Church discipline

[agedman]

Here are excuses that I have heard for a church not confronting sin in the assembly and in the staff.

We can't address the problem, they are good tithers ...

Christ said to let the tares and wheat grow up and He will separate them.

What will it take to keep this quiet

How dare you destroy the unity of the assembly.

His parents are ... and this must be dealt with through them.

I don't have time to deal with this right now.

What if they ask for their donation to the building fund back.

How dare you bring accusations against a man of God.

Those without sin should cast the first stone.

We've all made mistakes, can't we just forgive and forget...

Well, this is certainly unfortunate, but considering what the congregation has already been through we need to keep this quiet.

Our team is in first place, and we don't need to rock the boat.

Why don't you just move on to another church.
​

I could go on, and on, and on ....

 

[Don]

Here are excuses that I have heard for a church not confronting sin in the assembly and in the staff.

We can't address the problem, they are good tithers ...
Church that wants money instead of godliness.

Christ said to let the tares and wheat grow up and He will separate them.
Translation: "I'm too scared to do something about it"

What will it take to keep this quiet
Translation: "I'd rather cover up sin than call it sin."

How dare you destroy the unity of the assembly.
Translation: "Toe the cult line, or we'll kick you out instead of the person who's actually sinning."

His parents are ... and this must be dealt with through them.
Translation: "I have no authority in this church, and have to do what others tell me to do, rather than speak up for God."

I don't have time to deal with this right now.
Translation: "I hate confrontation, and would rather think about happy little elves."

What if they ask for their donation to the building fund back.
See comment about first statement.

How dare you bring accusations against a man of God.
Translation: "Yeah, you caught me, but I'm a pastor, so nothing I do is sinful."

Those without sin should cast the first stone.
Translation: "Stop judging, even if you're actually right."

We've all made mistakes, can't we just forgive and forget...
Translation: "I might hurt someone's feelings if I say anything that even hints that what I think they did was somehow wrong...."

Well, this is certainly unfortunate, but considering what the congregation has already been through we need to keep this quiet.
See comment #3.

Our team is in first place, and we don't need to rock the boat.
I don't have a translation for this, because it sounds more Joel Osteen motivational speaking than it does anything regarding sin and church.

Why don't you just move on to another church.
Since you're (not aged, but the pastor/deacon/whatever who says this) obviously too panty-waist to actually confront sin, that's a good idea....
​

I could go on, and on, and on ....

Interesting list. I was actually on the receiving end of "how dare you bring accusations against a man of God" once; and have seen way too many of those "let's keep this quiet" situations.

 

[canadyjd]

Yes you prohibit that. That is the purpose if the discipline has to go that far. ...... What if they come to church anyway and will not leave. You call the police and have them arrested for trespassing.

Wouldn't that violate God's commandment not to take matters of the church before pagan authorities? (I Cor. 6)

Don said it well...

As for the trespassing charge -- not sure that would fly, if the individual isn't causing any ruckus or otherwise being a disturbance. At the point that the church starts enforcing "private ownership" type behavior, they endanger their public and non-profit status.

Finally, take a look at what you previously agreed to: that the goal should be restoration. Would you really deny them the opportunity to hear more of God's Word, forcing them to go somewhere else--where possibly they'll hear heresy instead of truth?

peace to youraying:

 

[Iconoclast]

just found this on google...did not read it yet, but I liked the table of contents

http://www.communityepc.org/resources/discipline.pdf

 

[ktn4eg]

Here's something that I've often wondered about concerning withdrawing from someone who has been the subject of church discipline: To what extent is the spouse of someone who has been the subject of church discipline to withdraw from that person? Is he/she supposed to have little or nothing to do with him/her until that person is restored to fellowship (assuming he/she does see of error of their ways and repents)?

 

[agedman]

Here's something that I've often wondered about concerning withdrawing from someone who has been the subject of church discipline: To what extent is the spouse of someone who has been the subject of church discipline to withdraw from that person? Is he/she supposed to have little or nothing to do with him/her until that person is restored to fellowship (assuming he/she does see of error of their ways and repents)?

The spouse is not to take part or any side other than that of the marriage.

The marriage was before the church, and anything that would violate the marriage done by any person or organization outside of the marriage is not Scriptural.

 

[annsni]

I think the follow-on questions here have to be: Once you've "church disciplined" someone (which I believe is necessary, by the way), they are now considered a "non-member" of that church.

So what happens if they continue coming?

(most folks, as evidenced by the examples previously given, probably wouldn't; but what if?)

And what about continued contact with the individual? I mean, I'm not sure that someone not bathing would classify as a heretic, or heathen or publican, and therefore Titus 3:10 nor Matthew 18:17 seem to apply to that particular situation.

Moreover, if the individual, after receiving church discipline, continues to place him/herself in the church services, showing a willingness to hear the Word of God, do we prohibit that?

At our church, usually our "church watch" will prevent someone from coming back but so far we have only had one individual try to come back and once he realized he couldn't even enter the building, he left for good.

 

[Ryan.Samples]

Wouldn't that violate God's commandment not to take matters of the church before pagan authorities? (I Cor. 6)

Don said it well... peace to youraying:

Paul tells us we are to expel the immoral brother in I Cor 5. If someone is living an ungodly lifestyle, then they are supposed to hit the road. Perhaps the pain of imposed absence, the missing of true fellowship with believers, will so grieve the offender that he will correct his actions.

Paul goes on to say that individual members should not associate with the immoral person who claims to be a Christian. I again gather that the imposed absence is designed to demonstrate the seriousness of his offense.

I don't know about anyone else, but I take a pretty high view of God's word. In other words, my opinion doesn't matter here because God has offered us clear instructions. Total "rejection" of an immoral brother or sister sounds extreme to me and in the flesh I would suggest it is too drastic a step, but that's the whole point! God wants his people to police their own according to his dictates. I've yet to meet a congregation that does church discipline well--and some don't do it at all.

I don't think I Cor 6 has anything to do with church discipline. Paul states we are to rely on the church, not outsiders, to handle our affairs. If someone has been expelled from the fellowship then the church has handled its business itself. I don't see how using the God-provided structure of government somehow contradicts chapter 6. Using your logic, you wouldn't cause the police if five "Christians" are beating another believer (for whatever reason) and you think they might kill him. The church should handle that matter, not the pagans.

 

[freeatlast]

Not sure I agree with the analogy. Seems like it would be better to say that you booted the kids out of the house, and won't let them back in. Legally, you could then be charged with child neglect or even endangerment.

As for the trespassing charge -- not sure that would fly, if the individual isn't causing any ruckus or otherwise being a disturbance. At the point that the church starts enforcing "private ownership" type behavior, they endanger their public and non-profit status.

Finally, take a look at what you previously agreed to: that the goal should be restoration. Would you really deny them the opportunity to hear more of God's Word, forcing them to go somewhere else--where possibly they'll hear heresy instead of truth?

That is only because you do not understand the church. The church is no different then someone home. People are invited but anyone can be refused. If a person has been put out they can be arrested for trespassing if they refuse to leave.

 

[canadyjd]

Paul tells us we are to expel the immoral brother in I Cor 5. If someone is living an ungodly lifestyle, then they are supposed to hit the road....Paul goes on to say that individual members should not associate with the immoral person who claims to be a Christian...

The OP is about someone who disagrees with the stated doctrine of the church, not someone living an immoral lifestyle.

I don't know about anyone else, but I take a pretty high view of God's word.

Just so you will know, just about everyone who posts on BB takes a pretty high view of God's Word...we just don't always agree on what God's Word says... which is the point of the OP. If someone disagrees on a point of doctrine..should we kick them out of church and call the police if they dare to walk through the doors again.

I'd say that is an extreme position, and inconsistent with scripture.

peace to youraying:

 

[matt wade]

The OP is about someone who disagrees with the stated doctrine of the church, not someone living an immoral lifestyle.Just so you will know, just about everyone who posts on BB takes a pretty high view of God's Word...we just don't always agree on what God's Word says... which is the point of the OP. If someone disagrees on a point of doctrine..should we kick them out of church and call the police if they dare to walk through the doors again.

I'd say that is an extreme position, and inconsistent with scripture.

peace to youraying:

Yeah, we wouldn't want to be extreme and drive them out of the church with whips or anything.