article36

§31 Problems in the Assembling (1 Cor. 11:17–22)

These few lines are vitally related to the verses that follow, verses 23–26 and verses 27–34, although the weighty traditional nature of the ensuing verses distinguishes verses 23–34 from verses 17–22 and suggests the separation of the discussion of the Lord’s Supper into smaller, more manageable parts. Paul’s words and his concerns are straightforward, nearly self-evident, although the energy of his argument causes the discussion to shift about in a way that might be difficult for some readers to follow.

11:17 / Paul identifies and criticizes a problem or problems related to when the Corinthians come together. He takes a point of departure from the beginning of the previous section (11:2), where he had praised the Corinthians; now he says by contrast that he is unable to praise them for what they are doing in their meetings. Paul literally writes, “But this charging I do not praise.” This introductory line is transitional and, at a glance, ambiguous in point of reference. The NIV rightly recognizes that Paul is looking forward at this point rather than back to the previous lines, so one reads, In the following directives. The subject that Paul is about to address is the meetings of the Corinthian congregation. In what follows he will take up a sequence of unpraiseworthy activities that include behavior at the Lord’s Supper (11:17–34) and the use of spiritual gifts in worship (12:1–14:25); he corrects the various misunderstandings and misbehaviors as he discusses these problems and then sets out guidelines for orderly worship (14:26–40).

There is an undertone of irony when Paul says that he is not able to praise the Corinthians at this point, because his readers would not have felt particularly flattered by Paul’s remarks in the previous section of the letter (vv. 2–16). In this section Paul is even more blunt. He says the Corinthians’ gathering is not for the better but for the worse; the results of the congregational assembly are negative. To paraphrase sensibly, one might say that the congregational assembly did more harm than good.

11:18 / Paul explains why he is unable to praise the Corinthians in their assembling. He has heard particular information about their gatherings. Although he names them as a church (see 1:2), he immediately recognizes divisions that exist among the members. Moreover, he says to some extent I believe it, implying in a slightly sarcastic way that he is not surprised by the problem of factions. In part, Paul’s concern with divisions may go back to the discussion of factions in chapter 1, but at this point Paul does not make that connection explicitly.

11:19 / Oddly, Paul offers a rationalization for this problem. He explains that factions are necessary in order that those who are approved may be recognized. The reader is left to wonder whether Paul is being sarcastic or whether he discerns God creating confusion in Corinth—or both. When Paul says, No doubt there have to be differences among you, the reader wonders how forceful Paul means for this observation to be. He uses the Greek impersonal verb dei, which normally means “it must be” or “it is necessary,” and which, in the vast majority of NT occurrences means “it must be” or “it is necessary” because of the presence, action, and will of God.

The NIV translation is near paraphrase, though probably accurate, at this point. The words to show which of you have God’s approval more literally say, “in order that those who are approved may become manifest among you.” Implicit in this statement is the notion that some are approved while others are not; from Paul’s wording the reader is to understand that God does the approving and disapproving, although the behavior of the Corinthians is the key to distinguishing the groups.

11:20 / Paul explicitly raises the matter of the Lord’s Supper, declaring that the meal the Corinthians eat at their assemblies cannot be so named. The Greek text indicates that Paul is still explaining his understanding of the situation, although the way Paul words the statement—he begins, “Thus” or “Therefore” (Gk. oun)—is lost in the NIV. Indeed, the translation it is not the Lord’s Supper you eat is problematic, since Paul actually writes, “It is not the Lord’s Supper to eat.” The wording of this remark may indicate that Paul meant to say that the problem lay with the purpose of the gathering or the motivation that was brought to the assembly, rather than with the course or nature of the events per se. It is not the Lord’s Supper they eat, because they do not gather to eat the Lord’s Supper. Inappropriate aims make even appropriate actions unacceptable.

11:21 / In sharp juxtaposition to “the Lord’s Supper” Paul states here that each of you goes ahead without waiting for anybody else, which literally reads, “for each one starts her or his own supper to eat.” In other words, self-interest colors the eating from the outset. Paul contrasts “the Lord’s Supper” with “the [Corinthians’] own supper” and in the comparison reveals that a primary focus on the self is the problem with the Corinthians’ eating.

In this and the following verse Paul identifies that he opposes individualistic self-gratification in the extreme. Moreover, he gives a theological force to his denunciation by showing that self-interest undermines community. That is, self-interested activity breaks down the unity of the church that God has brought into being. Each person or group goes an individual way, without concern for others. Thoughtlessness toward others causes humiliation and, as becomes clear in what follows, is antithetical to love.

Commentators rightly suggest that differences in the social status of believers in Corinth lie behind the formation of groups where some remain hungry and others get drunk. Some apparently had more means, time, and goods than others, and distinctions were made. This insight is helpful at a sociological level and assists modern readers in understanding the practical dimensions of the problems in Corinth, although Paul does not address the situation on that plane (pace Watson, First Epistle, pp. 117–19). Indeed, Paul does not say to wait for others and then to distribute the goods more equitably, although in one way that might have pleased him (see 10:33). Simply altering the activity will not correct the true problem in the Corinthian church. Rather, Paul addresses this problem as a theological issue: persons are focused on themselves rather than on “the Lord” and others who are part of the community of faith that God has called into existence. Paul gives no sociological pep talk; rather, he moves ahead with his argument and recalls the Corinthians to a proper theological point of view (vv. 23–34).

11:22 / Paul issues a series of remarks, including four rhetorical questions and a final declaration. He uses these to provide a forceful explanation of his inability to commend the practices of the Corinthians. The tone of the lines is telling. The first question is as a double negative in Greek and amounts to stinging sarcasm, Don’t you have …? (contra Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, p. 195). The second question exposes the real results of what was happening in Corinth, Or do you despise …? The third question is neutral and open, What shall I say to you? And the fourth question is also genuinely deliberative, Shall I praise you for this [the way they are behaving]? Finally, Paul bluntly says, “I do not praise you!”—a declaration in direct opposition to the first words of 11:2, “I praise you.…”

The grammar of the last question and the concluding statement is ambiguous; so that one may read the lines as the NIV: Shall I praise you for this? Certainly not! Or, one may understand the phrasing to be slightly different: “Shall I praise you? In this I do not praise!” The question is a minor matter of punctuation, and while Paul’s rhetoric is unclear, his force and meaning are unequivocal.

From the way Paul frames these questions one must ask whether the Corinthians are interpreting divisiveness as a pluralism that deserves praise. If so, Paul’s remarks indicate that unity is essential and unity without diversity is meaningless. To bring shame to those who have nothing is to express disdain, even if unintentionally, for the church of God. One might conclude by contrast that to cherish God’s church would lead one to honor the less fortunate or that to bring honor to those who have nothing would be an expression of concern for God’s church. As Paul compares and contrasts matters in Corinth, the reader finds him teaching that an interest in God’s work may be seen in concern for others, and that concern for others may be the best indication of genuine concern for God’s work. In the end, as he repeats himself (“Shall I praise you for this? Certainly not!”), Paul expresses his basic disapproval of the gatherings in Corinth. Self-serving activity, even when religious in nature, is not God’s will or the purpose for the church.