The interpretation timeline
1 Corinthians 5:13 Douay-Rheims

For them that are without, God will judge. Put away the evil one from among yourselves.

A.D. 220 – 1871 6 witnesses 7 excerpts

Patristic

before A.D. 750
220
A.D.
Tertullian Patristic
c. A.D. 150–220
“It does not matter that he also said, "For the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord," since both in the destruction of the flesh and in the saving of the spirit there is, on His part, judicial process; and when he bade "the wicked person be put away from the midst of them," he only mentioned what is a very frequently recurring sentence of the Creator. "Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness; " for (in the Psalm it is written, ) "With the holy man thou shalt be holy, and with the perverse thou shalt be perverse; " and, "Thou shalt put away evil from among you." Again, "Go ye out from the midst of them; touch not the unclean thing; separate yourselves, ye that bear the vessels of the Lord.”
Source
“But, as the argument now stands, since what is eternal can be deemed evil, the evil must prove to be invincible and insuperable, as being eternal; and in that case it will be in vain that we labour "to put away evil from the midst of us; " in that case, moreover, God vainly gives us such a command and precept; nay more, in vain has God appointed any judgment at all, when He means, indeed, to inflict punishment with injustice.”
Source
407
A.D.
John Chrysostom Patristic
A.D. 347–407
“"Put away from among yourselves the wicked person." He used an expression found in the Old Testament, partly hinting that they too will be very great gainers, in being freed as it were from some grievous plague; and partly to shew that this kind of thing is no innovation, but even from the beginning it seemed good to the legislator that such as these should be cut off. But in that instance it was done with more severity, in this with more gentleness. On which account one might reasonably question, why in that case he conceded that the sinner should be severely punished and stoned, but in the present instance not so; rather he leads him to repentance. Why then were the lines drawn in the former instance one way and in the latter another? For these two causes: one, because these were led into a greater trial and needed greater long-suffering; the other and truer one, because these by their impunity were more easily to be corrected, coming as they might to repentance; but the others were likely to go on to greater wickedness. For if when they saw the first undergoing punishment they persisted in the same things, had none at all been punished, much more would this have been their feeling. For which reason in that dispensation death is immediately inflicted upon the adulterer and the manslayer; but in this, if through repentance they are absolved, they have escaped the punishment. However, both here one may see some instances of heavier punishment, and in the Old Testament some less severe, in order that it may be signified in every way that the covenants are akin to each other, and of one and the same lawgiver: and you may see the punishment following immediately both in that covenant and in this, and in both often after a long interval. Nay, and oftentimes not even after a long interval, repentance alone being taken as satisfaction by the Almighty. Thus in the Old Testament, David, who had committed adultery and murder, was saved by means of repentance; and in the New, Ananias, who withdrew but a small portion of the price of the land, perished together with his wife. Now if these instances are more frequent in the Old Testament, and those of the contrary kind in the New, the difference of the persons produces the difference in the treatment adopted in such matters.”
Source

Scholastic

c. 1100 – 1500
1272
A.D.
Thomas Aquinas Catholic
1225–1274
“**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.”

Post-Reformation

c. 1650 – 1900
1771
A.D.
John Gill Reformed
1697–1771
“But them that are without God judgeth,.... Or "will judge", in the great day of judgment; wherefore though such persons did not fall under the censures and punishment of the apostle, nor of a church of Christ, yet they shall not go unpunished; God will call them to an account for their fornication, covetousness, idolatry, extortion, &c. and will judge, condemn, and punish them, according to their works; and therefore since they do not fall under the cognizance of the churches of Christ, they are to be left to the tribunal of God; and all that the saints have to do is to watch over one another, and reprove, rebuke, and censure, as cases require, and as the case of this church did. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person; not that wicked thing, as some read it, but that wicked one; meaning not the devil, who is sometimes so called; a sense of the words proposed by Calvin, not asserted; but that wicked man, that, incestuous person, whom the apostle would have removed from among them, by excommunication; which was what became them as a church to do, and which lay in their power to do, and could only be done by them, and was to be their own pure act and deed: reference seems to be had to those passages in Deu 17:7 where the Septuagint render the phrase, , "thou shalt put away that wicked one among yourselves". Next: 1 Corinthians Chapter 6”
Source
1849
A.D.
1774–1849
“Take away. This passage is differently understood by commentators. By some it is understood thus: expel the evil one from among you, that is, the incestuous man. (Estius) — By others, it is understood to be spoken in a general sense, meaning, take away the evil of sin from among you. (Calmet) Bible Text & Cross-references: He excommunicates the incestuous adulterer, and admonishes them to purge out the old leaven. 1 It is heard for certain that there is fornication among you, *and such fornication, as the like is not among the heathens: that some one hath his father’s wife. 2 And you are puffed up: and have not rather mourned, that he might be taken away from among you, who hath done this deed. 3 *I indeed absent in body, but present in spirit, have already judged, as though I were present, him that hath so done, 4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, you being gathered together and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus, 5 To deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. 6 Your glorying is not good. *Know you not that a little leaven corrupteth the whole mass? 7 Purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new paste, as you are unleavened. For Christ, our Pasch, is sacrificed. 8 Therefore let us feast, not with the old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. 9 I wrote to you in an epistle, not to keep company with fornicators. 10 I mean not with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or the extortioners, or the servers of idols: otherwise you must needs go out of this world. 11 But now I have written to you, not to keep company: if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or a server of idols, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such a one not so much as to eat. 12 For what have I to do to judge them that are without ? Do not you judge them that are within? 13 For them that are without, God will judge. Put away the evil one from among yourselves.”
Source
1871
A.D.
1871
“put away from among yourselves that wicked--Sentence of excommunication in language taken from Deu 24:7. Next: 1 Corinthians Chapter 6”
Modern · 1953 →

The in-app commentary runs from the Fathers to the early-modern record, then stops — that's where the public-domain sources end, not where the reading does. For the modern reading, follow the sources directly.