1. It is reported commonly (that there is) fornica- tion among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the GentUes, that one should have his father's wife.
Having dismissed the subject of the divisions in the church of Corinth, he takes up the case of the incestuous member of that church. It is reported commonly (oAw? aKoverai). This may mean what our translation expresses, viz., it was a matter of notoriety that fornication existed among them. "OXtos may have the force of omnino^ ' nothing is heard of among you ex- cept, &c.' Or it may mean, ' In general, fornication is heard of among you.' That is, it was a common thing that fornication was heard of; implying that the offence, in different forms, more or less prevailed. This is the less surprising, consider- ing how little sins of that class were condemned among the heathen, and how notorious Corinth was for its licentiousness. To change the moral sentiments of a community is a difficult and gradual work. The New Testament furnishes sad evi- dence, that Jewish and Gentile converts brought into the church many of the errors of their former belief and practice. The word fornication (Tropveta) is used in a comprehensive sense, including all violations of the seventh commandment. Here a particular case is distinguished as peculiarly atrocious. The offence was that a man had married his step-mother. His father^s wife is a Scriptural periphrase for step-mother. Lev. 18, 8. That it was a case of marriage is to be inferred from the uniform use of the phrase to have a woman in the New Testament, which always means, to marry. Matt. 14, 4. 22, 28. 1 Cor. 7, 2. 29. Besides, although the connection con- tinued, the offence is spoken of as past, vs. 2. 3. Such a marriage Paul says was unheard of among the Gentiles, that is, it was regarded by them with abhorrence. Cicero, pro Cluent. 5, 6. speaks of such a connection as an incredible crime, and as, with one exception, unheard of. It is probable from 2 Cor. 7, 12, that the father of the offender was still alive. The crime, however, was not adultery, but incest ; for other- wise the apostle would not have spoken of it as an unheard of offence, and made the atrocity of it to arise out of the relation of the woman to the offender's father. We have here there- fore a clear recognition of the perpetual obligation of the Le- vitical law concerning marriage. The Scriptures are a perfect rule of duty ; and, therefore, if they do not prohibit marriage 4*