Church discipline for domestic abusers who claim to be Christians: 1 Corinthians 5:11-13.

There are six sins for which a professing believer should be promptly expelled from the church and treated as an unbeliever.

• sexual immorality
• greed — covetousness
• idolatry — elevating something other than God to the place that only God should occupy
• verbal abuse — assailing with scornful language, slander, reviling
• drunkenness — by extension this includes any kind of drug abuse
  
• swindling —  robbing, extortion, destructive ferocity, ravening, predating, raping, plundering, subsisting on live prey

Every domestic abuser is guilty of verbal abuse, idolatry and swindling. Some domestic abusers also misuse alcohol or drugs. And when it comes to sexual immorality, there are numerous sins they can commit. I’ll explain this more below, but let me first show you the passage in scripture which lists these six heinous sins and instructs the church to expel such sinners. 

1 Corinthians 5:11-13:

But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people. What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.”  (NIV)

If a professing Christian is committing one or more of these six heinous sins, that person is a hypocrite and a danger to the church. That person must be excommunicated, expelled from the congregation, and handed over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh. Those who remain in the congregation must treat that person as an unbeliever. Verses 4-5 and 13b:

So when you are assembled and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, hand this man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord. … Do not even eat with such people. … “Expel the wicked person from among you.”  (NIV)

This is a command to the church. It is not merely guidance for the individual who has been the victim of the heinous sinner’s conduct. The command is directed at the church, the congregation, the denomination, all who profess to be following Christ. There is no wriggle-room in this commandment: it is clear, firm and unambiguous. Do not associate with such arch hypocrites! Do not even eat with them!

In the case which precipitated Paul’s having to give this commandment (the man who was sleeping with his father’s wife), Paul had probably been appraised of the facts by Chloe’s people (1 Corinthians1:11; 5:1). This raises a question…

Was Paul listening to gossip?

The people who informed Paul were not committing the sin of gossip. They informed Paul because they knew that the man was acting wickedly while passing himself off as a Christian, and they were grieved and concerned for everyone in the congregation. The informants told Paul because they saw that most of the congregation were doing nothing about this man’s hypocrisy, and they appealed to Paul because they thought he could — and would — do something about the problem. Paul was prepared to credit their report without needing to go to Corinth to ascertain the facts for himself. Paul must have known and trusted the informants well enough to be confident that they were not malicious people so they would not make a false report.

It is not gossip to make a report of evil conduct if you have witnessed evidence of the problem — e.g.,  you are a direct victim of the hypocrite’s wickedness, or you can see the church being led astray by the hypocrite’s wickedness. You will not be guilty of gossip when you are reporting the sin to those who may be able to help bring a solution to the problem. By the same token, you are not partaking in gossip if you to listen to a report of evil conduct and you have the wisdom, influence and / or authority to help bring a solution to the problem.

The six sins named in 1 Corinthians 5:11 are heinous and will harm the church if the wicked person is allowed to remain.

Each of these six sins do grievous harm to the victim, and will also do much damage to the church. If the church treats the wicked hypocrite as a genuine Christian, the wicked person’s cunning deceptions, their predatory ways, their mindset of entitlement, their punishing of resistance, and their slander of whistleblowers, will damage the whole church. The congregation will become puffed up with the pride of conceit and self-righteousness. In sentimentalism, or apathy, or fear, the congregation, and eventually the whole denomination, will collectively be going along with the predator’s deception.

The grave harm to the victims and the grave risk to the church explains why 1 Corinthians 5 prescribes a much quicker excommunication than the process given in Matthew 18 which is for less serious sins. Matthew 18 prescribes a more gradual escalation from discussion, to confrontation, to inclusion of more witnesses, until a final outcome is reached. But Matthew 18 is not to be used for these six heinous sins! Churches make a grave error when they use Matthew 18 to discipline abusers. I think it is reasonable to infer that God caused Paul to write 1 Corinthians 5 because Matthew 18:15-17 was not, by itself, an adequate precept to cover all types of sin in the congregation.

The decisive and rapid act of expulsion which Paul prescribed for any of these six heinous sins was to be carried out even though Paul was physically absent. Paul knew it was urgent! Purge that evil person from among you!

In his own mind, Paul had already handed the man over to Satan. I imagine Paul making this kind of prayer: “Dear God, let Satan deal with this man so that his spirit may perhaps be saved in the day of the Lord. He is no longer the church’s responsibility. And please get the Corinthian congregation to obey my instructions swiftly, so that their arrogance and apathy will be brought to a halt.”

Reasons why domestic abuse comes under the six heinous sins listed in 1 Corinthians 5

I define domestic abuse as a pattern of coercive control that proceeds from a mentality of entitlement to power, whereby, through intimidation, manipulation and isolation, the abuser keeps their target subordinated and under their control. (link)

Using this definition of domestic abuse, all domestic abuse comes under the rubric of 1 Corinthians 5:11.

All domestic abusers use verbal abuse. They assail their targets with scornful, contemptuous language. They slander, badmouth, and falsely accuse their targets. Abusers resist taking responsibility for their bad behaviour; instead, they routinely and habitually shift blame away from themselves. They covertly manipulate the target to take responsibility for all the problems in the relationship.

All domestic abusers swindle and rob their targets. The domestic abuser surreptitiously undermines and systematically disassembles the target’s personhood so that the target distrusts her own judgement and doubts her own instincts. The coercive controller entraps the target by stealth, robbing the target of dignity and liberty. Domestic abusers extort sexual services and slave-like work from their targets, threatening and punishing any resistance to their extortion. Many domestic abusers swindle the assets and savings of their targets. The abuser’s strategies of control, and the harm which long-term abuse does to the target’s health, can undermine the target’s earning capacity.

All domestic abusers idolise themselves and are greedy for pleasures. They prioritise their own pleasures more than they love God (2 Timothy 3:4). They pressure their targets to treat them as if they were gods, demanding that all family members jump when they say “jump”.

I could hazard a guess that most if not all domestic abusers are guilty of sexual immorality. Many men who engage in domestic abuse are repeatedly raping their wives, because rape is the sexual penetration of someone without their consent. Domestic abusers seldom seek consent in the bedroom because they believe they’re entitled to get their sexual preferences met without having to negotiate. They can coerce ‘pseudo-consent’ from their targets by making it clear that if the target refuses sex, there will be some bad consequence for her later. In addition, some domestic abusers consume porn, some are sodomists, some are adulterers, some are sexually abusing children, some are committing incest, some are secretly having homosexual partners while being in a heterosexual marriage. Other domestic abusers deprive their targets of sexual intimacy, preferring to get their own sexual preferences met by porn, or by sexually abusing children, or by practising homosexuality, or by engaging in anonymous fantasy sex-chat. And there is a whole range of worse sexual sins and paraphilias that I won’t name here.

The domestic abuser is a persistent predator. Coercive control is a capture crime. The coercive controller wants a long-term intimate partner in order to exert power over that person in predatory, deceptive, systematic, soul-destroying ways. The coercive controller’s goal is to oppress, feed off, and desecrate the target’s life, all while giving the appearance of being in a loving intimate partnership. By maintaining this appearance, the skilled coercive controller can predate on his intimate partner for years.

Don Hennessy uses the term male intimate abuser for men who choose to abuse their female intimate partners. Hennessy has worked with hundreds of male intimate abusers and he says:

• Male intimate abusers use the same tactics as pedophiles. (link)
  • As with pedophiles, their primary sense of entitlement is sexual.
• The male intimate abuser gains control of the mind of the target woman so that he can dictate the level of intimacy and sexual activity in the relationship. (link)
  • These men have the skill to surreptitiously carry out this brainwashing while pretending to be in love.
  • They are more devious than pedophiles.
  • The target woman lives in the crime scene.
• Society has been hoodwinked by these men. (link)

Dr Emma Katz is a world-leading expert on coercive control in children’s and mothers’ lives.  Her book [Affiliate link] explains and documents the damage men do when they choose to coercively control their intimate partners and children. Her articles and podcasts cover topics like:

• Ten Reasons Why a Coercively Controlling Man is an Unfit Father
• How Domestic Abusers Distort Their Children’s Thinking
• Why Domestically Violent Men Use Emotional Abuse
• Why Abusive Men DON’T Love Their Children
• Family Courts, Abused Mothers Accused of “Parental Alienation”

Many Christians do not have a robust definition of domestic abuse.

Having a weak definition of domestic abuse helps a person turn a blind eye to how 1 Corinthians 5:11-13 should be applied to abusers.

I have seen many “Christian advocates” who claim to be advocating for victims of abuse, yet they do not teach a robust definition of domestic abuse. Most “Christian advocates” do not teach that the church should use 1 Corinthians 5:11-13 to expel abusers. In my observation, these two failings go together, like the two crippled legs of a purblind creature.

Many sentimental Christians ignore or skim over 1 Corinthians 5:11-13. Some think that 1 Corinthians 5 applies only to sexual sin. Some say it applies only when the sexual sinner’s conduct is public knowledge. But Paul made no such qualifications when he gave the commandment in verse 11.

***

Further reading and listening

Are all sins equally bad? Are all transgressions of the law equally heinous?

Does 1 Corinthians 5:11 apply only if there is common knowledge of the person’s sin? (Part 1)  and Part 2 — by Barbara Roberts.

Church discipline and church permission for divorce — how my mind has changed — by Barbara Roberts, October, 2013.

If I tell people about my husband’s abusive behavior, am I gossiping? — one of our FAQs.

Don Hennessy Digest — by Barbara Roberts.

How Coercive Control Harms Child Safety and Wellbeing – an interview with Dr Emma Katz

Love without truth is sentimentality. Sentimentalism in churches leads to abuse.

“Leave the choice to divorce to the victim,” says the SBC’s Church Cares curriculum.