Homilies on Second Corinthians

^3. “So although I wrote unto you,” I wrote “not for his cause that did the wrong, nor for his cause that suffered the wrong.” For that they might not say, Why then do you rebuke us if we were “clear in the matter?” setting himself to meet this even further above, and disposing of it beforehand, he said what he said, namely, “I do not regret, though I did regret.” 'For so far,' says he, 'am I from repenting now of what I wrote then, that I repented then more than I do now when you have approved yourselves.' Do you see again his vehemence and earnest contention, how he has turned around what was said unto the very opposite. For what they thought would have made him recant in confusion as having rebuked them hastily, by reason of their amendment; that he uses as a proof that it was right in him to speak freely. For neither does he refuse afterwards to humor them fearlessly, when he finds he can do this. For he that said farther above such things as these, “He that is joined to an harlot is one body,” and, “Deliver such an one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh,” and, “Every sin that a man does is without the body,” and such like things; how says he here, “Not for his cause that did the wrong, nor for his cause that suffered the wrong?” Not contradicting, but being even exceedingly consistent with himself. How consistent with himself? Because it was a very great point with him to show the affection he bore towards them. He does not therefore discard concern for him, but shows at the same time, as I said, the love he had for them, and that a greater fear agitated him, [namely] for the whole Church. For he had feared lest the evil should eat further, and advancing on its way should seize upon the whole Church. Wherefore also he said, “A little leaven leavens the whole lump.” This however he said at the time; but now that they had well done, he no longer puts it so but differently: and implies indeed the same thing, but manages his expressions more agreeably, saying,

“That our care for you might appear unto you.”

That is, 'that you might know how I love you.' Now this is the same thing as the former, but being differently expressed seemed to convey another meaning. For [to convince yourself] that it is the same, unfold his conception and you will perceive the difference to be nothing. 'For because I love you exceedingly,' says he, 'I was afraid lest ye should suffer any injury from that quarter, and yourselves succeed to that sorrow.' As therefore when he says, “Does God take care for oxen?” he does not mean that He cares not, (for it is not possible for any existing thing to consist if deserted by the Providence of God): but that He did not legislate primarily for oxen, so also here he means to say, 'I wrote first indeed on your account, but secondly on his also. And I had indeed that love in myself,' he says, 'even independently of mine Epistle: but I was desirous of showing it both to you, and in a word to all, by that writing.'