Christ taught the disciples, by prophecy, on how to conduct disciplinary cases in a local church. He prophesied earlier in Matthew 16:18 concerning the birth of His church which found fulfillment in Acts 2. The above text is an appropriate preparation for His disciples who will lead His church after His departure. He knew problems among members will come up due to sin. Since He has promised that His church will prevail over the devil’s attacks then this biblical manner of handling problems provide an answer to the preservation of the church.
When separation is neglected then there is a possibility the church might lead to destruction. God does not want it to happen. His church must be purged from elements who desire her destruction. Avoiding biblical discipline to spare greater or more significant members from leaving the church may lead to spiritual weakness and eventual death. Thus, the practice of separation is a great necessity both at the individual and ecclesiastical level.
Every local church must have its governing guidelines, doctrinal stand, ministerial approaches, and own local culture that describe its own identity. All these must be constructed in conformity with biblical standards. It must be constantly assessed to agree with the biblical parameters. When any of these is violated then a certain correction must be enforced. Such law or rule must be carried out or else it is irrelevant to be retained. Violation of it must be punished to prevent repetition which could bring in weakness to the church. The Savior provided clear standards on how to handle such violations.
First, it must be settled on a personal level (v.15). The offended person must go and tell the offender of his sin or violation. He must do it privately. It must only be between him and the other person. He must do it to win the offender into the right position or doctrine.
Some interpersonal problems could be prevented from becoming a local church problem if the people involved had only followed this injunction. One should not be tempted to disclose matters with others prior to fulfilling this first step of correction.
Second, if the first level of correction fails then the offended must ask another to accompany him in the task of winning the offender into his position as stated in verse 16. This is now beyond the private and personal level. The third person who accompanies the offended person learns about the problems. He needs to know all for him to do his work of convincing the offender to repentance.
The offended person must exercise care in the selection of the person to accompany him at this level of correction. Spiritual maturity is an utmost qualification. Sincerity and competence are a necessity in this task. Clear goals such as stated in Gal. 6:1 must be at the forefront.
Third, if the first two steps fail, the offended party and the accompanying person must inform the local church of the problem with the aim of possible ecclesiastical correction (v.17). We call this ecclesiastical level of correction where members will need to know about the problem. In this case, the offended person will have to inform the whole assembled membership concerning the problem of the offender. Thus, the original private sin becomes a public matter known to all people comprising the church membership. In this delicate level, the church pastor must lead and moderate the meeting so as not to allow it to become like of the world’s way of proceedings. The local church must exercise care in the administration of this disclosure so as not to make it like the ungodly judicial court proceedings. Debates and attempts to win sides must not be given forum. Here all will know about the sin of the offender and the attendant issues. Even at this level of correction the aim remains—to bring the offender to repentance and to restore him in right fellowship with the church (the premise: when one sins you sever fellowship from the body!).
Finally, if the ecclesiastical level of correction fails to bring the offender to repentance, the offender must be publicly regarded by the church through its pastor as an unbeliever. This level of correction is the ultimate avenue of correction. The shame brought by public disclosure of one’s sin must move the offender to repentance and admission of disciplinary measures. Repentance at this level means admission of all sins raised against the offender. It also involves readiness to submit to church disciplinary measures. The Lord called such person as a “heathen or publican”. As a heathen person his claim of belief in Christ is regarded as false. As a publican he is regarded as an outcast from the local church. By the usage of these terms Christ expressed strong and harsh treatment to the offender who failed to repent from sin and restore fellowship with the local church membership. No member should have any fellowship in whatever level with this person.
To some this biblical injunction may appear unloving and stern. But note well who is speaking in this context. If your Bible is a “red letter edition” then this passage is printed in red. Consider also verse 18. It teaches that the decisions made by the local church concerning these issues above have already been affirmed in the court of heaven. If one has been shortchanged by the overpowering human church leaders and members then God will avenge for him in the future. The church’s correction inflicted on him is irrelevant. If on the other hand one is truly guilty of such sin then he deserves such correction. Circumventing or any form of evading such correction is powerless. God will surely demonstrate in the future the vindication of His word.
Local church autonomy may impede the full implementation of this biblical imperative. One church may properly correct a member who may circumvent the correction by misrepresentation as he attemps to join another local church. If the latter local church neglects the former’s correction then she abets the offending person in his unrepentant position. The latter church damages the former church as well as the offender. She also damages the name of the Lord of the church. At this point fundamental local churches destroy one another by misbehavior, misrepresentation, and inciting the offender to deeper spiritual backsliding. What is the course of action to consider by the former local church whose autonomy and integrity has been doubted? The Lord strongly commanded treating the offender as a heathen and publican. Any local church that cuddles such offender-member is guilty of tolerating the wrongdoing and impeding the correction of the same. Such local church must be severed from the fellowship. Her action is detrimental to the membership. She is helping the disobedient church member to remain in his sin by going against the authority of the local church. May God spare our fellowship from such destructive local church misbehavior. CBC members mark and avoid such ruinous influence (Rom. 16:17; 2 Thess. 3:6, 14,15). Amen.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment