., this Epistle, to the end that I might induce you to confirm your love toward him. That I might know the proof of you. A proof of your obedience

To whom ye forgive anything , I forgive also. You have asked through Titus that he may be forgiven, and I make the same request of you. So Theodoret explains these words. Cf. also chap, vii. 7. It is clear from ver. 7 that this forgiveness had not yet taken place, and the meaning therefore is : As, when you were gathered together and my spirit I excommunicated him (1 Cor. v.), so now do I join with you in forgiving him, as you will forgive him at my exhortation. Observe against Luther that this Epistle was written to the rulers of the Church, or rather to the Church itself, that it might exercise this power of absolving, not corporately, but by the prelates. Yet out of courtesy he wishes even the laity to co-operate in the absolution, and by their consent, prayers, desire, and compassion to forgive this 1 6 SECOND EPISTLE TO THE scandal which had been given to them and the Church, and to remit the due canonical penance or punishment, Cf. i Cor. v. 4. Hence he goes on to say, “ For your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ” S. Paul here asserts that he forgave in the exercise of his power and jurisdiction as the vicar of Christ ; and he orders his sentence to be publicly proclaimed in the Corinthian Church, by the bishop or some other officer, and implies that the Corinthians forgave merely through their prayers, consent, and execution of the sentence of absolution. S. Chrysostom lays this down clearly when he says : “ As when he ordered the man to be cut off he did not allow that with them was any authority to forgive , since he said, * 1 have judged to deliver such an one to Satan so again did he admit them into partnership with him when he said c When ye are gathered together to deliver him l He was aiming at two ends , one that the sentence might be passed , and the other that it should not be carried out without them x lest he should seem to do them an injury by so acting. Neither does he pass sentence alone, lest the Apostle should seem to be isolated and to despise them If I forgave anything, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave lit in the person of Christ, I forgave it, i.e,, I determined to forgive it (ver. 7), and now by this letter and by the bearer, whether Titus or some other, I forgive it This is a Hebraism, by which the past is put for the present. It may be asked, What was it that the Apostle forgave ? I reply, 1. that this forgiveness consisted in giving absolution from excommunication, and at the same time, or rather still more, in giving full indulgence for the incest, i.e,, remission of all the penalty due because of it. It is evident from 1 Cor. v. that the punishment inflicted was excommunication, and with it the penalty of ignominious exclusion from the Church, and the handing over of his body to be afflicted by Satan. Here, however, he absolves him from every chain by which he had been bound. 2. To forgive, properly speaking, refers to guilt or punishment Of excommunication alone is it strictly said, “ I absolve.” 3. He re*admits him to grace, both on account of the zeal of the Corinthians and the contrition of the incestuous person, and relaxes INDULGENCES 1 7 his punishment and shame and rebuke, lest from too much sorrow he should despair. This indulgence is referred to by the word anything. Whatever part of the punishment you have asked may be forgiven him, I forgive him. 4. He remits the punishment not merely, as Calvin thinks, before the Church, but in God’s judgment : this is expressed by the phrase in the person of Christy otherwise there would not have been any indulgence or mercy shown here to the fornicator. It is better to be visited on earth with infamy and corporal punishment than before the tribunal of God to be handed over to the fire, either of purgatory or of helL Hence S. Thomas and others rightly lay down that the Apostle and the Church give indulgences. So, in olden times, martyrs, when in prison, sent to the Bishops men who had lapsed, praying them to relax their punishment, as appears from Tertullian (ad Martyr . c. 1), Cyprian (Epp. n, 21, 22); and the Council of Nice (c. xi. and xii.) grants to those that have lapsed that, according to the willingness with which they bore the punishment inflicted on them, might the Bishop give indulgence. Cf. Baronius, vol. i. p. 592. Observe that the reason for giving indulgence was the fear that the penitent might despair. Hence, formerly, indulgence was not given unless a good part of the penalty had been paid, and that lest the vigour of discipline and of satisfaction, which is the third part of repentance, should be relaxed. Cf. S. Cyprian (ad Martyr . lib. iii. Epp . 6). The Council of Trent (sess. xxv.), in its decree on indulgences, orders that moderation should be shown in giving indulgences, according to the ancient practice of the Church, lest ecclesiastical discipline should, by excessive leniency, be rendered lax. If I forgave anything ; He speaks modestly of his generosity. Hence he adds that he did it in the Person of Christ In the person of Christ This may be understood (1.) in the presence of Christ. So Theodoret and Vatablus. This rendering is eagerly adopted by Calvin and Beza, and read as if it meant, I forgive him ex animo> really and not feignedly. (2.) Properly it means, “ I forgive him by the authority of Christ entrusted to me, VOL. II. B 1 8 SECOND EPISTLE TO THE who said, f Whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.*” So Theophylact renders it: “I forgive him just as if Christ had forgiven him : just as a regent acts with the authority of a king, and orders, passes laws, and pardons in his stead.” As S. Paul, in i Cor. v., had excommunicated the fornicator in the name of Christ, so here, by the same authority, he sets him free, just as any one who might have been condemned by the regent could not be pardoned but by the regent himself. Ver. ii. — Lest Satan should get an advantage over us . Lest we be deceived, and lest that fornicator be, by excessive severity, driven by Satan to despair. The Greek verb means, lest we be seized unjustly, and taken possession of by Satan, just as misers, usurers, and tyrants defraud, and rob, and oppress. Hence Ambrose renders it, “ Lest we be possessed by Satan.** For, as Theophylact says, when Satan catches and deceives souls, he does not seize what is his own but what is ours and Christ’s. Hence Tertullian (de Pudicit. c. xiii.) reads for the following clause : “ We are not ignorant of his devices,” “ We are not ignorant of his robberies.” For we are not ignorant of his devices . Plutarch relates an excellent saying of Chabrias, that “ he is the best commander who knows intimately the plans of the enemy.” In like manner he is the best Christian soldier and captain who knows thoroughly the devices and machinations of Satan. He transforms himself into an angel of light, that that which is a suggestion of our enemy the devil may seem to be the counsel of a friendly angel We often experience suggestions of evil surmisings, bitterness of soul, anger, moroseness, cowardice, and we think that we are moved by some good cause and by reason, and that these things come forth from our own minds, when all the time they proceed from the devil, who suggests them to our ruin. The Christian, therefore, should, in such cases, reflect whether these suggestions are in accordance with charity, humility, patience, grace, and the law of Christ, and if he finds them to be opposed, let him be sure that they are of the devil : if he is in doubt, let him take counsel with his confessor, his superior, or some prudent man. S. Anthony, by long experience, learnt this and taught it : he was THE DEVICES OF SATAN 19 in the habit of constantly laying bare and explaining to his disciples, the arts and devices of the devil, and of pointing out the way to defeat them, as we read in the life of him by Athanasius. S. Francis, too, frequently did the same thing, and so freed many of his followers from the deviFs temptations, as S. Bonaventura relates ( Vita, lib. Lc.11). In this way, then, Satan was instigating the leaders of the Corinthian Church to show anger and indignation against this fornicator for having so foully stained the first purity of his Church, to the end that, being deprived of all comfort and hope, he might lose all heart and become desperate. Paul saw through this intent of Satan, and here exposes it, and bids them receive the fornicator once more into grace, and give him, on his penitence, pardon and remission. Vers. 12, 13. — Furthermore , when I came to Troas . . . I had no rest in my spirit because I found not Titus my brother . S. Jerome (ad Hedibiani) says that Titus was S. PauPs interpreter, and explained the sublime truths taught by him in Greek worthy of the subject. There was, too, another reason why Paul went to Troas to meet Titus, viz., that he was anxious to hear from Titus, whom he had sent to Corinth, the state of the Church there, before he himself fulfilled his promise of returning thither. Hence, in chap. vii. 6, he says that he had been comforted in Macedonia by the arrival of Titus, who brought him word of the sorrow of the Corinthians and of their desire to see him. Titus, however, seems to have reported to Paul that the time was not yet ripe for his return to Corinth. Paul, therefore, postponed his visit to Corinth, and sent on this letter to pave the way for him, and to correct the failings of the Corinthians

Now thanks be unto God which always causeth us to triumph in Christ The Syriac and Theophylact render this “triumphs in us,” i.e. f makes us conspicuous to all A triumph is the procession of a victorious commander through the midst of the city with his trophies and other signs of victory. But those things which seem to us to be suffering and shame are our glory and triumph, says Theophylact Secondly, Anselm understands it of God triumphing over the devil in us or through us. Cf. Col. ii. 15. The Apostle seems to have had to bear sharp persecution in 20 SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHTANS, C. II. Macedonia, and, indeed, in vii. 5 he says that he had suffered there every kind of tribulation : without were fightings, within were fears ; but God’s grace gloriously and triumphantly overcame them all S. Jerome (Ep. 150 ad Hedibiam, qu. xi.) says beautifully that the Apostle here gives thanks to God for counting him worthy to be the subject of the triumph of His Son over so many persecutions and evils, which he underwent in his task of converting the Gentiles to Christ " For the triumph of God? says S. Jerome, “ is the suffering of the martyrs for the name of Christy the shedding of their blood, and their joy in the midst of torture* For when any one saw the martyrs stand firm, and so perseveringly endure tortures , and glory in their sufferings, the odour of the knowledge of Christ was shed abroad among the Gentiles, and the half unconscious thought would arise that if the Gospel were not true it would never be proof against death.” The preaching of the Gospel therefore triumphs in the Apostles, inasmuch as in it faith overcomes unbelief, truth falsehood, the love of Christ the hatred of the scornful, patience every kind of suffering and persecution, and even death itself