The Great Commentary of Cornelius a Lapide: the First Epistle to the Corinthians
Chapter 5
i. The Apostle proceeds from the schism of the Corinthians to deal with the scandal caused by incest among them : he blames them for allowing one living openly in incest to remain among them, and orders them to excommunicate him and hand him over to Satan.
ii. He bids them (ver. 6) purge out this and any other leaven of sin, in order that they may with purity celebrate the everlasting Passover, and so eat the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.
iii. He orders them (ver. 9) not to mingle with Christians that are open sinners; but as for heathens and unbelievers, he says that they are not under the jurisdiction of him or of the Church.
Ver. 1 . — It is reported commonly among you . It is no vague rumour, but a well-ascertained fact.
1. The Gentiles who were not barbarians, but living civilised and honest lives, by natural instinct rejected all such intercourse of a step-son and step-mother. The poets praise Hippolytus for preferring to incur the anger of his father, Theseus, rather than yield to the lust of his step-mother, Phaedra. When he was solicited by Phaedra and refused to consent to the abomination, he was falsely accused by her to his father of having solicited her, and was torn asunder by him by four horses. There is, however, extant an example of such intercourse in Valerius Maximus (lib. v. De Par . Amore in Lib .), in the case of King Seleucus, who, on learning from his physician that his son Antiochus was sick unto death from love of his wife Stratonice, handed her over to him.
2. Theodoret, in his preface to this epistle, and Chrysostom here say that this fornicator was an eminent and powerful leader of the schism at Corinth, and this is why the Apostle proceeds so directly from the one sin to the other.
It may be asked whether this incestuous person took his father's wife during his lifetime or afterwards. Some reply that he was dead; but it seems more likely that he was living, from the phrase used, “his father’s wife,” and also from the words of 2 Cor. vii. 12 : “ I did it not for his cause that had done the wrong, nor for his cause that suffered wrong,” which seems plainly to mean the father. Anselm and others take the view that the father was still alive. The man, therefore, was at once incestuous and an adulterer, and was obstinate in his sin ; for without such obstinacy he would not have been excommunicated.
Ver. 2 . — And ye are puffed up . You meanwhile are so occupied with your contentious pride that you neglect to correct this incestuous person by removing him from your society. So Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Anselm. Learn from this how careful not only prelates but all the faithful should be to remove from the Church scandals and their authors.
Vers. 3, 4. — For I verily as absent in body ... in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. As it behoves a Pastor and Bishop to be always present by vigilant care, even though absent in body from the Church, I have already judged, i.e., determined ; and by these words I now order that he be excommunicated and handed over to Satan, and that in the name of Christ, by His authority which I wield when I order and judge.
Chrysostom refers the clause in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ to what follows, when ye are gathered together. Paul means that they were to assemble, and in a public congregation of the Church they were to excommunicate the incestuous person. This clause, thirdly, may be referred to the words to deliver such an one to Satan; such delivery and execution of the sentence would be done in the power, name, and place of Christ.
Vers. 4, 5. — When ye are gathered together . . . deliver such an one unto Satan. I determine and order, O Corinthians, that when you are assembled in the Church, where I shall be present in my spirit, i.e., in mind, affection, and the authority given me by Christ, this incestuous person be excommunicated and handed over to Satan, who rules outside the Church, and is wont in this world to afflict the excommunicate not only in soul but also in body. It plainly appears from these words that the heretics are wrong in saying that the power of excommunicating resides in the whole congregation , and not in the prelates. On the contrary, he says, I have judged. All that the Apostle means is that the excommunication is to be publicly pronounced by whoever was presiding over the Church, that others might fear to do the like. Hence, he does not say that they were to assemble and hand him over to Satan, but when ye are gathered together I have determined to hand him over to Satan, i.e., through him who in the name of Christ is in charge of your Church in my place, and whose, therefore, it is to hand him over. In every state judgment takes place, not by the popular voice, but by the judges and magistrates.
The Apostle, moreover, uses this phrase to denote that this spiritual power had been given to the Church, and was exercised by prelates in the name of the Church, not in the sense that the whole Church has received it directly from Christ, but that Christ gave it to Paul and the other Apostles, not for themselves, but for the good of the Church; for as great confusion would ensue if each one had to be asked to give his sentence, the whole Church discharges this duty by the hands of its heads and rulers. Again, as excommunicating is liable to cause hatred, Paul wishes it to be done with the consent of the whole Church, that so he may win all to his side, and none may protect the powerful fornicator and accuse Paul of over severity. Hence he leaves, as it were, the judgment to them of his own free-will, and out of his modesty he makes them the assessors, approvers, and executors of the sentence pronounced by him of public excommunication of the fornicator by the hands of their president.
So often prudent princes and generals will in a difficult and dangerous matter, when any great officer is to be punished, seek the opinion of other great officers, and what is more, leave the judging of him to them. So Chrysostom, Ambrose, Theophylact,
Anselm.
With the power of our Lord Jesus Christ Connect this with deliver , or, better still, as Ambrose does, with when ye are gathered together and my spirit. In other words, in this act of excommunication the Spirit is present with you, and still more with my spirit. For Christ has given His mighty power to His Church, and so the Church can, by her rulers and prelates, excommunicate and deliver over to Satan the contumacious.
Ver. 5. — To deliver such an one to Satan . Theophylact thinks that by these words Paul actually excommunicates the fornicator, but it is truer to say that by them he orders his excommunication to be carried out by the prelates in the Corinthian Church. If otherwise , he would have said, “ I deliver,” instead of “ I have judged to deliver ; ” and the same is borne out by his bidding that he be delivered over to Satan in public assembly of the Church.
1. Observe that the ancients understood this passage of the power and act of excommunicating which is lodged in the prelates of the Church. So Chrysostom, Anselm, Augustine, and others.
2. The excommunicate are said to be delivered over to Satan, because being ejected from the fellowship of Christ and His Church, and being deprived of all its benefits, its prayers, suffrages, sacrifices, and Sacraments, of the protection of God, and of the care of pastors, they are exposed to the tyranny and assaults of the devil, whose rule is outside the Church, and who goes about against them more than before, and impels them to every kind of evil. Cf. Ambrose, Augustine (lib. iii. Ep. contra Parmen . c. 2), Jerome (Ep. 1 ad Heliod.), Innocent (apud S. Aug. Ep. 51).
For the destruction of the flesh. 1. That the devil may harass him with bodily sickness, wounds, and diseases ; that his flesh may be low and its vigour be destroyed ; that being thus humiliated he may learn wisdom. So say Theodoret, Chrysostom, Theophylact, Œcumenius, Anselm.
2. Ambrose and Anselm here, and S. Augustine in the passage just cited, explain it to mean, for the destruction of the pleasure of the body through this confusion and shame. But though shame may restrain a man from the external act when there is danger of its being commonly known, yet it does not do away with the inner desire of the heart, and therefore the first meaning, which is supported by the Fathers, is the more true and suitable.