The Pulpit Commentary — 1 Corinthians — Section 217

Vers. 1-8.-The i·elations of Oliristians to pttblic law. The apostle here' deals with a fresh mistake made by the Corinthian Christians. In view of the extensive commercial interests of Corinth, ,ve can well understand that disputes constantly arose which could only be settled by the common law courts. St. Paul does not intend us to infer that these law courts were unjustly conducted, or that, in ordinary matters .and under ordinary circumstances, recourse may not be bad to them. He only points out tha~ the new feeling and sentiment which they should have and cherish, as Chr)stian discipl_cs, w?uld b_e oppo_sed to the litigious spirit, and fill them with an anxiety to set thmgs right with thetr brethren rather than to stru"o-le for the securin" 01· their own rights. lie glances, further, at the misconception whi~h the surrounding heathen would form of such indications of quarrelling among the Christians. " We can well under~tand how detrimental to the best interests of Christianity it would be for the Christian communion, founded as it was on principles of unity and love, to be perpetually, through the hasty temper and weakness of individual members, held up to the scorn of the heathen, as a scene of intestine strife." 'l'he princip!e laid down by the apostle led in later times to the appointment of "courts of arbitration." Of these we have historical evidence in the middle of the second century. It has been J)Ointed out that the proper illnstration of St. Paul's principle should be sought, not in a Christian country, but in a heathen country where Christians may happen to reside. On his principle, as it may now be applicable to us, we propose to dwell. I. ST. p AUL THROWS NO SLIGHT ON PUBLIC LA w. How are we to regar<l law? Is it the arbitrary command of a ruler? Or is it a national code created by the gifts of some legal genius, some Lycurgus or Justinian? Is it not rather a nation discovering the impor- tance of the protection ol its persons and property, mutually agreeing to the adoption of rules for the securing of such protection, and putting the applications of such rules into the hands of certain individuals, called kings, judges, or magistrates? So for ..a people to disobey the laws is more truly rebellion against themselves, against their best interests, than against their rulers; an<l every individual in a nation is bound both to honour and to keep the law. St. Paul would fully recognize this, and intend no disrespect by what he says concerning it. We should observe that he carefully distinguishes the sphere of law to which he refers. Explain the _difference between the" criminal" and "equity" courts at our assizes. St. Paul deals with matters of dispute, with equity questions, not with crime. And he very properly urges that such disputes usually rest on "strong feeling," "misunderstanding," etc., ao.d_ conse- quently can be best dealt with from within the Christian brotherhood, which can rrcognize "feeling," and help its members to overcome "faults." . E_lsewhere he urges full obedience to the" powers that be." But he pleads that tho Chnst1ansonly confessed their failure from the Christian spirit when they could not give way on~ to the o~her, hut were compelled to get outsiders and heathen to tell them what was Just and nght. So still we may say there are only a few things in respect of which Christians are justified in goin?: to law, and they concern wholly the interpretations of national law iu relation to rights of property. For these it is sometimes necessary to get an authoritative decision. Happily, the principle of arbi~ration is spreading i:n t~ade -disputes aDd iu natioual differences. Christians will hail the day when arb1trat1on, the handmaid of ptace, gains her rule in every land, and men and nations "learn war :no more." II. ST. PAUL ASSUMES THE AUTONOMY (sELF-IlULE) OF CHRIST'S CHURCH. He would have them fully understand that, as a Church, they were quite competent to manage their own affairs-all their affairs, and certainly all internal disputes. Show -0n what frequently declared nnd comprehensive principles the apostle's argument is based. 1. The Church of Christ iR a society. 2. It is a separated society, standing free from the worl<l; in it, but not of it. a. It is a complete society; the Hea<l and the rnembers together make up a" whole body." 4. It is a society resting 011 a common vasis, the "!ife in Christ," not on a common opinion, nor on e. common order, but on c11. H. 1-20.] THE Fll{S'l' EPISTLE TO THE CORDITHIANS. 21!.l