Two things, however, must be noticed here. The first is, that the Apostle does not here absolutely deny that he
had a command to baptize, for this is applicable to all the Apostles: Go and baptize; and he would have acted
rashly in baptizing even one, had he
not been furnished with authority, but simply points out what was the chief
thing in his calling. The second
thing is, that he does not by any means detract here, as some think, from the
dignity or utility of the sacrament. For the question here is, not as to the
efficacy of baptism, and Paul does not institute this comparison with the view
of detracting in any degree from that;
but because it was given to few to teach, while many could baptize; and
farther, as many could be taught at the same time, while baptism could only be
administered to individuals successively, one by one, Paul, who excelled in the
gift of teaching, applied himself to the work that was more especially needful
for him, and left to others what they could more conveniently accomplish. (John
Calvin, Commentaries on the Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians,
2 vols. [trans. John Pringle; Bellingham, Wash.: Logos Bible Software, 2010],
1:72)
