1 Corinthians 6:5Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

He condemns such an objection as an empty pretext. Therefore he continues: “Is there not among you even one wise man?” Is there such poverty among you, he says? Are intelligent people so rare among you? By what he adds next he strikes them still more. After saying, “Is there not among you even one wise man?” he adds: “who would be able to judge between his brethren.” When brother litigates with brother, the mediator in the dispute does not need great wisdom and skill. Affection and kinship can do much to resolve the dispute. That judgment must be entrusted to people capable of examining matters, he expressed in the words: “Is there not among you even one wise man?” And to close their mouths completely.

Nevertheless, I said this to your shame, if there are truly so few wise men among you that simple and uneducated people must conduct judgment. He added "between his brethren" to show that, when the dispute is with a brother, many kinds of knowledge are not needed. Brotherly disposition helps most of all to end the quarrel.

I said this to your shame, when I called you to the judgment of insignificant men. Why does the one who is wise among you not render judgment between a brother and his neighbor?

Since, he says, there are wise brethren, one of them should be chosen for judgment, whose justice will astonish the world. It is a great shame if among those said to have known God, no one can be found who can examine a matter according to evangelical right. Paul called the judge a brother because the head of their church had not yet been appointed.

The Apostle points out many incongruities. First, a believer goes to law, for he calls the believer a brother. Then, he goes to law with one of the same faith. Worst of all, he goes to law before an unbelieving judge. Here one must know that this does not contradict what is written to the Romans. There he commands them not to resist authorities. Here he gives a rule that the wronged should not run to those authorities for protection. The choice, whether to suffer wrong or to be vindicated by one of the same faith, depended on their will. Then he introduces the more perfect ordinance.

“How dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the impious, and not before the saints?” The Apostle Paul presents it as possible, though undesirable and even humiliating (v. 7), for Christians to have lawsuits among themselves (vv. 7 and 8). It could also become unavoidable for them to turn to judgment in these lawsuits. He does not deny the necessity of judgment. He only desires that Christians be judged by Christians, and that for examining matters arising among them they choose judges from among themselves. These should be prudent persons, able to judge between brethren, and possessing standing in the Church (vv. 4 and 5). By contrast, he strictly censures Christians when, though they are to judge the world, they turn for judgment in insignificant matters (v.

Further, the Apostle reproachfully points out to the Corinthians that it is improper for Christians to appoint as their judges those who are of no account in the Church, that is, pagan judges (1 Cor 6:4). He says that it cannot be that among the Corinthians there is “not one wise man who could judge between the brethren” (1 Cor 6:5). Lawsuits themselves are also improper for Christians, who are bound to live as brothers. “Why not rather remain wronged? Why not rather suffer loss?” (1 Cor 6:6-7), instead of seeking satisfaction in court for wrongs? By the word “rather,” the Apostle shows that he is outlining for the Corinthians only the ideal of higher moral perfection. He is not asserting that every complaint, even a lawful one, is already a sin.

Having established the internal, ecclesiastical judgment, the holy Apostle Paul rebukes Christians for lawsuits before unbelievers. He expresses the desire that, by mutual yielding, Christians should prevent every lawsuit, since lawsuits in general do not correspond to the Christian duty of enduring wrongs and oppression. The Apostle first proves the impropriety of Christians being judged by pagans from the profound moral distinction between them and the pagans. Christians are holy, or at least sanctified, and in baptism they are bound to keep every righteousness and do every good. Pagans are unrighteous, and therefore are always ready for a biased and unjust judgment. Consequently, it is unworthy for Christians to go for judgment into pagan courts.

“I say this to your shame.” I say this to shame you and your lack of understanding, because you go to outsiders when at home there are more than can be counted who are able to do this. Or he says it to shame the empty excuse that there is no one to judge. In the Church, of course, there will always be wise people able to examine every matter and establish peace among the brethren. Chrysostom says: “‘I say this to your shame.’ He condemns such an objection, namely that there is no one to judge, as an empty pretext. Therefore he continues: ‘Is it so, that there is not one wise man among you?’ Is there such poverty among you, he says? Are intelligent people so rare among you? By what he adds next he strikes them still more.