The interpretation timeline
2 Corinthians 3:2 Douay-Rheims

You are our epistle, written in our hearts, which is known and read by all men:

A.D. 407 – 1871 7 witnesses

Patristic

before A.D. 750
407
A.D.
John Chrysostom Patristic
A.D. 347–407
“What means this, "ye are?" 'Did we need to be commended to others, we should have produced you before them instead of an epistle.' And this he said in the former Epistle. "For the seal of mine Apostleship are ye." But he doth not here say it in this manner, but in irony so as to make his question, "Do we need epistles of commendation?" more cutting. And in allusion to the false apostles, he added, "as do some, [epistles of commendation] to you, or letters of commendation from you" to others. Then because what he had said was severe, he softens it by adding, "Ye are our epistle, written in our hearts, known of all." Here he testifieth not only to their love, but also to their good works: since they are able to show unto all men by their own virtue the high worth of their teacher, for this is the meaning of, "Ye are our epistle." What letters would have done to commend and gain respect for us, that ye do both as seen and heard of; for the virtue of the disciples is wont to adorn and to commend the teacher more than any letter. "Written in our hearts." That is, which all know; we so bear you about every where and have you in mind. As though he said, Ye are our commendation to others, for we both have you continually in our heart and proclaim to all your good works. Because then that even to others yourselves are our commendation, we need no epistles from you; but further, because we love you exceedingly, we need no commendation to you. For to those who are strangers one hath need of letters, but ye are in our mind. Yet he said not merely, "ye are [in it]," but "written in [it]," that is, ye cannot slide out of it. For just as from letters by reading, so from our heart by perceiving, all are acquainted with the love we bear you. If then the object of a letter be to certify, "such an one is my friend and let him have free intercourse [with you], your love is sufficient to secure all this. For should we go to you, we have no need of others to commend us, seeing your love anticipateth this; and should we go to others, again we need no letters, the same love again sufficing unto us in their stead, for we carry about the epistle in our hearts.”
Source

Scholastic

c. 1100 – 1500
1272
A.D.
Thomas Aquinas Catholic
1225–1274
“After the Apostle has set forth his excuse, in which he sought the goodwill of his hearers, here he consequently pursues his intention, namely treating of the ministers of the new testament. And concerning this he does two things. For first he commends the dignity of good ministers; but second he sets out at length the malice of evil ministers, and this from chapter 10 onward. Concerning the first he does two things. For first he commends the ministry of the new testament; second he commends the use of this ministry in others, exhorting them to it, at chapter 6: "but helping," etc. Concerning the first he commends this ministry of the new testament from three things. First from its dignity, in this chapter; second from its use, in chapter 4, at "therefore having," etc.; third from its reward, in chapter 5, at "for we know that if," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he removes a certain objection; second he commends the ministers of the new testament, at "who has also made us fit," etc. Concerning the first it must be known that the Apostle intends to commend the ministers of the new testament, of whom he himself was one. And therefore, lest the Corinthians should object to him that in this he wished to commend himself, he immediately excludes this, saying, "we begin again ourselves," etc. Where he does two things. First he raises a question; second he responds, at, namely, "or do we need," etc. His question is this: I say that we are not adulterating the word of God, as the pseudo, but from sincerity, as from God. But by saying this, do we begin again to commend ourselves, that is, do we say these things because we wish to seek our own glory and not God's? And he says "again," because in the first epistle he had commended himself enough, when he said: "as a wise master-builder," etc. Therefore we do not say this in order to seek our own glory, but God's. Prov. 27:2: "let a stranger praise you," etc. But he responds to this question when he says, "or do we need," etc. And he shows that he does not gladly commend himself. And concerning this he does two things. First he shows that he does not need the commendation of men; second, that he does not even require this from them, at "but such confidence," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he shows that he does not need their commendation for his own glory; second he assigns the cause of this, at "you are our epistle," etc. He says therefore: I say that we do not begin to commend ourselves, because we do not need commendation. And this is what he says: "or do we need," we true ministers, as certain ones, namely the pseudo, letters of commendation, that is, praises sent, to you, from others, or from you, sent to others? But against this, in Col. 4:10 it is said: "Mark, the cousin of Barnabas, concerning whom you have received a command," etc. Also, the legates of the Pope always carry letters of commendation. Therefore it is not evil. I respond. It must be said that to receive letters of this kind from famous persons, so that only through them are they commended and honored, until they themselves come into notice from their own good works, this is not evil; this the legates of the Pope do. But the Apostle was already so known and commended among these people through his own works, that he did not need letters of commendation. And therefore, immediately assigning the cause of this, he adds: "you are our epistle." As if he were to say: I have good letters, I do not need others. And therefore concerning this he does two things. For first he shows what this letter is that he has; second he explains this same thing, at "manifested," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he shows what that letter is; second he shows it to be sufficient for his own commendation, at "written," etc. He says therefore thus: "you are our epistle," that is, the epistle through which our dignity is manifested, by which we are commended, so that we do not need other letters. Above, chapter 2: "you are our glory." Gal. 4:19: "my little children, whom I am again in labor for," etc. But is this letter sufficient? Yes, because "written," etc. Where he touches on two things that cause the sufficiency of letters of this kind. One is that it be understood and known by him for whom it is sent, otherwise he would still be seeking it, unless he knew that he had it. And as to this he says, "written in our hearts," because we always hold you in memory, having a special care for you. Phil. 1:7: "because I hold you," etc. The second is that he to whom it is sent should read and know it, otherwise he would not care about its commendation. And as to this he says, "which is known and read by all men." It is known, I say, because you have been instructed and converted through us. But it is read, because by our example others also imitate you. Hab. 2:2: "write the vision, and make it plain upon tablets, that he who reads it may run." But how this epistle is known, he explains, saying "manifested," etc. And concerning this he does three things. First he explains whose this letter is; second, how it is written; and third, in what. But whose it is, he shows thus, that it is Christ's. And therefore he says, "manifested, that you are of Christ," that is, formed and led by Christ, namely principally and authoritatively. Matt. 23:8: "one is your master." But by us secondarily and instrumentally. And therefore he says, "ministered by us." 1 Cor. 4:1: "let a man so regard us," etc. 1 Cor. 3:4: "what then is Cephas," etc. But how it is written, he shows, that it is not with ink, that is, not mixed with errors, as the pseudo-apostles; not changeable and imperfect, like the old law, which brought no one to perfection, Heb. 7:19. For ink is black, by which error is understood, and erasable, by which changeableness is understood. It is not, I say, written with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God, that is, with the Holy Spirit, by whom you live, and by whose teaching you have been instructed. Eph. 1:13: "in whom you have been sealed." But where it is written he suggests, adding, "not on tablets of stone," as the old law, so as to exclude hardness, as if he were to say: not in hearts of stone having hardness, like the Jews. Acts 7:51: "stiff-necked," etc. But "on the fleshly tablets of the heart," that is, in hearts wide from charity, and fleshly, that is, soft from an affection of fulfilling and understanding. Ezek. 36:26: "I will take away from you the heart of stone," etc. "But such confidence," etc. The Apostle above excused himself, that he did not seek his own glory because he did not need it; but here he proves that he himself does not seek his own glory, indeed he does not attribute all the good that he does to himself, but to God. And concerning this he does two things. For first he attributes all the good that he has and does to God; second he assigns the cause of this, at "not that we are sufficient," etc. He says therefore first: I say that we do not need letters of commendation, and that you are our epistle, ministered by us. Nor do we even seek our own glory, but Christ's. And "such confidence," that is, of saying such things, "we have toward God," that is, we refer it to God. Or a confidence tending toward God, from whose strength I say this, because he himself works in me. Which confidence indeed we have "through Christ," through whom we have access to the Father, as it is said in Rom. 5:2, who has united us to God. Jer. 17:7: "blessed is the man," etc. And because united to God through Christ, I have this confidence. Ps. 11:6: "I will act with confidence," etc. But the cause of this confidence is that whatever I do, even the very beginning of the work, I attribute to God. And therefore he says, "not that we are sufficient to think," let alone to say, or to fulfill. For in any process of a work, first there is assent, which comes about through thinking, then a bringing together through the word, and afterward fulfillment through the deed; hence it follows that thus no one has even the thinking from himself, but from God; for there is no doubt that not only the perfection of a good work is from God, but also its beginning. Phil. 1:6: "who has begun a good work in you," etc. And this is against the Pelagians, who say that the beginning of a good work is from us, but the perfection is from God. Isa. 26:12: "all our works," etc. But from this, lest he should seem to take away the freedom of the will, he says "from us, as it were from ourselves," as if he were to say: I can indeed do something, which belongs to free will, but this, which I do, is not from me, but from God, who confers this very power; so that thus he both defends the freedom of man when he says "from us," that is, from our part, and commends the divine grace, when he says "as it were," namely that it proceeds from ourselves, but is from God. The Philosopher also holds this, that man can never do a certain good by free will, without the help of God. And his reasoning is this, that in those things which we do, that must be sought for the sake of which we do them. But it is not possible to proceed to infinity, but one must arrive at something first, namely at counsel. So therefore I do good, because counsel toward this is present in me, and this is from God. Hence he says that the counsel of good is from someone who is above man, moving him to act well. And this is God, who moves both men and all things that act, to their actions, but in different ways. For since a motion of this kind is something received in the thing moved, it is necessary that this come about according to the manner of its own nature, that is, of the thing moved. And therefore he moves all things according to their natures. Those things, therefore, whose nature it is to be of free will, having dominion over their own actions, he moves freely to their operations, as rational and intellectual creatures. But other things not freely, but according to the manner of their nature. But although we are not sufficient to think anything from ourselves, as it were from ourselves, nevertheless we have some sufficiency, by which, namely, we can will the good and begin to believe, and this is from God. 1 Cor. 4:7: "what do you have, that you have not received?"”

Reformation

c. 1500 – 1650
1637
A.D.
1567–1637
“Ye are our epistle. You, O Corinthians, converted by my efforts, are to me like an epistle of commendation read and understood by all, which I can show as my credentials to whom I like. As the work recommends the workman, and the seal faithfully is represented by its image, so do you commend me as though you were a commendatory letter, sealed by yourselves. For all know what you were before your conversion— drunken, gluttonous, given up to impurity and other evil lusts. Corinth was then an emporium, as famous for its vices as its wares. But now all men see that you have been completely changed, through my preaching, into different men — temperate, chaste, meek, humble, devout, liberal. This your conversion, therefore, is my commendatory letter, i.e., the public testimony of my preaching before all people. Written in our hearts. You have been converted by me, and indelibly written and engraven on my heart This “epistle” was twice written by S. Paul. (1.) He wrote it actually when he instilled into the mind of the Corinthians the faith and Spirit of Christ (2.) CONFIDENCE IN GOD 27 He wrote it and imprinted it on his own heart by his care and love of them. (3.) Christ again was inscribed on their hearts by Paul’s ministry, as if by a pen ; and Christ Himself, by Paul’s preaching, imprinted on them his faith, hope, charity, and other graces, not with ink, but by the inspiration of the Spirit of the living God, who filled their hearts with charity and all virtues”
Source

Post-Reformation

c. 1650 – 1900
1771
A.D.
John Gill Reformed
1697–1771
“Ye are our epistle,.... Here a reason is given why they stood in no need of letters of commendation, to or from the church at Corinth, because that church was their living epistle, and which was much preferable to any written one. The apostle calls them their epistle in the same sense, as they are said to be his "work in the Lord, and the seal of his apostleship", Co1 9:1 they were so as persons regenerated by the Spirit and grace of God, in whose conversion he was an instrument; now it was the work of conversion in them, which was the epistle said to be written in our hearts; some think it should be read, "in your hearts"; and so the Ethiopic version reads it; and it looks as if it should be so read, from the following verse, and from the nature of the thing itself; for the conversion of the Corinthians was not written in the heart of the apostle, but in their own; and this was so very notorious and remarkable, that it was known and read of all men; everyone could read, and was obliged to acknowledge the handwriting; it was so clear a case, what hand the apostle, as an instrument, had in the turning of these persons from idols to serve the living God; and which was so full a proof of the divinity, efficacy, truth, and sincerity of his doctrine, that he needed no letters from any to recommend him.”
Source
1832
A.D.
Adam Clarke Methodist
1762–1832
“Ye are our epistle - I bear the most ardent love to you. I have no need to be put in remembrance of you by any epistles or other means; ye are written in my heart - I have the most affectionate remembrance of you. Known and read of all men - For wherever I go I mention you; speak of your various gifts and graces; and praise your knowledge in the Gospel.”
Source
1849
A.D.
1774–1849
“You are our epistle, better, and of greater force, than any commendatory epistle, written and engraven in my heart, by the love and affection I bear you. You may also be looked upon as the epistle of Christ, because of your zeal for the Christian religion, written upon the soft and fleshy tables of your tender affections, with which you have received, and kept his precepts; and not like the precepts of the law, which were engraven on tables of stone, which the hard-hearted Jews did not keep. (Witham)”
Source
1871
A.D.
1871
“our epistle--of recommendation. in our hearts--not letters borne merely in the hands. Your conversion through my instrumentality, and your faith which is "known of all men" by widespread report (Co1 1:4-7), and which is written by memory and affection on my inmost heart and is borne about wherever I go, is my letter of recommendation (Co1 9:2). known and read--words akin in root, sound, and sense (so Co2 1:13). "Ye are known to be my converts by general knowledge: then ye are known more particularly by your reflecting my doctrine in your Christian life." The handwriting is first "known," then the Epistle is "read" [GROTIUS] (Co2 4:2; Co1 14:25). There is not so powerful a sermon in the world, as a consistent Christian life. The eye of the world takes in more than the ear. Christians' lives are the only religious books the world reads. IGNATIUS [Epistle to the Ephesians, 10] writes, "Give unbelievers the chance of believing through you. Consider yourselves employed by God; your lives the form of language in which He addresses them. Be mild when they are angry, humble when they are haughty; to their blasphemy oppose prayer without ceasing; to their inconsistency, a steadfast adherence to your faith."”
Source
Modern · 1953 →

The in-app commentary runs from the Fathers to the early-modern record, then stops — that's where the public-domain sources end, not where the reading does. For the modern reading, follow the sources directly.