I want to treat others the way I’d want to be treated when needing reproof.
—Donald Bubna
Debbie was a young woman in our congregation who had a knack for touching lives. One day she told me something that was troubling her in the life of a mutual friend, a fellow believer in our church.
Reviewing biblical principles together, we agreed certain logical steps of confrontation should be followed. Debbie hesitated, then said reluctantly, “I know biblically that’s right, but it seems so hard.”
Debbie’s orthodoxy is sound and so is her heart, but her response to church discipline is typical of many in the church.
The exercise of discipline in the body of Christ is too often unpracticed. More often than not the exceptions are legalistic groups where discipline is applied rigidly to codes of dress and other externals. These surface problems are not of great or lasting concern.
But what should the church do with a person indulging in delinquent behavior? Or when we are faced with violations of honesty, morality, or integrity—issues to which the Bible clearly speaks? What about the person who is showing an unusual amount of interest in someone other than a spouse? Or one whose business ethics are frequently questioned? Or the person who is flirtatious? Or one who stretches the truth? Or the young couple who seem to have no control over their child, or their finances? How do we help these people?
Rather than caring enough to confront, we tend to allow much error to go on and on. Only if a scandal breaks out or pressure breaks up a marriage do we begin to express concern. Usually, this is too late.
God calls us to a better way. I was convicted to think hard about discipline when a parishioner asked me about my views on the subject. My response was immediate: “I don’t think we deal with 50 percent of the discipline cases we should deal with in this church.”
“But that’s 50 percent more than what anybody else we know is doing,” he replied.
Although this answer was probably an overstatement, it was an indicator of a severe deficiency.
These, then, are the principles of discipline I share with fellow Christian workers. My convictions are not meant to imply expertise. Rather, as a pilgrim and a learner who deeply cares for the church, I am calling us to loving action.
Why discipline?
Paul told the Galatians that if a person is caught in any trespass or sin, those who are spiritual ought to restore him (6:1). Discipline in the church is always to be redemptive in nature. Its aim is not to show that we are right and others are wrong. A child is corrected to save her from delinquency and to help her grow into maturity. The Galatians text sees the person caught in sin as the victim of a trap of the evil one. The call for the church is to “rescue the perishing.”
Take, for example, the case Debbie discussed with me. Her friends had a teenage daughter, Ann, who worked in a store after school. Several times she had to work into the evening and was brought home by the store’s owner, who was also in our fellowship. An open note sent to Ann by this man thanked her for listening to his long tales of mistreatment as a child and lack of appreciation as an adult. He emphasized the significance of Ann’s sympathetic ear, since no one else, even his wife, seemed to understand. Ann’s alarmed parents shared this with Debbie, who brought it to me.
It worked out naturally for me to visit with the parents. The father told me his first reaction was “to paste the guy good!”—not an abnormal response for a protective father, but hardly a redemptive act.
Since Ann’s parents were acquainted with the store owner and were mature Christians, we decided they should confront him directly. After the father’s initial reaction, I felt he took a balanced view of the situation and realized his intention was to be redemptive rather than vindictive. We agreed the store owner was probably caught in an emotional trap, or at least did not have perspective. Such an encounter might well keep him from going off the deep end.
Neglecting a confrontation, on the other hand, might contribute to our brother’s downfall and even indirectly cause serious injury to another less fortunate “Ann” in his future.
Relationship web
The church is a family; we are brothers and sisters. We cannot choose our siblings, for it is the Spirit’s work to bring them to new birth and into the family. As family, we belong to one another.
“Family” implies responsibility and accountability. I sometimes do things or take risks for my two earthly brothers only because they are my brothers.
A church family is equally responsible and accountable to one another. Effective discipline takes place in the context of these relationships. “Faithful are the wounds of a friend” (Prov. 27:6).
Our church was involved in a building program, never an easy time in the life of a local congregation. One day the moderator of our board requested that the two of us go to lunch, and that I stop by this office before we ate. Richard, a capable executive and good friend, came right to the point: “I know you have a mind for details, Don, and this building program is not the easiest thing we have ever done. But you’re driving our building chairman up the wall with your ceaseless probing of every detail.”
That hurt. I thought my questions were necessary. I’d thought I caught several mistakes just in time to prevent serious building errors. Richard kept boring in: “Don, you have to back off and give this man room.” He was right, of course.
As I left, I felt much chastised. But I also felt something else. Richard had taken a great risk in confronting me, and therefore I knew he cared about me deeply. I felt that love. Our close friendship gave him credibility.
If a parent or sibling in the family communicates with another family member only to correct, little positive response is guaranteed. The church elder as well, seen only from a distance serving communion or interviewing for membership, has built little basis to give reproof when it is needed. If he never visits or invites others into his home, he will not be heard as clearly as the elder who has become a true brother.
Disciplers of men and women are tuned in to the web of relationships in their fellowship. A weakening of this web produces a distress signal in the caring church and should initiate action. If we reach out early, our later efforts in times of serious trouble will be more meaningful. If, however, we allow someone to grow distant from our fellowship without trying to find out why, there is no platform for later confrontation or healing.
Bible procedures
“When all else fails, read the directions,” we often say. The words of Jesus (Matt. 18:15-17) give us clear directions on the procedure of church discipline. Too often, leadership within the local body, charged with the responsibility of discipline in the church, is either unfamiliar with these instructions or treats them as irrelevant.
“If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you.” This calls for an open fellowship where people can honestly talk to one another about differences, shortcomings, sins. When I sense there is sin, to take action is a loving act. Every marriage counselor knows that where wrongs have taken place and no communication follows, that marriage is on the road to failure.
But the reproval should be private. The person who feels offended may have misunderstood. This is the time to gather information and to learn. It is not the time to gossip, an act that brings injury to the church family. In a healthy church, private reproval will be common practice.
Let’s say, for example, John is irritated by Roger’s habitual absences from board meetings and seeming laxness in corporate prayer ministries. It’s time for John to take the matter to the Father in prayer. Then, if a valid concern persists (not borne solely out of irritation), to face Roger gently. He may learn that Roger’s time and energy have been drained by family or business pressures. The confrontation will enhance John’s understanding of Roger; it also should enlarge Roger’s sense of accountability and bring into focus the need to balance his priorities. If both of their attitudes are correct, brotherhood will thrive.
When approached by a fellow member of the body of Christ about any matter, the Matthew passage says we have a responsibility to listen: “If he listens, you have won your brother.”
When confronted, my first tendency is to think, Here we go again! This is quickly followed by a raising of my defense mechanisms. I immediately want to justify my actions. Learning to listen, however, stretches me. One way I try to listen is by summarizing to the person what he or she has said. I ask the person to correct my summary; I want him or her to know I have really listened.
My attempts to listen to reproof have been good for my character, an aid in my development, and a bridge-builder in our church’s web of relationships.
Once in a staff gathering I felt pressed and harried. A matter arose that irritated me. Wishing to dispose of it in a hurry, I responded quickly and firmly.
Later, a fellow staff member said, “Don, I’m not sure you understood how you handled that.” He then role-played my actions. I immediately saw my overreaction. His reproof brought direction to me, strengthened my relationship with the staff member who cared enough to confront, and allowed me to mend the fence with the person I offended.
“If he will not listen, take one or two others along.” If the first step does not bring the needed response in private, it is time to involve three or four people.
The new people are not there to substantiate our prejudices but to bring new objectivity as God gives them spiritual insights. Again, the emphasis is on listening. God wants us to make an effort to understand what is being communicated. The risk is greater now, and it always must be remembered that the motivation is redemption. Although moving into the group process is scary, it does improve the attention level.
The winning of a brother or sister is not apt to be a simple, onetime contact; it will most likely be a series of contacts. Restoration takes a lot of nurture.
Some years ago, a close friend of mine and leader in our church became involved in a relationship that seemed unhealthy. Mary was an empathetic person whose official church responsibility brought her into frequent contact with Tom. It appeared Tom and Mary were seeing each other outside their official responsibilities.
When I approached Mary, she admitted it, defending the friendship as a needed ministry to Tom, who was struggling physically and emotionally.
The first confrontation brought no changes, so I went again. Mary kindly informed me that I was misjudging the situation. She would be cautious, but I should not be concerned. I felt she was not listening. At this point, I found it necessary to involve other church leaders. This time, both Mary and Tom listened, and both families were helped.
“If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church.” In Jesus’ time, there was not a structured local church. The organism did not yet have the form it would take in the book of Acts and in the Epistles. This aids us in understanding the importance of the principle of communicating a situation requiring discipline to the larger body.
I am not certain that there is one way to “tell it to the church.” Scripture seems ambiguous about this; when this happens, I lean toward cultural flexibility in carrying out principles.
Thus, in our church, we use our full elder board. Two or three cases reach this level each year. In such instances, the elders report it in our bulletin along with other agenda items. Names are used only in the extreme cases involving excommunication.
Several years ago our church was hit with an epidemic of divorces. Several were among leaders or prominent families. All of us were concerned, and some of our older members were upset at “what our church was coming to.” After consultation, several elders and I decided to make a statement to the church regarding our position toward the discipline process.
Near the close of a Sunday morning service, I asked the people to listen prayerfully to a statement of concern. I placed the statement in the context of the troubled marriages we were experiencing in society. I regretfully informed them of what we all already knew: that our church was not untouched by these tragedies, and that some of our families were in crucial struggles.
I said that the elders were concerned and were working with two hands extended: one of mercy and grace toward healing, and the other of the unchanging standard of God’s Word, which stood for the sanctity and permanency of the home. I reminded them that marriage vows were for life.
I then called the church to love these people, to pray for them, and to abstain from judgment; and to pray for the elders who were making difficult decisions. I committed us as a church to teach more effectively the scriptural admonitions for husbands and wives.
“If he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.” An outcast. We treat the person as a nonbeliever, because he or she is not walking as a believer. It means to keep loving the person as Jesus loved the publicans and sinners. It means to reach out to her in witness, but not to relate to her as a member of the body of Christ. Like all evangelistic outreach, the goal is to bring a soul to Christ and back into the functioning body.
In twenty-five years as a pastor, I have participated in the step of excommunication only three times. This is an extremely heavy responsibility. But Jesus says in this passage, “Where two or three come together in my name, there I am with them,” and this action—loving discipline—is agreed upon in heaven (Matt. 18:20).
Some years ago Dick and his wife started attending our church about the time we were developing a newly-married couples group. Dick, a student at a nearby Christian college, announced to the church that God had called him to preach the gospel. People admired his dedication. His sincerity seemed evident to many by his frequent testimonies. Some folks concluded that this exceptionally spiritual young man should be groomed for leadership within the young marrieds’ group.
Fortunately, Dick never rose to leadership, for God provided sufficient checks in the hearts of more mature people not to place him in a leadership position.
Shortly, a relationship developed between Dick and his wife and another couple, and they began to spend time together. Their lessening involvement in our fellowship should have been a warning to us. A few months later, Dick announced he was divorcing his wife to marry the woman from the other couple.
One of our pastors continued to reach out to Dick but wasn’t heard. Finally, several went to confront Dick. He refused to listen to these men, stating flatly, “God told me my first wife would never be compatible in the ministry, and that I needed this kind of wife. God told me to do this.”
The matter was now brought to the entire board of elders. They decided prayerfully to remove Dick from fellowship and then communicate it to the whole church by way of a bulletin announcement.
A letter was written to Dick expressing our concern, our understanding of what he had done (based on Scripture), our love, and the responsibility we accepted in dismissing him from our fellowship.
Within a few months, Dick, now remarried, moved to a distant state where he thought he could start a church in a small community. We felt it our obligation to write the ministers of that community about the action we had taken. This was done in hope of restoring Dick to fellowship.
Young couples in our church watched us to see what the church would do about Dick. They were not “out to get” him. Their question was: “Does the church really believe what is preached from the pulpit about the permanency of the home, about purity, about the sanctity of marriage?”
Our courage to act was well received; it strengthened our people’s confidence in the church.
Five years later, Dick visited Salem, and he left word that he now felt our church had done the right thing. He had finally recognized his error.
Tough kind of love
The New Testament makes clear that the exercise of church discipline is for those “who are spiritual” (Gal. 6:1), and that discipline is to be carried out in a spirit of “meekness.” Every incident of serious discipline is an awesome reminder of my own weakness.
I want to treat others the way I’d want to be treated when needing reproof: I would desire the absence of harshness or condemnation, and a preeminence of the spirit of Christ, who, as our living high priest, would put his arm around us, saying, “I know, I understand, I also once lived as a man.”
Where this is true, there will always be the extending of forgiveness up to “seventy times seven.”
Debbie is right. Church discipline is hard. It requires courage—a tough kind of love. It is biblical; it is right. Do we believe this truth enough to act?
Copyright © 1997
