The first paragraph, vs. 1–4, relates to the change of his plan of going immediately to Corinth. In vs. 5–11 he refers to the case of discipline mentioned in his former letter. In vs. 12–14 he states why he did not remain in Troas. And in vs. 14–17 he pours out his heart in gratitude to God for the continued triumph of the gospel.
The true reason why the apostle did not go immediately to Corinth, and his views in reference to the offender whose excommunication he had insisted upon in his former letter.
THERE is no change of subject in this chapter. The apostle after defending himself from the charge of levity in conduct and inconsistency in doctrine, had said, in v. 23 of the preceding chapter, that he did not go to Corinth before giving the church time to comply with the injunctions contained in his former letter, because he did not wish to appear among them as a judge. He here says, in amplification, that he had determined not again to visit Corinth under circumstances which could only give pain to the Corinthians and to himself. He knew that he could not give them sorrow without being himself grieved, and he was assured that if he was happy they would share in his joy, vs. 1–4. The sorrow occasioned by the incestuous person was not confined to the apostle, but shared by the church. He was satisfied with the course which the church had pursued in reference to that case, and was willing the offender should be restored to their fellowship if they were, vs. 5–11. His anxiety about them was so great that not finding Titus, from whom he expected to receive intelligence, he was unable to remain at Troas, but passed over into Macedonia to meet him on his way, vs. 12–13. The intelligence which he received from Titus being favourable, the apostle expresses in strong terms his gratitude to God who always caused him to triumph, vs. 15–17.
- But I determined this with myself, that I would not come again to you in heaviness.
The connection is with what immediately precedes. ‘I deferred my visit in order to spare you, not that I assume to be a lord over your faith, but a helper of your joy. But the true reason for my not coming was that I did not wish to come with heaviness.’ The words ἔκρινα ἑμαυτῷ, rendered I determined with myself, may mean simply I determine as to myself. I had made up my mind; or, ‘I determined for myself,’ i.e. for my own sake. This perhaps is to be preferred. The apostle thus delicately intimates that it was not merely to spare them, but also himself, that he put off his visit. The word this refers to the purpose which the apostle had formed, and which is explained by the following infinitive, μὴ ἐλθεῖν, not to come. Two explanations are given of the following clause. According to the one, the meaning is, ‘I determined that my second visit should not be with sorrow;’ according to the other, ‘I determined not a second time to visit you in sorrow.’ In the one case the implication is that Paul had, at this time, been only once in Corinth; in the other, the passage implies that he had already (i.e. after his first visit) been to Corinth under circumstances painful to himself and to the church. There are two reasons for preferring this latter view. The first is, that according to the position of the words, as given in all the older manuscripts, (μὴ πάλιν ἐν λύπῃ πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἐλθεῖν,) the πάλιν, again, belongs to the whole clause and not exclusively to ἐλθεῖν. The sense, therefore, is that he determined not a second time to come with sorrow, (he had done that once.) The other reason is, that there is evidence from other passages that Paul had been twice to Corinth before this letter was written. See 12:14, 21, 13:1. That there is no mention in the Acts of this intermediate journey, is no sufficient reason for denying it, as the passages referred to are so explicit. To make the second visit one by letter, as Calvin (venerat enim semel per epistolam) and others have done, is evidently unnatural. Having gone once to correct abuses and to exercise severity, he was anxious not to have a second painful interview of the same kind, and therefore, instead of going to them, as he had intended, directly from Corinth, he waited to learn through Titus what had been the effect of his letter. With heaviness, ἐν λύπῃ, with sorrow, i.e. causing sorrow to you. This explanation is required by the following verse, otherwise the meaning would more naturally be in sorrow, i.e. in a sorrowful state of mind, as the word λύπη everywhere else with Paul means a state of grief.
- For if I make you sorry, who is he that maketh me glad, but the same that is made sorry by me?
This is the reason why he did not wish to come bringing sorrow with him; ‘For if,’ says he, ‘I make you sorry, who is there to make me glad? How can I be happy, if you are afflicted? Unless my visit cause you joy, it can bring no joy to me.’ As inspiration leaves full play to all the characteristic peculiarities of its subject, in reading the writings of inspired men we learn not only the mind of the Spirit, but also the personal character of the writers. The urbanity of the apostle Paul, his refinement and courtesy, are just as plainly revealed in his epistles as his intellectual power and moral courage. The passage before us is one of many illustrations of the truth of this remark, furnished by this epistle. Who is he that maketh me glad, but the same that is made sorry by me. The singular is used, not because a particular individual, much less because the incestuous person, is specially referred to, but because the case is stated in the form of a general proposition. ‘I cannot expect joy from one to whom I bring sorrow.’ Such was the apostle’s love for the Corinthians that unless they were happy he could not be happy. This is the natural and commonly received interpretation of the passage. Chrysostom, and many of the ancient commentators, and some also of the moderns, give a different view of its meaning. ‘Who gives me joy, but he who allows himself (λυπούμενος as middle and not passive) to be grieved by me.’ That is, no one causes me so much joy as he who is brought to repentance by me. But this is obviously inconsistent with the context. The verse, as thus explained, gives no reason why Paul did not wish to go to Corinth bringing sorrow. On the contrary, the more of that kind of sorrow he brought with him, or was occasioned by his visit, the better. This interpretation would make the apostle say, ‘I will not come with sorrow, for nothing gives me so much pleasure as to cause (godly) sorrow.’ To avoid this incongruity Olshausen says the connection is to be thus understood: Paul determined that he would not come with sorrow, because he feared that few of the Corinthians would give him the happiness of seeing that they had been made sorry by his former reproofs. But this makes the passage itself a reproof, an insinuation that they had not profited by his first letter. This is contrary to the whole spirit of the passage, which is overflowing with confidence and affection.