Most people define repentance as a kind of sorrow, but this is not

exactly St. Paul's view here. There is a kind of sorrow, he intimates,

which issues in repentance, but repentance itself is not so much an

emotional as a spiritual change. The sorrow which ends in it is a

blessed experience; the sorrow which does not end in it is the most

tragical waste of which human nature is capable. The Corinthians, we

are told, were made sorry, or grieved, according to God. Their sorrow

had respect to Him: when the Apostle's letter pricked their hearts,

they became conscious of that which they had forgotten--God's relation

to them, and His judgment on their conduct. It is this element which

makes any sorrow "godly," and without this, sorrow does not look

towards repentance at all. All sins sooner or later bring the sense of

loss with them; but the sense of loss is not repentance. It is not

repentance when we discover that our sin has found us out, and has put

the things we most coveted beyond our reach. It is not repentance when

the man who has sown his wild oats is compelled in bitterness of soul

to reap what he has sown. It is not a sorrow according to God when our

sin is summed up for us in the pain it inflicts upon ourselves--in our

own loss, our own defeat, our own humiliation, our own exposure, our

own unavailing regret. These are not healing, but embittering. The

sorrow according to God is that in which the sinner is conscious of

his sin in relation to the Holy One, and feels that its inmost soul of

pain and guilt is this, that he has fallen away from the grace and

friendship of God. He has wounded a love to which he is dearer than he

is to himself: to know this is really to grieve, and that not with a

self-consuming, but with a healing, hopeful sorrow. It was such a

sorrow to which Paul's letter gave rise at Corinth: it is such a

sorrow which issues in repentance, that complete change of spiritual

attitude which ends in salvation, and need never be regretted.

Anything else--the sorrow, _e.g._, which is bounded by the selfish

interests of the sinner, and is not due to his sinful act, but only to

its painful consequences--is the sorrow of the world. It is such as

men feel in that realm of life in which no account is taken of God; it

is such as weakens and breaks the spirit, or embitters and hardens it,

turning it now to defiance and now to despair, but never to God, and

penitent hope in Him. It is in this way that it works death. If death

is to be defined at all, it must be by contrast with salvation: the

grief which has not God as its rule can only exhaust the soul, wither

up its faculties, blight its hopes, extinguish and deaden all.

St. Paul can point to the experience of the Corinthians themselves as

furnishing a demonstration of these truths. "Consider your own godly

sorrow," he seems to say, "and what blessed fruits it bore. What

earnest care it wrought in you! how eager became your interest in a

situation to which you had once been sinfully indifferent!" But

"earnest care" is not all. On the contrary (ἀλλὰ), Paul expands it

into a whole series of acts or dispositions, all of which are inspired

by that sorrow according to God. When they thought of the infamy which

sin had brought upon the Church, they were eager to clear themselves

of complicity in it (ἀπολογίαν), and angry with themselves that they

had ever allowed such a thing to be (ἀγανάκτησιν); when they thought

of the Apostle, they feared lest he should come to them with a rod

(φόβον), and yet their hearts went out in longing desires to see him

(ἐπιπόθησιν); when they thought of the man whose sin was at the bottom

of all this trouble, they were full of moral earnestness, which made

lax dealing with him impossible (ζῆλον), and compelled them to punish

his offence (ἐκδίκησιν). In every way they made it evident that, in

spite of early appearances, they were really pure in the matter. They

were not, after all, making themselves partakers, by condoning it, of

the bad man's offence.

A popular criticism disparages repentance, and especially the sorrow

which leads to repentance, as a mere waste of moral force. We have

nothing to throw away, the severely practical moralist tells us, in

sighs and tears and feelings: let us be up and doing, to rectify the

wrongs for which we are responsible; that is the only repentance which

is worth the name. This passage, and the experience which it depicts,

are the answer to such precipitate criticism. The descent into our own

hearts, the painful self-scrutiny and self-condemnation, the sorrowing

according to God, are not waste of moral force. Rather are they the only

possible way to accumulate moral force; they apply to the soul the

pressure under which it manifests those potent virtues which St. Paul

here ascribes to the Corinthians. All sorrow, indeed, as he is careful

to tell us, is not repentance; but he who has no sorrow for his sin has

not the force in him to produce earnest care, fear, longing, zeal,

avenging. The fruit, of course, is that for which the tree is

cultivated; but who would magnify the fruit by disparaging the sap? That

is what they do who decry "godly sorrow" to exalt practical amendment.

With this reference to the effect of his letter upon them, the Apostle

virtually completes his reconciliation to the Corinthians. He chooses to

consider the effect of his letter as the purpose for which it was

written, and this enables him to dismiss what had been a very painful

subject with a turn as felicitous as it is affectionate. "So then,

though I did write to you, it was not for his sake who did the wrong

[the sinner of 1 Cor. v.], nor for his who had it done to him [his

father][65]; but that you yourselves might become conscious of your

earnest care of our interests in the sight of God." Awkward as some of

the situations had been, all that remained, so far as the Apostle and

the Corinthians were concerned, was this: they knew better than before

how deeply they were attached to him, and how much they would do for his

sake. He chooses, as I have said, to regard this last result of his

writing as the purpose for which he wrote; and when he ends the twelfth

verse with the words, "For this cause, we have been comforted,"[66] it

is as if he said, "I have got what I wanted now, and am content."

But content is far too weak a word. Paul had heard all this good news

from Titus, and the comfort which it gave him was exalted into abounding

joy when he saw how the visit to Corinth had gladdened and refreshed the

spirit of his friend. Evidently Titus had accepted Paul's commission

with misgivings: possibly Timothy, who had been earlier enlisted for the

same service (1 Cor. xvi. 10), had found his courage fail him, and

withdrawn. At all events, Paul had spoken encouragingly to Titus of the

Corinthians before he started; as he puts it in ver. 14, he had boasted

somewhat to him on their account; and he is delighted that their

reception of Titus has shown that his confidence was justified. He

cannot refrain here from a passing allusion to the charges of

prevarication discussed in the first chapter; he not only tells the

truth _about_ them (as Titus has seen), but he has always told the truth

_to_ them. These verses present the character of Paul in an admirable

light: not only his sympathy with Titus, but his attitude to the

Corinthians, is beautifully Christian. What in most cases of

estrangement makes reconciliation hard is that the estranged have

allowed themselves to speak of each other to outsiders in a way that

cannot be forgotten or got over. But even when the tension between Paul

and the Corinthians was at its height, he boasted of them to Titus. His

love to them was so real that nothing could blind him to their good

qualities. He could say severe things to them, but he would never

disparage or malign them to other people; and if we wish friendships to

last, and to stand the strains to which all human ties are occasionally

subject, we must never forget this rule. "Boast somewhat," even of the

man who has wronged you, if you possibly can. If you have ever loved

him, you certainly can, and it makes reconciliation easy.

The last results of the painful friction between Paul and the

Corinthians were peculiarly happy. The Apostle's confidence in them

was completely restored, and they had completely won the heart of

Titus. "His affections are more abundantly toward you, as he remembers

the obedience of you all, how with fear and trembling ye received

him." "Fear and trembling" is an expression which St. Paul uses

elsewhere, and which is liable to be misunderstood. It does not

suggest panic, but an anxious scrupulous desire not to be wanting to

one's duty, or to do less than one ought to do. "Work out your

salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God that worketh in you,"

does not mean "Do it in a constant state of agitation or alarm," but

"Work on with this resource behind you, in the same spirit with which

a young man of character would work, who was starting in business on

capital advanced by a friend." He would proceed, or ought to proceed,

with fear and trembling, not of the sort which paralyse intelligence

and energy, but of the sort which peremptorily preclude slackness or

failure in duty. This is the meaning here also. The Corinthians were

not frightened for Paul's deputy, but they welcomed him with an

anxious conscientious desire to do the very utmost that duty and love

could require. This, says Calvin, is the true way to receive ministers

of Christ: and it is this only which will gladden a true minister's

heart. Sometimes, with the most innocent intention, the whole

situation is changed, and the minister, though received with the

utmost courtesy and kindness, is not received with fear and trembling

at all. Partly through his own fault, and partly through the fault of

others, he ceases to be the representative of anything that inspires

reverence, or excites to conscientious earnestness of conduct. If,

under these circumstances, he continues to be kindly treated, he is

apt to end in being, not the pastor, but the pet lamb of his flock. In

apostolic times there was no danger of this, but modern ministers and

modern congregations have sometimes thrown away all the possibilities

of good in their mutual relations by disregarding it. The affection

which they ought to have to each other is Christian, not merely

natural; controlled by spiritual ideas and purposes, and not a matter

of ordinary good feeling; and where this is forgotten, all is lost.

FOOTNOTES:

[61] But see on chap. ii. 5-11.

[62] This is, I think, the only possible meaning of πολλή μοι παῤῥησία

πρὸς ὑμᾶς.

[63] So Schmiedel.

[64] It is difficult to fix either the text or the punctuation in ver.

8, and agreement among critics is quite hopeless. Practically they are

at one in omitting the γὰρ of the Received Text after βλέπω: and

Schmiedel agrees with Lachmann and Westcott and Hort that the original

reading was probably βλέπων. The R.V. has the same punctuation as the

A.V., which probably means that the Revisers could not get a

sufficient majority to change it, not that it is quite satisfactory as

it stands. It certainly seems better to connect εἰ καὶ μετεμελόμην

with what follows (νῦν χαίρω) than with what precedes; but the sense

is not affected.

[65] But see on chap. ii. 5-11.

[66] This is the true text. Instead of ἐπὶ τῇ παρακλήσει in ver. 13

all critical editions read ἐπὶ δὲ τῇ π., and make these words begin a

new paragraph.

XX

_THE GRACE OF LIBERALITY_

"Moreover, brethren, we make known to you the grace of God which

hath been given in the Churches of Macedonia; how that in much

proof of affliction the abundance of their joy and their deep

poverty abounded unto the riches of their liberality. For

according to their power, I bear witness, yea and beyond their

power, _they gave_ of their own accord, beseeching us with much

intreaty in regard of this grace and the fellowship in the

ministering to the saints: and _this_, not as we had hoped, but

first they gave their own selves to the Lord, and to us by the

will of God. Insomuch that we exhorted Titus, that as he had made

a beginning before, so he would also complete in you this grace

also. But as ye abound in everything, _in_ faith, and utterance,

and knowledge, and _in_ all earnestness, and _in_ your love to us,

_see_ that ye abound in this grace also. I speak not by the way of

commandment, but as proving through the earnestness of others the

sincerity also of your love. For ye know the grace of our Lord

Jesus Christ, that, though He was rich, yet for your sakes He

became poor, that ye through His poverty might become rich. And

herein I give _my_ judgment: for this is expedient for you, who

were the first to make a beginning a year ago, not only to do, but

also to will. But now complete the doing also; that as _there was_

the readiness to will, so _there may be_ the completion also out

of your ability. For if the readiness is there, _it is_ acceptable

according as _a man_ hath, not according as _he_ hath not. For _I

say_ not _this_, that others may be eased, _and_ ye distressed:

but by equality; your abundance _being a supply_ at this present

time for their want, that their abundance also may become _a

supply_ for your want; that there may be equality: as it is

written, He that _gathered_ much had nothing over; and he that

_gathered_ little had no lack."--2 COR. viii. 1-15 (R.V.).

With the eighth chapter begins the second of the three great divisions

of this Epistle. It is concerned exclusively with the collection which

the Apostle was raising in all the Gentile Christian communities for

the poor of the Mother Church at Jerusalem. This collection had great

importance in his eyes, for various reasons: it was the fulfilment of

his undertaking, to the original Apostles, to remember the poor (Gal.

ii. 10); and it was a testimony to the saints in Palestine of the love

of the Gentile brethren in Christ. The fact that Paul interested

himself so much in this collection, destined as it was for Jerusalem,

proves that he distinguished broadly between the primitive Church and

its authorities on the one hand, and the Jewish emissaries whom he

treats so unsparingly in chaps. x. and xi. on the other.

Money is usually a delicate topic to handle in the Church, and we may

count ourselves happy in having two chapters from the pen of St. Paul

in which he treats at large of a collection. We see the mind of Christ

applied in them to a subject which is always with us, and sometimes

embarrassing; and if there are traces here and there that

embarrassment was felt even by the Apostle, they only show more

clearly the wonderful wealth of thought and feeling which he could

bring to bear on an ungrateful theme. Consider only the variety of

lights in which he puts it, and all of them ideal. "Money," as such,

has no character, and so he never mentions it. But he calls the thing

which he wants a grace (χάρις), a service (διακονία), a communion in

service (κοινωνία), a munificence (ἁδρότης), a blessing (εὐλογία), a

manifestation of love. The whole resources of Christian imagination

are spent in transfiguring, and lifting into a spiritual atmosphere, a

subject on which even Christian men are apt to be materialistic. We do

not need to be hypocritical when we speak about money in the Church;

but both the charity and the business of the Church must be

transacted as Christian, and not as secular, affairs.

Paul introduces the new topic with his usual felicity. He has got

through some rough water in the first seven chapters, but ends with

expressions of joy and satisfaction. When he goes on in the eighth

chapter, it is in the same cheerful key. It is as though he said to

the Corinthians: "You have made me very happy, and now I must tell you

what a happy experience I have had in Macedonia. The grace of God has

been poured out on the Churches, and they have given with incredible

liberality to the collection for the Jewish poor. It so moved me that

I begged Titus, who had already made some arrangements in connexion

with this matter among you, to return and complete the work."

Speaking broadly, the Apostle invites the Corinthians to look at the

subject through three media: (1) the example of the Macedonians; (2) the

example of the Lord; and (3) the laws by which God estimates liberality.

(1) The liberality of the Macedonians is described as "the grace of

God given in the Churches." This is the aspect of it which conditions

every other; it is not the native growth of the soul, but a divine

gift for which God is to be thanked. Praise Him when hearts are

opened, and generosity shown; for it is His work. In Macedonia this

grace was set off by the circumstances of the people. Their Christian

character was put to the severe proof of a great affliction (see 1

Thess. ii. 14 f.); they were themselves in deep poverty; but their joy

abounded nevertheless (1 Thess. i. 6), and joy and poverty together

poured out a rich stream of liberality.[67] This may sound

paradoxical, but paradox is normal here. Strange to say, it is not

those to whom the Gospel comes easily, and on whom it imposes little,

who are most generous in its cause. On the contrary, it is those who

have suffered for it, those who have lost by it, who are as a rule

most open-handed. Comfort makes men selfish, even though they are

Christian; but if they are Christian, affliction, even to the spoiling

of their goods, teaches them generosity. The first generation of

Methodists in England--the men who in 1843 fought the good fight of

the faith in Scotland--illustrate this law; in much proof of

affliction, it might be said of them also, the abundance of their joy,

and their deep poverty, abounded unto the riches of their liberality.

Paul was almost embarrassed with the liberality of the Macedonians.

When he looked at their poverty, he did not hope for much (ver. 5). He

would not have felt justified in urging people who were themselves in

such distress to do much for the relief of others. But they did not

need urging: it was they who urged him. The Apostle's sentence breaks

down as he tries to convey an adequate impression of their eagerness

(ver. 4), and he has to leave off and begin again (ver. 5). To their

power, he bears witness, yes and beyond their power, they gave of

their own accord. They importuned him to bestow on them also the

favour of sharing in this service to the saints. And when their

request was granted, it was no paltry contribution that they made;

they gave _themselves_ to the Lord, to begin with, and to the

Apostle, as His agent in the transaction, by the will of God. The

last words resume, in effect, those with which St. Paul introduced

this topic: it was God's doing, the working of His will on their

wills, that the Macedonians behaved as they did. I cannot think the

English version is right in the rendering: "And this, not as we had

hoped, but first they gave their own selves to the Lord." This

inevitably suggests that afterwards they gave something else--viz.,

their subscriptions. But this is a false contrast, and gives the word

"first" (πρῶτον) a false emphasis, which it has not in the original.

What St. Paul says is virtually this: "We expected little from people

so poor, but by God's will they literally put _themselves_ at the

service of the Lord, in the first instance, and of us as His

administrators. They said to us, to our amazement and joy, 'We are

Christ's, and yours after Him, to command in this matter.'" This is

one of the finest and most inspiring experiences that a Christian

minister can have, and, God be thanked, it is none of the rarest. Many

a man besides Paul has been startled and ashamed by the liberality of

those from whom he would not have ventured to beg. Many a man has been

importuned to take what he could not have dared to ask. It is a

mistake to refuse such generosity, to decline it as too much; it

gladdens God, and revives the heart of man. It is a mistake to deprive

the poorest of the opportunity of offering this sacrifice of praise;

it is the poorest in whom it has most munificence, and to whom it

brings the deepest joy. Rather ought we to open our hearts to the

impression of it, as to the working of God's grace, and rouse our own

selfishness to do something not less worthy of Christ's love.

This was the application which St. Paul made of the generosity of the

Macedonians. Under the impression of it he exhorted Titus, who on a

previous occasion[68] had made some preliminary arrangements about the

matter in Corinth, to return thither and complete the work. He had

other things also to complete, but "this grace" was to be specially

included (καὶ τὴν χάριν ταύτην). Perhaps one may see a gentle irony in

the tone of ver. 7. "Enough of argument," the Apostle says:[69] "let

Christians distinguished as you are in every respect--in faith and

eloquence and knowledge and all sorts of zeal, and in the love that

comes from you and abides in us--see that they are distinguished in

this grace also." It is a real character that is suggested here by way

of contrast, but not exactly a lovely one: the man who abounds in

spiritual interests, who is fervent, prayerful, affectionate, able to

speak in the Church, but unable to part with money.

(2) This brings the Apostle to his second point, the example of the

Lord. "I do not speak by way of commandment," he says, "in urging you

to be liberal; I am only taking occasion, through the earnestness of

others, to put the sincerity of your love to the proof. If you truly

love the brethren you will not grudge to help them in their distress.

The Macedonians, of course, are no law for you; and though it was from

them I started, I do not need to urge their example; 'for ye know the

grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though He was rich, yet for your

sakes He became poor, that ye through His poverty might become rich.'"

This is the one pattern that stands for ever before the eyes of

Christian men, the fountain of an inspiration as strong and pure

to-day as when Paul wrote these words.

Read simply, and by one who has the Christian creed in his mind, the

words do not appear ambiguous. Christ was rich, they tell us; He

became poor for our sakes, and by His poverty we become rich. If a

commentary is needed, it is surely to be sought in the parallel

passage Phil. ii. 5 ff. The rich Christ is the pre-existent One, in

the form of God, in the glory which He had with the Father before the

world was; He became poor when He became man. The poor men are those

whose lot Christ came to share, and in consequence of that

self-impoverishment of His they become heirs of a kingdom. It is not

necessary, indeed it is utterly misleading, to ask curiously _how_

Christ became poor, or what kind of experience it was for Him when He

exchanged heaven for earth, and the form of God for the form of a

servant. As Mr. Gore has well said, it is not the metaphysics of the

Incarnation that St. Paul is concerned with, either here or in

Philippians, but its ethics. We may never have a scientific key to it,

but we have a moral key. If we do not comprehend its method, at least

we comprehend its motive, and it is in its motive that the inspiration

of it lies. We know _the grace_ of our Lord Jesus Christ; and it comes

home to our hearts when the Apostle says, "Let that _mind_--that moral

temper--be in you which was also in Him." Ordinary charity is but the

crumbs from the rich man's table; but if we catch Christ's spirit, it

will carry us far beyond that. He was rich, and gave up all for our

sakes; it is no less than poverty on His part which enriches us.

The older theologians, especially of the Lutheran Church, read this

great text differently, and their opinion is not yet quite extinct.

They referred ἐπτώχευσεν, not to Christ's entrance on the incarnate

state, but to His existence in it;[70] they puzzled themselves to

conceive of Him as rich and poor at the same time; and they quite took

the point from St. Paul's exhortation by making ἐπτώχευσεν πλούσιος ὢν

describe a combination, instead of an interchange, of states. It is a

counsel of despair when a recent commentator (Heinrici), sympathising

with this view, but yielding to the comparison of Phil. ii. 5 ff.,

tries to unite the two interpretations, and to make ἐπτώχευσεν cover

both the coming to earth from heaven and the life in poverty on earth.

No word can mean two different things at the same time: and in this

daring attempt we may fairly see a final surrender of the orthodox

Lutheran interpretation.

The Expositor's Bible: The Second Epistle to the Corinthians · 第 18 / 27 段