Reflecting on issues of ethics in church discipline

The church in Corinth has a reputation for several significant problems. One of its members lives with the wife of his father while the community remains unconcerned (1 Cor. 5:1, 2). Moreover, it appears that prostitution (sacred or literal) is not contrary to the faith of some (6:15–18). Disputes within the community are obvious (6:7). During Communion services the rich eat and get drunk in front of the hungry poor (11:21). Tensions are enormous: Each member identifies with a different leader, providing opportunities for division (chapters 1–3). Their claim to the charismatic gifts provides them with a platform favoring attitudes of superiority and contempt (16:11). Finally, their doctrinal deviations go so far as to put in question the resurrection of Christ (ch. 15) and the validity of marriage (ch. 7). These issues nurture their conflicts with the establishment and even cause them to view with suspicion the authority of Paul (2 Cor. 11:12–15).

But most amazing, Paul considers this “the church of God which is at Corinth” (1 Cor. 1:2; 2 Cor. 1:1).* Corinth has the honor of being the only church designated by this glorious formula. Moreover, he calls the members of this church “saints by calling” (1:2, NAS).

How can it be that, with multiple reasons to dismiss this church and its members, Paul approaches them with such esteem? Finding the answer could enlighten our outlook and provide practical advice for dealing with issues of church discipline.

Conform your life to what you are

Underline the first exhortation, a mysterious formula found in 1 Corinthians 5:7. “Cleanse out the old leaven . . . as you really are unleavened.” What a paradox! How can one take away what is lacking in the first place? Paul postulates that the Corinthians lack leaven, and requests that they eliminate it altogether. Rather than call upon one stricken with a sickness that came from misdeeds, Paul makes an appeal: correct the behavior and bring it in conformity with your Christian identity. The intent of Paul’s intervention clearly emphasizes, not exclusion of the saints, rather, their correction.

Let us be constructive

The theme associated with acting in ways that are beneficial or constructive pervades this epistle. It appears that Paul has taken on the vocation of Jeremiah and sees the accomplishment of God’s promises to the prophet taking place in front of his eyes (Jer. 1:10; 31:28). God plants and builds by means of His servants (1 Cor. 3). To enter into the plan of God, we must build. “ ‘All things are lawful,’ but not all things are helpful. ’All things are lawful,’ but not all things build up” (10:23). The constructive action identifies the feature of the true prophet. “He who prophesies speaks to men for their up-building and encouragement and consolation” (14:3). He alone edifi es the church (14:4). Everything must be done for edification (14:5). Gifts awarded by God were intended for that purpose (14:2). Edification becomes the standard of all actions worth taking (14:26). See also Romans 14:19 and 15:2.

Used in construction, cement contains love, for “ ‘knowledge’ puffs up, but love builds up” (8:1). The central theme of construction therefore opens the door to a pastoral approach focused on building up the victim of sin, not on destroying.

Let us be supportive

In dealing with the problem of the gifts and the conflicts that they may bring in the church, Paul refers to the agape love (ch. 13). When he brings a verbal form to the three abiding theological virtues, faith, hope, and love (13:13), Paul affirms, in 1 Corinthians 13:7, that love believes all (faith), hopes all (hope), and endures all (agape love). In this verse, Paul interjects “enduring” hupomone (translated “perseveres” in the NIV) as a synonym of agape. One who loves genuinely supports the other actively and remains ever enduring and unfailing. It means to give to someone all the support you can. Loving results in the capacity to care for the other even when that person becomes morally compromised. It instigates a corrective approach that takes into consideration the qualities of the guilty party and provides an opportunity to build up the individual.

Let us be understanding

A Native American saying asserts that we may know others only if we have walked in their moccasins. While we often request the sinner to be understanding of the disciplinary action taken by the church, the action must be preceded by knowing that person and the reasons that caused the failure.

Let us be true

Paul dedicates the first three chapters of 1 Corinthians to the disputes resulting from the pretensions of the Corinthians of greater knowledge. Each of the groups targeted by Paul claimed notoriety by linking their exclusive affiliation with Paul, Cephas, or Apollos (1:12). Each wanted to occupy the highest ground in arguing their opinions.

For Paul, through the light of the cross and the love it radiates, we discover how valuable we are in the eyes of God, and we have no reason to boast. The proud cannot comprehend this expression because no eye has seen, no ear has heard, no mind has conceived these things. They are so foreign to the human nature.

Thus, we cannot be helpful in the healing process of others if we do not have a clearly established perception of our own limitations and finiteness. To be true, one must approach the guilty, not from a position of strength, but from the very bottom of one’s own weaknesses.

Let us be coherent

In the midst of these chapters on ministration, a doctrinal chapter (15) appears, dealing with the resurrection. Brought up like an erratic block, it has no apparent connection with the rest of the epistle. However, Paul may have been led to develop this Christology specifically as a response to the problems of the church in Corinth. The sins of Corinth are not unrelated to their departure from their faith in the resurrection.

Christ’s resurrection equates with an inescapable reality that seals our own resurrection. Since we all, as believers, expect to be resurrected, everything worth doing must submit to this parameter. Not only a dogmatic reality, the resurrection became the foundation of all ethical considerations. This dimension should both predicate the actions of the believer and provide effectiveness to the work of ministering. All pastoral care must interface with the potential of the resurrection of the ministered and maintain a bond that may be maintained for eternity. Our lives must be seen from the point of view of a special call and gift to live eternally with Jesus and with our brethren and sisters in Christ.

Conclusion

The context shows clearly that Paul does not advocate against interventionism. But since his great encounter on the way to Damascus, Paul remains fascinated with the person of Jesus. Through his entire life, he repeatedly remembers his own evil deeds and treasures the precious grace he received. He never feels himself above the others, never judges them with a feeling of superiority, but recognizes his stance as a sinner who has been redeemed. Because this perspective illuminates Paul’s pastoral approach, it assuredly will enlighten the way we approach church discipline.