1 Corinthians 5:2

“And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you. ”

Even this fact has not sufficed to disturb the proud self-satisfaction which he has already rebuked in the Corinthians in the previous chapter, or to make them come down from the celestial heights on which they are now walking to the real state of things.

The word πεφυσιωμένοι, puffed up, goes back on the words, 1 Corinthians 4:6 (φυσιοῦσθε), and especially v. 19 (τῶν πεφυσιωμένων). What have they done, those grand talkers, in view of this monstrous scandal? This is what the apostle called “having speech but not power.” Should not this moral catastrophe have opened their eyes to the fallen state in which their Church lay? Calvin admirably says: “ Ubi luctus est, ibi cessat gloriatio. ”

A living Church, which had in it the δύναμις of its Head, would have risen as one man, and gone into a common act of humiliation and mourning, like a family for the death of one of its members. This is what is expressed by the verb πενθεῖν, to conduct a mourning.

The aorist ἐπενθήσατε cannot merely designate a feeling of inward grief. It shows that Paul is thinking of a positive, solemn deed, of something like a day of repentance and fasting, on which the whole Church before the Lord deplored the scandal committed, and cried to Him to bring it to an end.

The words, that might be taken away, are referred by most commentators to the excommunication which the Church would not have failed to pronounce upon the guilty one as the result of such an act of humiliation. Calvin says without hesitation, “The power of excommunication is established by this passage.” But it seems to me that neither the conjunction that nor the passive might be taken away is suitable to an act which the Corinthians should have done themselves. The that rather indicates a result which would be produced, independently of them, in consequence of the mourning called for by the apostle. It is the same with the passive form might be taken away. If Paul had thought of an exclusion pronounced by the Church itself, he would have said: “That ye might take away;” or, better still, “Ye have not mourned, and then taken away the offender.” At the most he would have said, “Ye have not mourned, so that (ὥστε) he might be taken away.” Whether we refer the ἵνα to the intention which would have dictated the mourning (Meyer, Edwards), or to that of the apostle who calls for it (de Wette), we do not sufficiently account for it, any more than for the passive form might be taken away. It must be confessed, it seems to me, that in Paul's view he who does the act of taking away is different from him who mourns, though the mourning is the condition of his intervening to strike. This is what the Corinthians should have known well, and this is precisely the reason why they should have mourned that he whose part it was to take away might act. The mysterious arm, which, if the Church had felt its shame, would have removed it by striking the guilty one, can only be the arm of God Himself. To the grief and prayer of the Church He would have responded in a way similar to that in which He had acted, on the words of Peter, toward Ananias and Sapphira, or as He was acting at that very time at Corinth, by visiting with sickness, and even with death, the profaners of the Supper (1 Corinthians 11:30-32).

Hofmann sees that in the ordinary construction these expressions cannot apply to an act done by the Church. And, as he does not suppose that the term can designate anything else than excommunication, he begins a new sentence with ἵνα, regarding this conjunction, with Pott, as the periphrasis of an imperative: “Let such a man be taken away from among you (by a sentence of excommunication)!” No doubt the ἵνα, that, is sometimes used thus. But it is hard to see how such an order would harmonize with what follows, where Paul relates what he has done to make up for what the Corinthians had not done. Besides, this construction would here be entirely unexpected and far from natural. The ἐξαρθῇ of the T. R. is taken from 1 Corinthians 5:13. The reading should be ἀρθῇ, with most of the Mjj.

The verb αἴρειν, or ἐξαίρειν, is ordinarily used in Leviticus and Deuteronomy to denote the capital punishment inflicted on malefactors in Israel; comp. also the ἀπαρθῇ, Matthew 9:15, and parallel, applied to the Messiah's violent death.

In saying from among you, Paul is certainly thinking of the way in which he had characterized his readers at the beginning of his letter: “Sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints by call.” How could one guilty of adultery and incest have a place in such an assembly!

The term τὸ ἔργον τοῦτο has a certain emphasis: “An act such as this.” The reading πράξας, in three Alex., might be preferred, because the verb πράσσειν is pretty often used in an unfavourable sense, in opposition to ποιεῖν (see John 3:20-21; John 5:29, etc.). But ποιεῖν better expresses than πράσσειν the accomplishment of the deed.

After characterizing both the guilty pride and softness of the Church, the apostle contrasts with them his own mode of acting.