Down through the years, I’ve been part of a few in-church discussions about church discipline. They were all memorable. Almost everyone was against it and treated me like I was going off the deep end for bringing it up. Being against church discipline was an issue worth yelling over, and I’ve been yelled at more than once.
In my denomination and tradition, church discipline of a certain kind was common in the late 1800′s and even early 1900′s. I recall reading the business meeting minutes of a church I belonged to that was founded in the late 1700s. In the the late nineteenth century, many business meetings involved the discipline of members for things as trivial as card playing and as serious as shooting another church member.
In the 1920′s, church discipline began to disappear and today is almost totally unknown in Southern Baptist circles. The reason is clear. Southern Baptists and most evangelicals completely lost the ability to see anything positive in church discipline, at least by the measurements they now use to measure what is positive and helpful in church life.
Church discipline was punitive and exclusionary, overstepping the church’s role and destructive to the church’s mission too represent Christ.
Church discipline lost out to…
a. the church growth mentality
b. the loss of church as community and the rise of church as voluntary participation
c. the change in the role of leaders from shepherds and elders to growth facilitators and peace keepers
d. the disconnection of the life of the congregation from the integrity of the Gospel
e. a litigious and hyper-individualized society
f. concerns about insurance, media and reputation
g. the equation of tolerance with love
h. the weakening role of the pastor as compared to influential lay members, particularly those with money and power
i. the abandonment of any serious understanding of church membership
j. a surrender to the culture’s view that religious institution should not “nose into” most personal ethical issues.
k. The gutting of the Gospel to be a message without repentance or discipleship components.
l. Open communion
On the church staffs that I have worked on, bringing up church discipline was like bringing up the suggestion of running naked around the parking lot during the 11 a.m. service.
As regards church discipline, the result is now something like this:
1. Church discipline is a very bad thing.
2. Only crazy people and abusive churches do it.
3. Church discipline means embarrassing people by announcing their personal failures and issues publicly.
4. You’re mean and unloving to even discuss it.
5. The Gospel, Jesus and a loving God are all against it.
6. You’ll get sued and be on TV.
7. It will split your church.
8. People will just go to another church and become members there.
9. Growing churches don’t do it or even talk about it.
10. Churches that say they are doing it are cults.
Now in some circles of Baptist life, this is changing. Certain forms of church discipline, especially in regard to dangerous moral compromise and the issue of long-time “inactive members,” are seeing a more positive and constructive response. Liturgical gangsta Wyman Richardson has a ministry in this area, as does the well known Peacemakers ministry of Ken Sande. Pastor Kevin Hash discussed doing church discipline in his church in an interview here at IM. The atmosphere is changing.
There is still a very long way to go. Primarily in the area of seeing church discipline as a helpful and constructive ministry to God’s people.
We need to look at church discipline again. Since Jesus was the one who prescribed it in detail, and since Paul clearly lays it out as part of a healthy church, we need to understand why and how it can become a strength and source of health, life and the presence of God in our churches.
It is my contention that a church doing church discipline in a fully Biblical, Jesus shaped way will…
-save lives.
-save marriages and families.
-stop abuse.
-magnify the Gospel.
-develop shepherds and leaders who love their people.
-provide many new opportunities for ministry.
-provide an outlet for the exercise of spiritual gifts.
-demonstrate the Christian virtues of love, mercy, grace and compassion.
Where is church discipline when we need it? Especially, where is church discipline when the hurting people in your church need it?
To be continued….
This looks like a very promising series. You said numerous things just in this introduction that resonate with my experience and ideals, and I look forward to seeing the rest of the post.
Imonk,
Right on. I agree whole heartedly that church dicipline has lost out becasue folks are afraid of two things. Loosing members and being sued.
As a pastor I believe whole heartedly in church discipline. It needs to follow a few guidlines.
1. Be for major issues only. (not personal griviecnes)
2. Be done with the idea of restoration as the ultimate goal not exclusion
3. Be done in a consistant and clear manner.
A few examples from my ministry.
Our church has at best 35 folks in Sunday School. We had about 150 on the church list. That was dishonest, unhealthy, and stupid. After a very long and heated few months and business meetings I was able to convince the church to go through a process of trying to locate our “members” . Those that did not respond were dropped completely. Others were put on inactive lists. I would have just as rather dropped all of them. We left an inactive list b/c a lot of folks were afraid of getting sued and then there is a whole issue involveing the cemetary and who can and can not be buried there. It was a really big deal.
Second,
We have a young lady who was an active member, begin to slip away, b/c pregant out of wedlock i.e. I tried to get in touch with her, not to yell at her but to just ask her to come back. I could not get even her family mebers to give me a good address. After a while, I tried to get the deacons of the church to go with me and talk with her. Again, not to yell at her, but to tell her that more now than ever she needed a church family and that she should come back to the church, make aknowledgements for her benefit and the benefit of others, and get back with us.
No one had the stomach for it. I was left with making it an issue myself or going it alone.
I”m not convinced that Jesus was sitting up an attendance standard when he gave us the information in Matt 18. Meaningful church membership should allow people the opportunity to go through times in their lives that they don’t show up for everything. I do fear the Lord’s Accountants on that one. But I agree with you and many other people that the category of the inactive member is a farce.
If a person is beyond the church’s ability to minister to them, they should be removed. But if they are working a bad shift, going through a divorce, in a season of doubt because of cancer, in a nursing home, etc, they are still part of the family.
I’m going to be exploring the pastoral care aspect, not how to reduce the church down to the “real members” as some of my Calvinist friends want.
A lot of this grows out of the failure of caring and shepherding that I have just experienced, and I’d like to help some younger leaders to think about why Jesus said all that stuff in Matt 18 that so many people misunderstand.
I am just glad to hear that I am not the only one who sees this need. I have been at my current church for 18 months, and have seen at least 5 issues that should have been handled through church discipline (at least the beginning steps of). None of the issues were handled correctly, including the Sunday School teacher that was shacking up with her non-Christian fiance. I have basically been asked to stop brining it up (the price of being the young associate pastor). Our churches need church discipline, because that would give us the tools for reconciliation that we are missing in church today.
I agree Imonk,
And I get the point. Our inactive folks were folks who I had not seen either as a member or a pastor for over 8 years. Some of them were not even known by anyone.
I think we may have done a great deal of dammage to church discipline by focusing on minor things like the card playing and dancing. our old minutes have the same accounts. they sort of disappeared after the 20′s. i wonder why that was?
How do you feel about the argument that the deacons should be more involved in church discipline than the pastor? I’m not sure how I feel about that, I can see how if the deacons head up part of it, it can protect the pastor from charges of beign a dictator.
my whole idea is that church discipline is done by “the church” not any one group.
Having a regenerate church membership with no discpline is crazy. it just doesn’t make sense.
I think the concerns you mentioned (your second list, 1-10) are legitimate. I’ve seen a kind of discipline exercised because of disagreements between church leaders on non-essentials. One leader who was more gifted and fruitful than the others was excommunicated because he didn’t go along with the program. But there was nothing in his behavior or ministry that deserved such a strong response. (Admittedly, the guy was a difficult person to work with, but he didn’t deserve discipline for it.)
It’s still amazing to me that Christian churches can have uglier political struggles than the Gentile world.
This has been a nagging question for me. I went through a divorce 4 years ago. Long story short I confessed to the elders of my church my fault in the divorce.
However, my ex left that church and attends another church. I am glad she attends as she has custody of my kids and they love to go to church. There is an issue of her relationship with a gentleman at her work which I found out had gone on 2 years before our divorce and still goes on to this day. They do not live together I know there has been and I guess we could still say adultry going on. No one at her church is aware of this relationship but everyone at her place of employment is very much aware of this relationship.
I realize we all have our struggles. However, isn’t one of the biggest criticisms of Christ followers today the fact we often live our lives no differently from the world. Would this be a situation where church discipline should be applied?
Michael, you touch on the real issue, IMHO:
I’m going to be exploring the pastoral care aspect… A lot of this grows out of the failure of caring and shepherding…
The issue is trust. We “younger members” simply don’t trust the deacons/elders/pastors, and usually with good reason. The abuses and neglect suffered over the past decades in the name of programs and ministry show where their intents lie. Until pastoring and shepherding (same thing?) get back to the nurturing and feeding of the flock rather than the management and supervision of the herd, there will be no leg to stand on with regard to discipline.
I know some folks may howl about this, but the two most obvious things that are not often addressed are “shacking up” and illegitimate children.
Most folks are afraid to touch it b/c
1. they may have a family member involved in it
2. are afraid one day they will
3. are convinced their own shortcomings prevent them from holding others to standards
But they miss the point. Church discipline is not the pastor holding someone accountable. It is the church holding someone accountable. The church has that authorityt and the integrity.
Imonk,
I think I have picked up on the fact that you are a open communion guy (I might be wrong) If so correct me.
But how would you handle as a pastor a person living in known open sin coming to the Lord’s table as an open communionist?
Should a minister simpley give Paul’s warning and let folks judge themselves or do we have a greater more active role to play?
I really don’t know how I feel, so know I’m not trying to box you in here.
Austin
I wonder how discipline could even happen without the accuser’s freight of hypocrisy and need to punish coming along with it. I’ve never met a Christian who’d resolved an idea of Christian discipline that wasn’t somehow adjudicated by their own artifice of nagging conflicts, shame and self-contempt. We flog each other a lot when we’re afraid to flog ourselves; if there are Christians out there real enough to discipline such that it leads to discipleship, they should talk to me.
I believe #b (the loss of church as community and the rise of church as voluntary participation) is most of the problem right there. No one thinks of church discipline as a loving Christian mentor trying to help us follow Jesus better, because they didn’t sign up for that sort of relationship. They just want to go someplace where every Sunday they sing happy songs to Jesus, listen to a motivational speech, make small talk with a few like-minded folks, and that’s about all.
Of course this is two-sided: Pastors don’t think of church discipline as part of the discipleship process. They think of it as dealing with people once they’ve become problems. By the time it’s ever called “church discipline,” it’s long past the point where the mentoring fell by the wayside.
I’m glad you’re talking about this from the pastoral end. Too much has been said about non-committal laymen, but if a church never teaches otherwise, such behavior is to be expected.
Thanks for the post. I wouldn’t attend a church that didn’t have at least some measure of church discipline. I need it. My kids need to know about it. It’s really a loving, body of Christ thing, and it’s amazing what happens when you submit to Him in this way.
thanks for “going there…” looking forward to reading more/thinking more about this issue.
i’ve yelled at others during discussions about all of this. trying to repent of that.
very timely for me/my church/my community.
During college I was a student leader in a campus ministry and each semester we would have to kick someone out for dating an unbeliever. Eventually some of my fellow leaders began dating unbelievers themselves. Some were open about it and chose to quit rather than receive the inevitable shunning, whereas others just kept quiet about it and kept their unbelieving girlfriends/boyfriends a secret.
iMonk,
one more thing–
at some point in addressing this could you touch on the role of women (in churches/denominations that don’t ordain women as deacons or elders) with regards to walking with those women who are in various discipline/pre-discipline (if there is such a thing) situations? i think it is necessary and good, but some male pastors, elders, & deacons might not think about it and/or might not know how to implement it and/or might think it is unbiblical.
Thankfully, as you pointed out, the atmosphere in many or our Southern Baptist churches is changing. The small church I attend is just one example of a Southern Baptist church that is in the prcoess of recognizing the necessity, and recovering the practice of church discipline.
Out of curiosity how do you define open communion? Would you consider a church that passes out communion to anyone sitting in the pew while explaining that it is only for those who are believers to be open?
[I posted too early above]
iMonk,
Great insights. Church discipline is a lost art. I’ll be interested to read what you have to say in the series. Personally, I think it is almost impossible to do church disipline well as long as point “b” is true.
Most of the discipline I see is done poorly. Often, it is abusive.
I remember in high school that one of my classmates was paraded up front to confess her sins to the church and ask forgiveness to avoid discipline (she was single and pregnant). The sad thing was that a lot of the other kids were sleeping around and were still in leadership positions. Because the one girl’s sins were obvious, she was made an example of. That’s not right.
I think that discipline is biblical. I think that churches should use discipline. But discipline should be painful for the church community. It only “works” when there is a depth of relationship that withdrawing fellowship hurts everyone involved and pains the disciplined person to come back. Otherwise its just “making an example of someone.” Perhaps the rule of thumb is, “If it doesn’t hurt you to withdraw fellowship from this person, you don’t have the right to discipline them.”
“If it doesn’t hurt you to withdraw fellowship from this person, you don’t have the right to discipline them.â€
that is excellent!
Justin,
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. I’m not exactly young anymore at almost 33, but I find myself with the same sentiment. I don’t know how much I respect and trust the church leadership. I’m suspicious of their intents and motivations. I often feel that things come from more of a place of judgment than love. And the truth is, many in leadership see themselves as managers, not shepherds. I’m generalizing when I say these things. I do love and respect many church leaders (in and outside my specific church).
I’ve had friends who were hurt by bad church discipline.
This is going to be a good series!
Where I pastor, they seem pretty eager to discipline and I’m lucky that the most gung-ho discipliners aren’t part of the leadership structure. Some want to discipline for lack of attendance or some other stuff like that.
I see value in discipline when done from a community-based perspective. Leaving aside the issue in 1 Cor 5, it seems to me that the worst “church sin” in the NT is that of divisiveness in whatever form it takes (false teaching, gossip, etc.). I would be for using discipline carefully to root out divisiveness inside the church. If we lose members over it, how committed were they to begin with?
Church discipline lost out to…Open communion
Whoa, whoa, whoa, WHAT!?!?!
From the larger American perspective I don’t know how you could define a church or temple as anything other than a voluntary association. The last Pew survey I saw that covered it stated that 40% of Americans have switched their faith from the one they were born into to another one. That implies a lot of movement and, to a great extent, an undertstanding of faith home as a voluntary relationship. After all, if your Presbyterian church disfellowships you, there’s always another faith home to fellowship in.
I wonder if church discipline could be applied to areas of theological belief.
As a Presbyterian, I am constantly amazed at the beliefs expoused by my fellow congregants. From the idea that there was no bodily resurrection of Christ to Christ being a women to scripture being myth without authority, it seems to me that there is debate and searching, but a lack of clearly established truths.
Such is the influence of liberal theologies on the Presbyterian Church, I suppose.
The Westminster confession and the catechisms seem a good place to start. I would have a hard time trusting an elder who did not at least adhere to what I would consider the basics, such as the bodly resurrection of Christ and the authority of scripture.
I think a consistent practice of church discipline is one of the most important things a congregation can do.
Correcting an erring member is extremely difficult for pastors, elders, and anyone else involved. I think that is why many churches avoid the practice and choose to look the other way when they become aware of public sin within the body, especially sexual sin.
Therefore, the pastors, elders and other leaders have a strong incentive to ensure that the clearly and consistantly teaches what the Bible has to say about such things, as prevention is always easier than having to confront a sinful situation. Pastors and elders have an incentive to discuss how they would handle these depressingly common situations before they come up. When they do come up, they can respond with one unified, firm and loving voice.
I think that neglecting the discipline of the congregation is very much like neglecting discipline in the family: you spare yourself confrontation in the short term but invite disaster in the long term.
Also, as a sinner myself, I am glad that I can depend on my fellow elders, pastors and other brothers and sisters to call me to repentence should they become aware of something sinful and stupid that I am up to. I need that guidance and accountability in my Christian walk.
I came from a church that used discipline. I was very young when I saw that last of it. I really do not remember much of it, but it was done in the front of church on a Sunday morning. Some young man had basicly stopped going to church and was living outside of the community of belivers(calvinist of the dutch variety). They excommunicated him. He was not there but his family was. Seemed kinda harsh, even to a 10 year old(as I was at the time) This was back in 1980 or so. According to my family, public church discipline was common when they were growing up. I have not heard of it since in the denomination.
I have not been discipled by the church for my apostasy. It would not bother me if they did(in fact I would think it fun.) But I would not want it done to embarrass my family. To my mind, it is done more for keeping the others inline than helping the person they are disciplining. That is one of the reasons my father gave me for why they no longer do it.
Thanks for the great post, iMonk. Church discipline is indeed greatly needed. A word of caution, though, to echo what some others have said: church discipline is a powerful weapon for harm in the wrong hands. A senior pastor,using church discipline without the accountability of a good group of elders and/or deacons, can ruin lives and reputations to further his own agenda. We must promote church discipline, yes, but we must do it with extreme caution and with a strong emphasis on congregational accountability for those leaders charged with carrying it out.
I don’t know of any Church that would do great job at Church discipline. The examples I have seen of it were horrible.
At one point in college I was dating someone from the Church of Christ. His ex-girlfriend had left him several months before and gotten involved witbh another person….intimately.
He went to her church and reported her…you know…just because he was concerned about her soul, not because he was mad, or jealous, or anything. I didn’t believe him for a minute…and having gained insight into his soul, broke up with him.
My other experience with church discipline occurred in a non-denominational church that our family had been a part of for years. WE loved that church. WE left it when the pastor began to become heavily influenced by deliverance ministry and tried to make the church follow him headlong into it….Except half the church was very uncomfortable with the “teaching” and saw it as unbiblical and superstitious. The most vocal opponent to the teaching was “dis-fellowshipped” in the middle of a Sunday morning service…in front of his two daughters who were home from college.
There was no valid reason given. There was no open door for reconciliation. The congregation was asked to simply “trust the pastor” that this needed to be done. Having been part of the worship team and knowing the back-story, I knew it was done because the pastor had a personality conflict with the church member. They didn’t get along, and his vocal opinion was irritating to the pastor.
It was pretty much a “don’t let the door hit you in the a** on the way out” kind of thing.
It was horrible and traumatic and split the church in half.
Very few people are mature and wise enough to institute church discipline.
It’s like giving dynamite and matches to toddlers.
As an Irish Catholic, I’m reading this thread with a wry smile on my face because, ladies and gentlemen, when you start discussing church discipline – then welcome to the fun world of public opinion versus the repressive, misogynist, homophobic, racist, sexist, whatever other bad label you can think of mean old church.
Particularly in cases of sexual morality – then you’re accused of wanting to go back to the bad old days, when the parish priest was beating the courting couples out of the bushes with a blackthorn stick!
We’ve had cases involving schools and hospitals – I don’t know how American denominations are set up in this instance; what are your opinions on, for example, teachers in a church school? Like this article about how a repeat of a case from 1982 could happen again, even in enlightened modern Ireland:
http://www.herald.ie/opinion/comment/have-we-learned-the-lessons-of-the-pregnant-teacher-case-1474317.html
“Today, single pregnancy is a fact of life and we expect teachers, in common with every other profession, to live with each other without benefit of clergy. So much so that if anyone talks of “living in sin,” the reference is ironic.
Most people, at the time of the Eileen Flynn case, could not understand how a famously liberal and progressive judge could have ruled against her. They misunderstood the judgement, the reason the Holy Faith congregation took the case against her — and the factor which may lead to a version of it happening again in the future.
The judge vindicated the right of a religious order providing specifically Catholic education in a Catholic ethos, to remove a teacher whose lifestyle did not support that ethos.
The nuns didn’t want rid of Eileen because she’d had a baby. They just didn’t believe they could credibly promulgate explicit Catholic values like chastity and no sex before marriage, if all the pupils knew that one of their teachers was openly living a life that contradicted that.
In an Ireland increasingly sceptical, not just about those values, but about the credibility of a Church troubled by clerical child sex abuse to preach and protect those values, the Eileen Flynn case was seen as nuns punishing a sexually active women and ignoring the fact that she was a good teacher.
Nobody heard what the nuns were trying to say, which was: “We’re a Catholic school, therefore our teachers should live Catholic lives.”
Transpose the issue to Islam, and it makes immediate sense. Nobody would expect a Muslim school to employ a female teacher who (a) didn’t cover her head in public, (b) drank alcohol,(c) went around with a man to whom she wasn’t married.
The issue of whether people who believe in a particular religion should be entitled to have their children educated in a school which demonstrates that religion in every aspect of its operation has not gone away.
Which is why a version of the Eileen Flynn case may happen again.
Even in these changed times.”
Opinions? Comments? And I haven’t even touched the topic of American Catholic pro-choice/”abortion rights” politicians and the automatic excommunication/denial of communion controversies
As an outsider this is really making me curious. What warrants church discipline? Seems like most people are talking about birth out of wedlock, or living together before mariage(is that a sin in itself, or does it just imply they are having sex?). What would be the punishment for these things?
Tim W. what is wrong with Christians dating non believers?
iMunk, I have records of the men’s meetings from my great-grandfather’s Southern Baptist church during the 1880s. It is fascinating reading.
On more than one occasion the men formed committees to go and talk with a brother who was abusing his wife, or engaged in public drunkenness.
There was also a lengthy discussion about whether it was appropriate for the pastor to have relations with his wife on Sunday. The records give no clue as to why this issue came up, but apparently the men of the church were concerned.
If a church knows there is abuse going on in a family, I definitely think it is appropriate to act. I don’t think the congregation needs to be peering into their pastor’s bedroom window on Sunday evening though.
OK…I’m dying to know: how did the “running around naked during the 11:00 service ” idea go over ??
Just asking. (pictures not that necessary)
Greg R
In my Yearly Meeting church discipline is called being “eldered,” and while not wanting to be eldered goes a long way toward keeping me in line – it can also be a positive thing. Like if I’m just going through something spiritually/mentally/emotionally a more senior member will come along side of me and help me through it. That is also eldering.
Austin, with your pregnant church member besides going after her and trying to bring her back to church – you may need to remind other church members about loving her and while not saying what she did was okay not heaping condemnation on her head. When I was 17 and had just had a baby out of wedlock – I started going to church when the baby was about a month old. The pastor and his wife were wonderful to me. They were like an extra set of parents to me – in some ways they were better than my parents. It was other church members who were horrible – making comments about girls who get themselves pregnant and then have the nerve to think they should be *allowed* to keep their babies. The pastor actually got on one person for the nasty things they were saying about me and to me.
Defense of the Gospel in the hearts of victims is one of the huge benefits of church discipline. For example, if a husband is leaving his family and the church doesn’t take a stand and follow Matthew 18 than I think the gospel is damaged in the hearts and minds of his children.
Little kids don’t understand why mom and dad are breaking up but they know it is wrong and that it hurts. If the church doesn’t do the painful and hard thing of stepping in to make the truth known than the church is essentially putting their arms around the offending parents at the expense of the children. The child is harmed in the pain of the separation yet the church acts like there was no harm. Why would that child want to be a part of that church or that God when they grow up?
Sarah:
For the record, rabbis are traditionally advised to have sex with their wives on Friday night, so as to have the most joyful Sabbath possible.
I’m curious as to the range of issues dealt with by Protestant ecclesiastical tribunals… Premarital relations, spousal abuse and public drunkenness have been mentioned. What about divorce settlements, inheritance and property disputes or fighting/assault cases between members? Is the principle that one should never press civil charges against another congregant? I confess, I was unaware of this aspect of evangelical churches.
Andy D,
Generally discipline comes after either unrepentant or pre-meditated sin on the part of a member. The sin doesn’t need to be just sexual sin.
As for living together. It is not a sin for an unmarried and unrelated man and woman to live together outside of wedlock. You’re right in assuming that the assumption would be that they’re having pre-marital sex. I think generally this would be something that someone would be talked to about as being a bad idea (especially if the man/woman in question are dating).
I don’t know if you could go as far as calling dating a non-believer a sin. In fact the Bible says to stay with a spouse if they are not a believer. Again, this would be more of an issue of a bad idea idea. I’ve never known someone to be disciplined for dating a non-believer, but they would likely have someone talk to them about it.
amen, Rich Shipe
Michael,
Glad to see you tackling this issue and I’ll be reading your posts to learn more about this. Church discipline really is the elephant in the room in a lot of churches. Again, I appreciate your thoughts.
Wyman
Thanks Kenny, that clears up a lot.
So what is the response(punishment?) to these infractions?
I agree so heavily with the comment above about giving dynamite and matches to toddlers. Not that it’s an excuse to neglect church discipline though.
I remember while I was at a Christian college, we discusses church discipline in a theology class. The point that was made that we all seemed to accept was that the entire and only point and goal of church discipline was restoration, in line with the verse that says, “If your brother becomes caught up in sin, restore him GENTLY.” (Not exact wording)
Problem is, that last word is ALWAYS ignored. I have seen churches feebly attempting to exercise church discipline only from positions that were anything but gentle and aimed at restoration. It always came across as self-righteous indignation.
And I’m a huge believer that self-righteousness is jealousy with a halo.
And then the issue comes up on whether or not people believe something is sinful, and how do you resolve a disagreement over that? For instance, Imonk mentioned something about card playing. A church that took issue with this would be quickly emptied, and rightly so. Other issues include dating non-believers (which is NOT a sin imo, sorry Tim W), missing church on Sunday, failing to achieve the written standard of “active membership”… the list can go on and on.
Maybe that’s why many churches just dropped it. They simply could not agree over the nature of sin and exactly what constitutes it. Just thinking out lout on that one.
I’ll have to dig out the document and glance over it again. It is several years of meetings.
Whoops… I meant moral indignation is jealousy with a halo…
Austin:
There is a point in the process where they would be informed that they could not commune with us, but that would be well into the process described in Matt 18.
Comrade:
Because I grew up a closed communionist, I see both sides and I certainly see the problem from the standpoint of church discipline. I think there are ways to maintain church discipline and open communion, but not perfectly.
Someone can leave your church when refused and go to Southland and commune. It’s unrealistic to assume that a person in flagrant sin wouldn’t have altered their views on closed communion!
It really comes down to what leaders and church are willing to do to perpetuate meaningful membership. I don’t think we can duplicate Paul’s situation in I Cor 5 because there are so many other churches to go to.
ms
Re: Dating an unbeliever,
The Bible says not to be unequally yoked with a non-believer (2 Corinthians 6:14).
Dating is for courtship. Courtship is for marriage. If you would not marry an unbeliever, why in the world would you date one? It is hard enough to remain pure/true to your core convictions when you’re in a relationship with a Christian. It would be just this side of impossible with an unbeliever.
I find it interesting that when talking about church discipline the discussion always goes immediately to sexual issues and false teaching.
Both of these are legitimate reasons for the church to begin the process of church discipline, but it is sins against one another that Jesus addresses when He brings the subject up.
It seems He is more concerned about our relationships with each other than we are.
Considering what it is often like to be “part” of most churches, I wonder what would be the big loss in excommunication. I think this is one reason why church discipline has lost it’s value. The other big one would be the lack of anyone earning the right to have anything to say.
I think there are issues regarding how male elders can adequately care for, pastor and discipline increasing numbers of young, single, independent women within their congregations.
I’m not saying there should be female elders – that’s another discussion. But, within the traditional model, how do you pastor and guide these women?
George C:
I agree. Doctrine and sex are the immediate issues.
I have a different approach.
ms
@Aliasmoi – If your convictions are so weak that simply being with an unbeliever will destroy them, maybe it’s time to rethink your convictions.
Michael,
Exciting Series, enough to pull this lurker out.
Love your opening thoughts!
You’ve already alluded to this, but the success or failure of discipline or anything in the church comes back to getting the gospel right and our understanding of conversion right.
Getting those things right (as much as possible) is the difference between a church doing discipline ALL THE TIME, cause the church is full of unbelievers, who behave like unbelivers OR VERY RARELY, because the church is full of humble repentant followers of Christ, who really want to be delivered from sin, not just hell.
Good Luck!