One of the most difficult public displays of Christian obedience to God is the withdrawal of fellowship from a recalcitrant Christian. It is perhaps one of the most dynamic of commands to follow in the New Testament. Before reaching such a public excision, the Lord Jesus addressed the problem of confronting a wayward brother with the view to "gain" him (Matt. 18.15-17).
Preliminary Thoughts
The Lord sets forth a four-pronged redemptive procedure that begins under the most private of circumstances – "you and him alone" (18.15); in this setting, then, a private appeal to repent is offered. If the rebellious child of God maintains their posture, then the circle of brotherly concern widens to "one or two others" that come to witness the call to repentance (18.16).
Unfortunately, even at this point some are so entrenched in sin, that they will not hear the admonitions; consequently, the Lord says, "if he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church" (18.17). The publication of the situation allows the church as a whole to make an appeal to their fellow saint. All the "ties that bind" are summoned to invite this wayward soul to repent.
The Lord acknowledges that some will not be gained back to the fold by these loving and redemptive attempts, and sets forth the final process – consider the rebellious Christian as both an outsider of the blessings of the Christian covenant and a traitor who has chosen to serve Satan instead of Christ. In other words, the congregation must "disassociate the offender from the church fellowship."[1] The saved has now become the lost – how ironically tragic.
A Flagrant Issue
The New Testament has several examples of discipline; most usually they are of a very flagrant issue. For example, in 3 John 9-10 the apostle of love forewarns his audience that he will bring discipline upon Diotrephes the "missions" killer. Or, when Paul abbreviates his role in the discipline of Hymenaeus and Alexander ("delivered them to Satan"), who made shipwreck of their faith (1 Tim. 1.19-20).
However, in 1 Corinthians 5.1-13, Paul deals with an outlandish mode of porneia that is not even "tolerated" among the pagans (5.1 ESV). Porneia is the Greek word that is commonly translated "fornication" in older translations, and in newer translations as "sexual immorality."
The truth of the matter is that porneia is a generic term for "illicit sexual intercourse."[2] Porneia is an umbrella term and context must determine the type that is under consideration. The flagrant form of porneia Paul addresses in 1 Corinthians 5.1 is this, "a [Christian] man has his father’s wife" (i.e. his stepmother). The severity of this behavior is evident by the fact that Paul appeals to the fact that Gentiles – or pagans – do not even permit such behavior.
This context provides the most insightful New Testament example of withdrawing Christian fellowship from recalcitrant saints. And as careful Bible students, we must definitely rehearse the valuable instruction of these verses.
The Duel Rebuke
Paul moves from the case of the man with his stepmother, and draws attention to the congregation’s part in this flagrant relationship. The church had been "arrogant" and not "mournful" about the sinful relationship (5.2), and argues immediately that removal of the Christian was the appropriate reaction. The church at Corinth was laden with arrogance (4.6, 18-19), and here Paul rebukes them for this dispositional flaw that was affecting their decision making process on this matter.
Paul demonstrates that not only is the rebellious person accountable to God, but that the church too cannot subscribe to a lax posture about known – public – sin in the church. The church is responsible and accountable to respond to a situation where a saint’s sin has become public knowledge. The apostle’s prescribes that a period of "mourning" along with "disciplinarian action" is the appropriate reaction to sins of a public nature.
The Judgment
With the next flip of his pen, Paul moves into position to make the judgment Corinth should have – he places judgment upon the Christian and the sexually immoral relationship with his un-Christian stepmother (5.3-5). There is no clear statement regarding the woman in view, aside from the fact that she is the wife of his father.[3]
However, since the judgment is upon the Christian man, "it seems safe to assume that she is not a Christian."[4] Paul writes:
When you are assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus, you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord. (1 Cor. 5.4-5 ESV)The context for such a procedure is the public assembly of the church. This recalls the instruction of Jesus regarding the procedures to discipline another for sin (Matt. 18.15-17), the last two of which are set in a public context. Paul assesses that this situation is a public matter; and consequently, the licentious Christian must be disciplined immediately by the church in the public eye. The goal of this withdrawal is redemptive – "that his spirit may be saved."[5]
The judgment is upon his sin and behavior, but the goal of the discipline is to restore him back – i.e. to gain him (Matt. 18.15). In Hebrews 12.12-13, the author demonstrates that discipline is a privilege of sonship (12.5-8), and that the purpose is so "that the lame may not be put out of joint but rather be healed" (12.13).
Discipline is not designed to "disable permanently those who have experienced the crippling effects of sin. Rather, His purpose is to heal and restore the repentant to spiritual usefulness"[6]; in other words, "that we may share his holiness" (Heb. 12.10).
The Imagery of Influence and Purity
Corinth was crippling the unfaithful man’s ability to be restored by failing to address his immoral relationship. Paul makes very clear that both the church and the man were in a spiritually precarious position. Paul appeals to the imagery of the Passover, where preparing unleavened bread demanded the need to remove the leaven (yeast) from the lump of dough (5.6-7).
The bread is the congregation, and the leaven (yeast) is the culprit sinner in the church, and Paul speaks very clearly that the bread must be prepared for the Passover feast which is the Christian faith. From this, the apostle suggests that the Christian who is in a sexually immoral relationship with his stepmother must be removed from the congregation. Otherwise, the church would be affected by the "leaven" (influence) of this spiritually rebellious relationship.
But the truth is, they were already being afflicted by his influence, making it necessary for a public withdrawal to maintain the purity of the loaf (i.e. the church). David Williams, in his profitable work, Paul’s Metaphors: Their Context and Character, writes:
Paul had been speaking of the leaven (yeast), every trace of which had to be cleaned out of the house before the Passover was celebrated. On this analogy, he demanded that the Corinthians put their "house" in order by removing from among themselves what he called the "old leaven," a particularly appalling instance of sexual immorality that the church had condoned (vv. 1-5).[7]The apostle, then, was addressing what should have been quite obvious; but, because of the Corinthian’s arrogance the real issue (i.e. the issue of purity) was not seen as relevant – how shameful. May we strive to then the lesson of Corinth.
The Place of Christian Judgment
Paul later recalls a previous letter, where he instructed them "not to associate with sexually immoral people" (5.9 ESV). But it does not seem that they were even practicing such instruction, evident by the fact that they had allowed this immoral situation a harbor of protection in the bay of misguided church fellowship. Yet, Paul did not even suggest mere sexually immoral people in general. He meant, defiant immoral Christians are not to be associated with (5.9-11).
It is very interesting to observe that Paul moves from a specific case of porneia, and ends with formulating a generic principle against Christians practicing immorality in general – poneroi (i.e. evil doers).[8] Verse 11 is very clear that purity focused Christians are not to be involved with Christians who practice evil, and it is transparent where Paul stands on the matter by saying that eating a meal with them is forbidden. Such a withdrawal of Christian fellowship reflects the disfellowshipped Christian’s heavenly reality – estrangement from God (Matt. 18.18-20).
Christians have a responsibility to each other before the Lord (Matt. 18.15-17). This responsibility is to "judge" each other regarding sin when necessary (1 Cor. 5.12). To support his case, Paul appeals back to a formula common in Deuteronomy that highlights the need to judge insiders rather than outsiders of the covenant (17.7, 19.19, 21.21, 22.21, 24, 24.7),[9] and affirms : "God judges those outside. ‘Purge the evil person from among you’" (5.13).
The Aftermath: Mission Accomplished
What ever became of this gentleman and his situation after being withdrawn from? The answer depends upon the view taken as to how many letters Paul wrote to the Corinthians. It is true that Paul mentions a previous letter written to them prior to 1 Corinthians (1 Cor. 5.9), but did he write a third letter that would chronologically fit between 1 and 2 Corinthians (2 Cor 2:3-4; 7:8)?[10]
Without delving into this academic discussion, we set forth our assessment of the discussion. Essentially, we assume for the time being that Paul wrote three letters: (1) A lost letter prior to 1 Corinthians (5.9); (2) 1 Corinthians known as the "sorrowful letter" or "severe letter" (2 Cor 2:3-4; 7:8); and (3) 2 Corinthians.
Chronologically placing 1 and 2 Corinthians together contributes greatly in answering our question. In 2 Corinthians 2.6-11, Paul speaks of the reward of making the Corinthians sorrowful, and a certain punishment rendered by the majority of the congregation upon a certain individual. The connection is drawn that the man in 1 Corinthians 5 is the same as the gentleman made sorrowful in 2 Corinthians 2.
This man was sufficiently disciplined (2.6), and now the congregation's responsibility was three-fold (2.7-8): (1) "forgive him"; (2) "comfort him"; and (3) "reaffirm brotherly love." There will a great deal of Divine judgment upon those that do not respond in this fashion to a penitent brother or sister, for this is a great test of Christian obedience (2 Cor. 2.9-10; Matt. 6.14-16).
To the apostle, it appears that the matter of restoration of fellowship is just as important as the withdrawal of fellowship; the reason being, Satan is prepared to take advantage of our short comings at these pivitol moments (2.11). Would it not be appropriate to make the restoration announcement just as public as the withdrawal process was? It would definitely seem so.[11]
Conclusion
It seems therefore important to stress that the same amount of effort it took in the discipline process, should follow in the restoration process. There is to be no more invisible line of fellowship between the restored and the brethren, for that is over and the saint has returned. Neither should a "we'll see" attitude embody the brotherhood, but a loving reception - a mirror of heaven - is expected by Paul.
This is the victory of faith, the power of the blood of Christ, and the faithfulness of God. This is a great test of Christian faithfulness. May we be ever minded to discipline when needed and repair the splintered connections of fellowship after restoration. May we likewise be faithful to receive those who have been restored.
Sources
- Laney, J. Carl. "The Biblical Practice of Church Discipline." Bibliotheca Sacra 143 (1986): 353-64; p. 361.
- Vine, W.E., Merrill F. Unger, and William White, Jr. Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words. Nashville: Nelson, 1984. 2 vols.; p. 2.252; Thayer, Joseph H. Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament.1896. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1999; p. 532.
- The phrase reads: ὥστε γυναῖκά τινα τοῦ πατρὸς ἔχειν. Simon J. Kistemaker observes that "in Jewish circles, the wording wife of his father meant 'stepmother,'" and observes that God repeatedly told the Israelites to refrain from sexual relationships with their father's wife (cf. Lev. 18.8, 20.11; Deut. 22.30, 27.20). Kistemaker, S.J. "'Deliver This Man to Satan' (1 Cor. 5.5): A Case Study in Church Discipline." Master's Seminary Journal 3.1 (1992): 33-46; p. 35.
- South, Tommy. That We May Share His Holiness: A Fresh Approach to Church Discipline. Abilene: Bible Guides, 1997; p. 87.
- Some view the expulsion here as permanent, and redemption only to be found at the end of time (Harris 146-48); however, such a conclusion runs counter to the instruction of Jesus on discipline (Matt. 18.15-17), to Paul's use of similar language in disciplining and restoring false teachers (1 Tim. 1.20), and the general tenor of the New Testament regarding cleansing of sin in the Christian's life (1 John 1.6-2.3). Harris, Gerald. "The Beginnings of Church Discipline: 1 Corinthians 5." Understanding Paul's Ethics: Twentieth-Century Approaches. Ed. Brian S. Rosner.Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995. 129-51. Cf. Wayne Jackson's article on the forgiveness available to Christians in sinful lifestyles: Jackson, Wayne. "God's Plan of Salvation for His Lost Children." Christian Courier Online. 7 July 2004. Accessed: 30 Aug. 2007.
- Laney, pp. 355-56.
- Williams, David J. Paul’s Metaphors: Their Context and Character. 1999. Peabody: Hendrickson, 2004; p. 248.
- Zaas, Peter S. "‘Cast out the Evil Man from You Midst" (1 Cor. 5.13b)." Journal of Biblical Literature 103.2 (1984): 259-61; p. 259.
- Zaas points out that aside from a minor adjustment by Paul, the Greek phrase is parallel with the LXX (i.e. Septuagint) formulations in Deuteronomy, p. 259.
- Wallace, Daniel B. "2 Corinthians: Introduction, Argument, and Outline." Bible.org. 2007. Accessed: 26 July 2007. For those interested in this issue, Wallace's discussion will be of help on some of the complexities of this issue.
- Pilgrim, James. Withdrawing from the Disorderly. West Monroe, LA: Central Printers, n.d. I agree with Pilgrim's observation that, "To fail to forgive and receive the returning brother is as wicked as not marking him in the beginning (2 Cor. 2.11)" (p.17).
