1 Corinthians 5:9 Douay-Rheims

I wrote to you in an epistle, not to keep company with fornicators.

Thomas Aquinas

1225–1274 Catholic

**On 1 Corinthians, Chapter 5, Lecture 3**

Above, the Apostle had led the Corinthians to this, that they should separate the sinner from themselves, which indeed they had neglected on account of a false understanding of a certain word that was contained in a certain letter which he had sent to them earlier. And therefore he now excludes the depraved sense which they had conceived from the words. Hence concerning this he does three things. First he resumes the word of the earlier letter; second he excludes the false understanding, at the words: *not altogether with fornicators*; third he expounds the true understanding, at the words: *but now I have written to you*.

He says therefore first: I said to you in a certain other letter, which is not contained in the canon, *that you should not associate with fornicators*, that is, that you should not have society or communion with them, according to that word of Prov. 1:15: *my son, walk not with them, keep back your foot from their paths*; Ecclus. 9:6: *give not your soul to fornicators in anything*.

Then, when he says *not altogether with fornicators*, he excludes the false understanding of the aforesaid word. And first he sets forth what he intends; second he concludes his proposition, at the words: *otherwise you would have had to*, etc. Concerning the first, it must be considered that the Corinthians had conceived a false understanding of the aforesaid word of the Apostle in two ways.

First, as to this, that they understood it to have been said of unbelieving fornicators. But the Apostle excludes this, saying *not altogether* do I intend to say that you should not associate with the fornicators of this world. Now he calls unbelievers by the name of world, according to what is said in Jn. 1:10: *the world knew him not*; above, ch. 1:21: *the world by wisdom knew not God*.

Second, they had conceived a false understanding as to this, that they thought the Apostle had forbidden only concerning fornicators, but not concerning other sinners. And therefore, to exclude this, he adds *or with the covetous*, namely, those who unjustly withhold what belongs to others. Eph. 5:5: *covetousness, which is the service of idols, has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God*. *Or with the rapacious*, namely, those who violently seize what belongs to others. Below, in the same place: *nor shall the rapacious possess the kingdom of God*. *Or with those serving idols*, against whom it is said Wis. 14:27: *for the worship of unspeakable idols is the cause of all evil, its beginning and its end*. And the sense is: I have forbidden you the society not only of fornicators, but also of all other sinners. And it is to be noted that by fornication one sins against himself, but by covetousness and rapacity against one's neighbor, and by the worship of idols against God; and in these things which he sets down, every kind of sin is understood.

Then, when he says *otherwise*, etc., he assigns the reason for his proposition, saying *otherwise* — namely, if the aforesaid word were to be understood of the fornicators of this world — *you would have had to go out of this world*, since the whole world is full of such people. Hence you could not avoid such fornicators, except by going out of this world. For it is said, 1 Jn. 5:19: *the whole world is set in wickedness*. Or otherwise: *you would have had to go out of this world*, as if he were saying: from the time of your conversion you ought to have been separated from the unbelievers of the world. Hence you do not need to be admonished about this; for it is said, Jn. 15:16: *I have chosen you out of the world*. Or otherwise: *you would have had to go out of this world*, namely through death. For it is better for men to die than to consent to sinners in their sins. Hence it is said below, 9:15: *for it is better for me to die, than that any man should make my glory void*.

Then, when he says *but now I have written to you*, he expounds to them the true understanding, and first he sets forth what he intends; second he assigns the reason, at the words: *for what have I to do*?; third he infers the intended conclusion, at the words: *take away the evil*, etc.

He says therefore first: but now I explain thus what I formerly wrote to you: *do not associate*, namely, with fornicators and other sinners, *if he who*, among you, *is called a brother*, in the way the Lord says, Matth. 23:8: *you are all brothers*. Yet he does not say: if he who is a brother, but: *if he who is called a brother*, because through mortal sin someone withdraws from charity, which is the cause of spiritual brotherhood. Hence it is said in the last chapter of Hebrews: *let the charity of brotherhood remain in you*. He is therefore called a brother on account of the truth of the faith, but he is not truly a brother, on account of the lack of charity, which comes from sin.

Hence it is added *or a fornicator, or covetous, or serving idols, or a railer, or rapacious, or a drunkard, with such a one not even to take food* — namely, you ought not — according to that word of the second canonical epistle of John: *if any man come to you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, nor say to him, hail*; as if he were saying: by this that I said you ought not to be mixed with sinners, I meant concerning the faithful who are called brothers, and are among you.

But it is not to be understood by this, as Augustine says in the book against Parmenian, and as is held in the Gloss here, that someone ought to be separated from the communion of others by an extraordinary judgment, since he could frequently err, but rather this ought to be done according to the order of the Church, when someone is repelled from communion, as one convicted, or one who has confessed of his own accord. And therefore he says pointedly *if he who is called*, so that we may understand that naming to be the one which comes about through a sentence of the Church pronounced against someone in judicial order. But those who are thus expelled from communion are to be avoided as to table, as is said here, and as to greeting, as is said in the aforesaid authority of John, and further as to sacred communion. Hence it is said in the verse: *mouth, to pray, farewell, communion, table are denied* — namely, to the excommunicate.

But it must be noted that the Apostle above numbered only mortal sins, as a sign that someone ought to be excommunicated only for mortal sin. And concerning the other things indeed which he sets down it is manifest; but concerning drunkenness there can be doubt, since it does not always seem to be a mortal sin. For Augustine says in the sermon on Purgatory, that drunkenness, unless it be frequent, is not a mortal sin. Which I believe to be so, because drunkenness in its own kind is a mortal sin. For that someone should wish, for the delight of wine, to lose the use of reason, exposing himself to the danger of committing many other sins, seems to be contrary to charity. It happens, however, accidentally that drunkenness is not a mortal sin, on account of ignorance of the strength of the wine, or of the weakness of one's own head — an excuse which is nevertheless removed by frequent experience: and therefore the Apostle pointedly does not say *drunk* but *a drunkard*.

Now he adds two sins to those which he had set down above, namely, the drunkard and the railer. Now drunkenness is referred to the kind of sin which is committed against oneself, under which is contained not only lust, but also gluttony; but the railer is referred to the kind of sin which is committed against one's neighbor, whom someone harms not only in deed, but also in word, by wishing evil upon him, or by defaming him wrongly — which pertains to detraction — or by saying evil things to his face — which pertains to contumely — and all this pertains to the notion of a railer, as was said above.

Then, when he says *for what have I to do*, etc., he assigns the reason for what he had said. And concerning this he does three things. First he assigns the reason, saying: I said this is to be understood of brothers, and not of unbelievers. *For what have I to do*, that is, what does it pertain to me, *to judge*, that is, to pronounce a sentence of condemnation, *concerning those who are outside*? That is, concerning unbelievers, who are entirely outside the Church? For the prelates of the Churches receive spiritual power only over those who have subjected themselves to the faith, according to that word of 2 Cor. 10:6: *having in readiness to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience shall be fulfilled*. Indirectly, however, the prelates of the Churches have power over those who are outside, insofar as, on account of their fault, they forbid the faithful to have communion with them.

Second, he employs a comparison, saying *do you not judge those who are within*? As if he were saying: you judge by the same authority as I. Hence, just as you do not judge except concerning your own, so also I. It is said, Ecclus. 10:1: *a wise judge shall judge his people*.

Third, he answers a tacit doubt. For it might seem that unbelievers were better off, since they are not condemned for the aforesaid sins; but he excludes this, saying: therefore it is nothing to me to judge concerning those who are outside, for *those who are outside*, that is, unbelievers, *God will judge*, namely by a judgment of condemnation, not of examination; because, as Gregory says in the Morals, unbelievers will be damned without a judgment of discussion and examination. And as to this it is said, Jn. 3:18: *he who does not believe is already judged*, that is, he has in himself a manifest cause of condemnation, and this is reserved more gravely to the judgment of God, according to that word of Heb. 10:31: *it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God*.

Then, when he says *take away the evil*, etc., he infers the conclusion principally intended, saying: since this which I said, *do not associate with fornicators*, is to be understood of the faithful, not of those who are outside — therefore *take away the evil*, namely, the man, *from among yourselves*, that is, cast him out of your society, according to that word of Deut. 13:5: *you shall take away the evil from the midst of you*.

It must therefore be considered, from the aforesaid words of the Apostle, that we are not forbidden to have communion with unbelievers who never received the faith, on account of their punishment. This must, however, be guarded against by some, namely the weak, for their own caution, lest they be seduced. But those who are firm in the faith can lawfully communicate with them, and give effort to their conversion, as is said below, 10:27: *if any of the unbelievers invite you to a feast, and you are willing to go, eat whatever shall be set before you*. But from unbelievers who were at one time faithful, or who received the sacrament of the faith, such as heretics and those apostatizing from the faith, the communion of the faithful is entirely withdrawn, and this as their punishment, just as also for the other sinners who are still subject to the power of the Church.

Source details
1272 · Commentary on 1 Corinthians, ch. 5, l3

English is machine-translated from the public-domain Latin (Corpus Thomisticum, Thomas Aquinas's own autograph text), since no public-domain English translation exists. It is not a scholarly translation. Please report errors.

Read 1 Cor 5:9 in context →