Like Button

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Church Discipline

I'm going to throw a term out there and see if any of you know what it means: "capillary electrophoresis". Yeah, probably not too many out there who know that one (Science PhD Mom excluded). But that was just for fun. Let's try the next one: "church discipline". Not ringing any bells? I'm not surprised. It just doesn't happen that much anymore. The notion that a group of believers that gather together over shared belief in Christ and a particular set of doctrinal beliefs should have the right or responsibility to "discipline" members of that group is, well, archaic, even barbaric. We all know that we are to be tolerant and non-judgmental.

Well, that's all well and good ... but the source book from which the Church comes happens to disagree. Jesus Himself gave specific instructions on how to conduct church discipline. The sad fact that almost no one does it anymore is not a reason to conclude that Jesus changed His mind. It reflects, instead, the sorry condition of the followers of Christ.

What is the purpose of church discipline? Why should we do it? Well, the second question is easy: Because He said so. But there are other answers. Paul wrote "Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness" (Gal 6:1). Even when he wasn't being gentle, he said, "You are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord" (1 Cor 5:5). The most obvious purpose for self-discipline is to cause the sinning brother to repent. It is to restore, to save him or her. Now, when you think of it that way, the whole "be tolerant and non-judgmental" thing looks really stupid because being tolerant and non-judgmental ignores the need of the sinner -- restoration. In other words, in trying to be kind, we're not doing them any favors.

There are other reasons for churches to practice biblical discipline. One is to spare the rest of the congregation from exposure. Sin has a way of spreading, especially if it goes unchecked. If someone sins and no one really reacts, others think, "Hey, I guess it's okay" and you have a cancer. This, again, is not doing anyone any favors. But the ultimate reason to practice discipline is to protect the name of Christ. Already it is well known out in the world how "wacky" Christians are. Most detractors can quote off-the-cuff statistics about how church people are no better morally than non-church people. Sociologists are reporting that things like divorce rates and unmarried pregnancies among believers are the same as among non-believers. Unfortunately, it's not only the Church that gets the black eye; it is Christ Himself. And that, brethren, must not be.

What, then, is the biblical method of church discipline? I'm pretty sure that most of you know this. I'm also pretty sure that very few of us actually practice it, for a variety of reasons. Still, let's review.
"If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector" (Matt 18:15-17).
First, it's a quote from Jesus, so if we want to call ourselves followers of Christ, perhaps we ought to consider this important. Second, it's one of the very few things in Scripture (or even life) that offers a process, a step-by-step procedure. That makes it fairly simple to follow. So, it is important and simple. What could be easier?

Here, then, is the process:

Step 1: If your brother sins against you, go tell him. The hope here is that he listens, repents, and everything is well. If so, problem solved. It's over. (Remember, the most obvious goal is restoration. Therefore, mission accomplished.)

Step 2: If he doesn't, "take one or two others along with you". There are multiple reasons for this. First, you need to explain the grievance to these one or two others to confirm you were actually sinned against. You may be in need of correction. Second, the accusation carries more weight if two or three confirm it. Third, the weight of numbers along with the agreement of numbers might be effective in bringing about the repentance your brother needs.

Step 3: If he doesn't listen, "tell it to the church." It now becomes the responsibility of the church itself to address the sin and urge repentance. At this point it is out of your hands.

Step 4: If he doesn't listen to the church, the final step is separation. It is the same thing commanded by Paul in 1 Cor 5:11. "Do not even eat with such a one." Again, remember, the goal is to restore the sinner, provide protection to the rest of the church, and defend the name of Christ. It is not to be angry, uncivil, unkind. It isn't retribution. But it is commanded.

Of course, this whole thing, as important and as easy as it is, is really problematic these days to churches. Most Christians seem to forget that the commanded process begins with individuals. And as humans we have difficulty keeping in view the notion that "my good name must be defended" is not at stake here. The goal is restoration of a sinner, protection of the flock, and defense of the name of Christ. Funny ... if I'm the one who was sinned against, I don't seem to appear anywhere in that list. As individuals we don't want to confront. Why? Frankly, because we don't love enough. Generally we prefer to skip Step 1 and jump right to Step 2 ... you know, to engage in gossip and gather support for our own perspective. Even more rare is giving the reins to the church. How many of us, when we've been sinned against, are happy handing that off to the church and abiding by their decision? Frankly, that final step is also not very popular. We don't want to seem intolerant or judgmental. We don't want to exclude people. Christianity is inclusive, right? I mean, if we put them out from us, how are we going to positively affect them?

Still, despite all the difficulties, ramifications, and objections, there is no doubt that it is commanded and, therefore, important, and it is one of the most clearly laid-out processes in Scripture and, therefore, fairly simple. So, despite all our shortcomings, objections, and concerns, why are we not doing it?

No comments: