The Immorality Imperative
1 Corinthians 5:1-13
Cascades Fellowship CRC, JX MI
November 16, 2008
Series: The Church in Crisis
A couple of years ago, Rachel and I had a tree removed from our front yard – it was a Chinese elm with a split trunk. The previous winter the trunk had started to separate – an ice storm had left the tree encased in ice and the weight was literally dragging the two sides of the trunk apart. I figured the stump would make a good anger management tool – whenever life got to me, I could go out front and bludgeon the stump with an axe until the anger was gone or the stump was, whichever came first.
One Saturday, I grew ambitious and decided that I would remove the stump. At first, I seemed to be gaining ground – I quickly removed two large roots and began working on a third when all progress came to a screeching halt. As I began working on the third root I ran into a dense knot of interlocked roots that surrounded the stump about 2-3 inches below the surface. I removed one more major root, but the stump stayed. I hoped I’d done enough damage to kill off the stump.
When the next spring came, I had my answer – shoots grew out of the stump to form a thick bush in our front yard. It was healthy enough that I was able to hang Christmas lights in it that winter. The stump was still alive and sending up shoots and the following spring it got worse; not only were shoots coming out of the stump, but shooting up from the remaining roots that spidered out across the yard. Little Chinese elm trees were everywhere.
Now, let me admit right now, I’m not a big spender – so the idea of paying someone to come out with one of these monstrous-looking machines and grind the stump out did not appeal to me. Instead, I went to Meijer and bought a product called “Stump-Out.”
“Stump-Out” is a chemical compound that accelerates decomposition by breaking down the cellulous layers of the stump, making it porous. Essentially, the compound makes the stump soft and absorbent in about 4 to 6 weeks. Once the stump is soft and absorbent, you pour kerosene on the stump, let the kerosene soak in for 4 to 6 weeks, then you set the stump on fire. It is then supposed to smolder its way into a pile of ash you can then remove.
There is something about the way this stuff works that reminds me of our text today – the breaking down of protective barriers, the compromise of structures meant to maintain integrity, so that when kerosene is added it infiltrates every fiber of the stump making it susceptible to destruction by the fire.
In our series on 1 Corinthians, we have been talking about Paul’s travails with the church at Corinth. We began, as Paul does, by talking about the centrality of the Gospel. Put simply, the Corinthians were beginning to mix the Gospel Paul preached with other things. They thought they were being wise – wiser even than Paul, who first preached the Gospel to them. And each new teacher that came along with a unique twist was gaining a following among them, leading to divisions in the church. The only way to fix it, says Paul, is to return to the Gospel I preached – the true Gospel message, with Jesus at the center. Build your life and faith on that foundation alone – anything else is going to lead to loss at best, destruction at worst.
Unfortunately, division and a muddled gospel were not the only problems facing the Corinthian church – though the corrupted Gospel was certainly a contributor to rest of the problems. So in our text for this morning Paul takes up the next pressing issue – immorality in the church.
It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that does not occur even among pagans: A man has his father’s wife. 2 And you are proud! Shouldn’t you rather have been filled with grief and have put out of your fellowship the man who did this…? Your boasting is not good. Don’t you know that a little yeast works through the whole batch of dough? 7 Get rid of the old yeast that you may be a new batch without yeast—as you really are.
Can I ask you a question? Paul – the Apostle who gave us such gems as “You were dead in your trespass…” and “while we were yet enemies of God…” and “the things of the flesh are opposed to the things of the Spirit…” – the apostle who had the most comprehensive view of sin. What could anyone possibly do that Paul would shake his head and say, “it is actually reported…”? Do you hear the tone of incredulity – the total disbelief in Paul’s question? It’s like Paul is saying, “I can’t believe I have to address this – it is simply beyond the pale of reason that 1) this should happen in the first place and 2) that I should have to tell you it’s wrong. I mean even the most savage barbarian would consider this an abomination.”
What could possibly make Paul react this way? Well, what the text says is that “a man has his father’s wife….” The most likely scenario is that the son has become sexually involved with his step-mother.; something explicitly forbidden in Leviticus 18:8. But that could mean several things: 1) it could mean that the son not only defiled the marriage bed, but that he also broke up the marriage of his father and step-mother. 2) It could also mean that the son is engaged in a kind of open marriage situation and be entangled in a love triangle with his step-mother and his father. Either case is really too disturbing to think about; really a wholesale violation of parental, familial, and marital relationships. I mean, the real trouble with this scenario is that it weakens and erodes the very bedrock of society, making a mockery of our most basic relationships.
Oh, but there is more – the sin itself was bad enough. I mean, the kind of immorality Paul was dealing with was reason enough to for him to be incredulous, but what was just as shocking, if not more so is that apparently this man’s behavior was common knowledge and the church wasn’t doing anything about it. No wait, even worst than that, they apparently were boasting about how open-minded they were, how gracious and accepting. Rather than confronting this man on his immoral lifestyle, they were congratulating themselves on being charitable, forbearing.
But Chris, isn’t that how we are supposed be – love the sinner, hate the sin? Isn’t that what they were doing? How else do we show love and grace? I mean if we start pointing fingers and telling people to straighten up aren’t we going to drive them off? Perhaps. Perhaps, but let’s take a moment to see how Paul says it needs to be dealt with and then consider these questions.
Paul’s response compared to the Corinthians rather lackadaisical approach to the immorality seems almost extreme – he says to cut it out in order to preserve the rest of the Body. “Hand him over to Satan” Paul says, “that his body of sin might be destroyed, but his spirit saved on the Day of the Lord.”
A couple questions pop to mind almost immediately when I read this. The first is, “So what does it mean to ‘turn someone over to Satan?’” “The second question that comes to mind is, “Is that really necessary?” ‘Cause, boy that seems harsh and quite frankly in this day and age a bit counter-productive. Let’s take these in turn.
So what does it mean to “turn someone over to Satan?” This is a question that kind buggers the church today. I mean, what do you do – call up the local Satanic cult and tell them you have a candidate for sacrifice? Now, I make light here, but that’s only because this is such a hard thing to deal with, to wrestle with as a church. And the wisdom of it might escape us if we are not diligent to understand what God requires of us here.
The first thing I should point out is that if you just read this passage in isolation, it seems like Paul is telling the Corinthians, “If someone sins, kick them out.” If that is indeed the Lord’s instructions, then all of us may as well get up now and head for the doors. Turn your keys into Mike as you go.
Before anyone gets up to go, let me assure you that this is not the message God is speaking to us. We need to acknowledge that what we’re seeing here in 1 Corinthians 5 is the final stages of church discipline, not the first stages. Remember that Scripture teaches us elsewhere that if we find a Christian brother or sister in sin the first step is to go to them privately and call for repentance – that’s step 1. If they do not or if they refuse, then you take one or two others with you and call for them to repent again in the presence of witnesses – this is step 2. If the person still refuses to repent, then you are to bring the matter before the church – this is step 3.
If the person continues in their sin, that’s when you find yourself where Paul is as he is writing to the Corinthian church. Remember, this man’s sin was common knowledge – it was known and tolerated by the church. He’s had opportunity to repent, but arrogantly continues in his sin and error, so Paul instructs the Corinthians to “expel the wicked man.”
Now how does that help – how is kicking someone out the church “turning him over to Satan?” Let’s turn to the Heidelberg Catechism for a little help – Lord’s Day 31, Question and Answer 85.
How is the kingdom of heaven closed and opened by Christian discipline?
A. According to the command of Christ: those who, though called Christians, profess unchristian teachings or live unchristian lives, and after repeated and loving counsel refuse to abandon their errors and wickedness, and after being reported to the church, that is, to its officers, fail to respond also to their admonition—such persons the officers exclude from the Christian fellowship by withholding the sacraments from them, and God himself excludes them from the kingdom of Christ.
Such persons, when promising and demonstrating genuine reform,
are received again as members of Christ and of his church.
One of the promises Jesus made to his disciples and to those who would follow is that he would give them the keys of the Kingdom – the promise is found in Matthew 16:19, “I will give you athe keys of the kingdom of heaven; and bwhatever you bind on earth 1shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth 2shall have been loosed in heaven.” The catechism defines the “keys” as the proclamation of the Gospel, which either opens the way of heaven to the believing or becomes the means of condemnation for the unbelieving and hypocrites who do not accept the Gospel in true faith. The other key is the discipline of the church.
In other words, when the church exercises discipline in accordance with Scripture, there is a supernatural power at work – heaven is in agreement and backs the decision of the church. So when the unrepentant are turned out form the church, they lose the protection of the covenant blessings and are vulnerable to the attacks of the enemy. God, in his sovereignty, uses the rage and wiles of the enemy to chastise the child in error.
Now understand, that this is done in love and humility – notice that Paul tells the Corinthians that they should have been filled with grief over this man’s sin. Discipline is always undertaken with the goal of restoration, not punishment. Remember, the church’s mandate is the ministry of reconciliation, not recompense.
So turning someone over to Satan is in essence excommunicating them – expelling them from the church. And because the church has the keys to the Kingdom, when the church follows the Scriptural path and approaches such drastic action with a holy grief and humility, God acts in agreement allowing the unrepentant to be exposed to the enemy – to be sifted by Satan. Literally, the person becomes an object of evangelism again. All of this is done in the hope of restoration.
Now that we know what it means to turn someone over to Satan, is it necessary and effective? I mean, won’t the person just go to another church and start over. Let me answer that before I answer whether it is necessary.
I used to believe that for discipline of this nature to be effective churches needed to cooperate. However, after studying this a bit more I am convinced that the effectiveness of the discipline is not up to us. Our job is to remain faithful – as long as we are faithful, the results are in God’s hands. For a person to feel the full brunt of this discipline, God must remove him from the shelter of his wing and allow the enemy access. The church cannot do that on its own authority – God must agree and act. So discipline is effective even if the person slinks off to another church, because God is the one acting, the church is simply cooperating.
As to whether it is necessary, yes – and here’s why. Paul uses the example of yeast – how as an active culture, it works its way through the whole dough, changing its shape and properties. That’s the way sin works in the church, Paul says. You allow this sin to remain and it changes the shape and properties of the church.
Like the stump out in my front yard, sin compromises the integrity of the church, breaking down needed barriers until it becomes susceptible to the fires of temptation and compromise. The purity of the church is at stake – the purity that Jesus died to provide. And what is more, the name of our Lord is at stake – we bring defamation and shame upon the name of Christ when we permit sin to remain unchallenged in our midst.
Now, let’s understand here that when we talk about sin that must be expelled, we are talking about sin among the members of Christ’s body – believers who are acting like unbelievers. This is not a prohibition from interacting with those outside the fellowship who are living immoral lives. It is for those who claim to have given their lives to Christ, but whose conduct in life does not agree with their profession.
Dealing with immorality in the church is never any fun – its hard, heart-breaking work and on the surface may be frustrating, but the reality is it is imperative that the church deal with it. Failure to do so harms the church and it harms the person who is left to continue in sin.
