The Loving Act of Church Discipline Part 2:
Accountability and Responsibility
INTRODUCTION:
As I begin this sermon this morning I am reminded of a story about a person who didn’t want to go to Church. He told his mother this and she told him that he had to go. "But mom, they don’t like me there." His mother said, "There are a lot of people who like you, now you have to go." "But mom, it’s too hot in the church." His mother replied "We’ll sit by a window, now we have to go." "But mom, I’m too tired, I watched the late show last night." His mother replied "It’s only for an hour and after that I’ll let you sleep all afternoon." "But mom,..." and this time his mother wouldn’t let him finish. "Son you have to go," she said. "You’re the minister!"
In our lives there are a lot of things we don’t like to do. Yet we have to do them because we are the only ones uniquely qualified to do that particular task. The same is true with Church Discipline. No one likes going through the process. We are dealing with friends and in some cases even relatives who have fallen, and yet the Scriptures state that we as Christians are the only ones who can use this extreme measure in an attempt to restore a brother or sister back to their relationship with the Lord.
It’s also true that very few people like to be told they are accountable and will be held responsible for anything in society today. We can accept it in the workplace because there is renumeration for the job that we do. But outside the workplace, we have a difficult time when someone tells us that we have to accept additional accountability and responsibility, especially when because of a stand we take, we have no alternative.
Yet this is exactly the position that as a Christian we find ourselves in. As a Christian our lives are not our own anymore (2 Cor. 5:14-15; Gal. 2:20). These passages tell us that as Christians our lives are no longer ours to live as we chose. We live our lives according to the Word of God and that Word includes accepting the responsibility and accountability to administer Church Discipline should it be needed.
In our past study on Church Discipline, we determined that it was a positive action when exercised according to the Bible’s guidelines. I mentioned that of the six cases where discipline should have been used, of the five cases that exercised discipline in some form, four of the individuals were restored. In the one case where it was not used, it led to the resignation of the pastor and left the church ripe for a split. It’s only when sin is dealt with in a Biblical manner that positive results can follow (Hebrews 12:15).
Thus the question must be asked, if we have no alternative should the situation arise but to use Church Discipline, what is our responsibility and accountability in the process? That is what I want to deal with today. If we look closely at the Matthew passage, four different groups of people are established, therefore I would suggest to you today that burdens of accountability and responsibility fall on :
1. The individual Christian in the Church (Verse 15)
2. The fallen brother or sister (Verses 15-18)
3. The witnesses (Verse 16)
4. The Church congregation. (Verse 17)
We will also see that ultimately as a Church we will stand accountable and responsible to God for our actions in attempting to restore a fallen brother or sister
POINT ONE: THE INDIVIDUAL CHRISTIAN IN THE CHURCH.
Jesus addresses the individual concerning Church Discipline in verse 15. It tells us that if a brother sins against you, it is your responsibility to go to the brother or sister and attempt to make it right. But this is also the tip of the ice berg. There is much to look at before we get to this stage. We must also realize that as a member of a congregation, we also have the responsibility to make sure that the process is done in a just and biblical manner, with restoration the ultimate goal.
Our individual responsibility covers several areas:
1. We must consider our own walk with the Lord. We need to make sure that our Christian walk measures up to Biblical standards. Now, no one can do this perfectly, we will always have sin in our lives that we need to confess, repent of, and make right. This is what Jesus is refering to in Matthew 7:1-6. Jesus is instructing us first to make sure that our lives are in order, to remove the plank in our own eye, before we attempt to remove the speck in our brothers. We need to measure our hearts by Paul’s words in Philippians 4:5-9.
2. We must examine the fault and seriously consider whether it is of such stature to warrant going to a brother. In many cases the offender doesn’t realize an offence has been committed.
In a situation like this you can chose to forgive unilaterally as David did in 2 Samuel 16:11-12. But note this very carefully. You can only chose this option when you are the offended party and no others are involved. You may also chose to do this, only if it does not cause your brother to fall deeper into sin. You are your brother’s keeper (1 Cor. 8:9-13). The offense mentioned here is eating food that is thought by new Christians to be considered unclean. The obligation there was not to lead that weaker Christian into sin by eating the meat, even though it was understood now to be clean. If our silence is going to lead another Christian to fall deeper into sin, then we must confront the situation.
3. If ignoring the offense might hurt the offender (James 5:19). This could include anything that could present potential harm, either physically or spiritually to the offender. Our motivations have to again be for the best interests of the offending person. Just as the advertisement that says "Good friends don’t let friends drink and drive", so to "good Christian brothers and sisters, don’t allow other Christian brothers or sisters fall into sin."
4. We must realize that sin is like an Octopus in that it has tentacles that go in many direction. Unconfronted sin in the church can be like this in that it can have consequences on many people in the church. Especially if it comes from church leadership, or those recognized as church leaders (Hebrews 12:15).
5. If a situation has us considering going to an individual and confronting the individual on a matter of sin, then we have to recognize that there is a break in relationship, either our personal relationship or the individuals relationship with others. In such a case the responsibility is ours to go to the person who is offending and seek reconciliation. We have to remember that in some cases the offender may not even realize he’s offending. The golden rule in this kind of a situation is to deal with it quickly (Eph. 4:26), quietly, (Matthew 18:15), and carefully (Gal. 6:1).
6. As individuals we have the responsibility to make sure that should the situation arise where discipline is needed, that the proper biblical method is followed. We must be sure of the truth. Our testimony must be eye witness, not taken from a second person’s account. (Isaiah 1:17; Lamentations 3:35-36).
7. We also have the responsibility for our conduct in confronting the individual not to approach the individual in anger, or to use discipline as a means of vengeance. Our attitude must not be the attitude of the judge (Romans 14:10-13), but must be one of humbleness realizing that it would be just as easy for us to fall.
8. The individual in the church shares the responsibility of making sure that church discipline is carried out in a positive way, with the end goals of restoration and forgiveness. Church discipline is by it’s biblical nature designed by Jesus to be positive, and so must our intentions be. It was never designed to eliminate a problem by eliminating the person (James 5:19).
POINT TWO: THE FALLEN BROTHER OR SISTER
The fallen brother or sister has several responsibilities in the process of Church Discipline. Some of these are obvious, while others fall by the wayside during the emotion of the process.
1. The first responsibility of the Christian is always to be open to correction (Proverbs 1:1-7; 19:20; 2 Tim.4:2-4; 2 Tim. 3:16).
In saying this, I realize that the levels of correction will be different. It’s one thing to deal with the sin of slander or gossip, it’s another thing to deal with the sin of adultery, or murder. Some people simply may not be aware that they are offending someone, or may need to be shown better ways of dealing with situations and the correction is complete. The unique thing that happens here is that when sins such as jealousy, envy, gossip, etc., are dealt with successfully on a private basis, the restoration is complete on a corporate basis. A brother or sister restored privately according to Matthew 18:15 cannot help but become a prized treasure in the Church as people see the transformation in their life.
In other situations it may be more difficult to remain open to correction. While all sin has consequences, some may be easier to bear than others. If I murder someone for example, I not only effect my life as I spend the rest of it in prison, but I also effect the lives of my family and the victim’s family. My sin effects the church as people are angered, hurt and disillusioned.
I believe a big part of the reason for this is the fact that it involves a conscious choice on the part of the offender to participate in sin. The action is known to be wrong, and yet the choice is made to participate anyway. Consider Adam and Eve in Genesis 3:4-13. The temptation was presented, and the choice was made. From that point on humanity became aware of several emotions that they had not experienced before. The emotions of sin, embarrassment, inner pain, stress, disappointment, and a host of others. Temptation is always seeded in our mind, and when we nurture it, will always give as its fruit sin (James 1:15).
In situations like this there is often a lack of openness. The person chooses not to accept the correction of the church, and in many cases leaves the church. In cases like this discipline in absentia is the only recourse. Although the person is not there, the church acts and the individual is brought face to face with the words of Nathan to David 2 Samuel 12:1-13. Note especially the comments in verse 7 and verse 13. David is confronted with his sin and David acknowledges his sin.
2. There must be signs of repentance on the part of the fallen believer. All known sin is to be confessed (1 John 1:9; James 5:16). If we truly understand that we have wronged someone then our hearts should be convicted until we confess our wrong. But understand this, while our confession is in some cases public, our confession is only to God (Psalm 51:4). We may seek forgiveness, understanding, and reconciliation from the church for the way the sin effected the church, but confession and repentance is made only to God.
3.The fallen believer must accept accountability and responsibility for their action. The type of sin involving Church Discipline of any form, always involves others. It can range anywhere from one person to the entire church. The offender must make a statement accepting responsibility for his or her action, and allow themselves to be held accountable to the church during the process of restoration. The offender also accepts accountability for the consequences that arise as a result of his or her sin (Matthew 12:36-37).
A statement of acccountability and responsibility is necessary, and it is necessary as it is the offenders admission that they recognize their sin and claim it as theirs, they take possession and ownership of it. The fact is, that it is only by taking ownership of the sin, recognizing we are guilty, that we can be forgiven, and reconciled. Confession is good for the soul.
How that statement is made is divided into three camps, of which I would support two. The first camp follows the formula of Matthew 18:15. It is a private meeting between two individuals. The offending party realizes that he has hurt a fellow brother or sister, and apologizes immediately. This then is the end of the incident and nothing more needs to be done.
In cases of sin that deals with others, there are two schools of thought. First there is the school that states that the offending person may speak to a small group of church leaders, i.e.: the deacon’s board, or its equivalent, or possibly a church council which is made up of all the committees of the church. The second school believes the statement needs to be made to the entire church. Under strict conditions I favor the second.
Let’s look at the first school of thought. It would be nice to be able to handle situations like this in a very quiet manner. There would be a lot less pressure, all parties could retain a degree of pride, and less embarrassment for the church. But this system does not address a key aspect of the goals of Church Discipline, and that is to indicate to the world that sin in the camp will not be tolerated, and that one example can be a deterrent for others. Consider the example of Chuck Swindell’s office. A man was on staff with Chuck Swindoll and had an affair with a secretary. The church chose to handle the situation privately, and not let people see the consequences of sin. The next year 17 marriages of senior leadership people broke up.
In all fairness though, this system can be used very positively, to an extent. A Sunday School teacher found herself pregnant outside marriage. She waited as long as she could, but finally when to the deacons and told them the situation. There were a lot of tears, prayer, and the situation was dealt with that night. The discipline was that the woman would be relieved of her teaching responsibility for a time. The deacon’s felt that she would need the time with the baby and that would be the best thing to do.
The woman then asked to speak to the church. The deacon’s permitted this and stood with her as she addressed the congregation. Her eyes were full of tears as she explained what had happened. The deacon’s hugged her, and so did half the congregation before she was through. Everything was in the open, everything dealt with and settled. There was no living in the past, but with God’s help this woman and church walked together in mutual help and everyone grew. That is what discipline is all about. Resolving conflict not hiding it.
The third school of thought is to go directly to the church. This we will look at when we discuss the responsibility of the church.
4. It is the responsibility of the person under Church Discipline to willingly submit to any further action deemed necessary by the church for the process of restoration. Again there are some responsibilities to which the church is charged in this respect which we shall look at in a moment. Right now suffice it to say that all action taken by the church should be to the advancement of the fallen member and therefore the fallen member must accept the further actions with grace.
Let me close this section with the words of Dietrich Bonhoeffer with respect to the issue of openness and the necessity for it:
Since the confession of sin is made in the presence of a Christian brother (or the church)*, the last stronghold of self-justification is abandoned. The sinner surrenders, he gives up all his evil. He gives his heart to God, and he finds forgiveness of all his sin in the fellowship of Jesus Christ and his brother. The expressed, acknowledged sin has lost all its power. It has been revealed and judged as sin. It can no longer tear the fellowship asunder. Now the fellowship bears the sin of the brother. He is no longer with his evil for he has cast off his sin in confession and handed it over to God. It has been taken away from him. Now he stands in the fellowship of sinners who live by the grace of God and the cross of Jesus Christ... The sin concealed separated him from the fellowship, made all his apparent fellowship a sham; the sin confessed has helped him define true fellowship with the brethren in Jesus Christ.
POINT THREE: THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE WITNESSES
This follows the Old Testament teaching of Deuteronomy 19:15-21; 17:6-7; and Hebrews 10:26-32. According to the law, testimony in criminal cases had to be supported as the penalty involved was usually death. The testimony of the witnesses would be taken separately, and if after investigation the accused was found guilty, then the witnesses would take part in the execution. If the witnesses were found to be false, then they would receive the same penalty that they tried to have inflicted on the person they accused. Thus the testimony of witnesses is always in support of the truth, not an individual.
The responsibility of the witnesses is straightforward. Matthew 18:16 tells us that the responsibility of the witnesses is to "establish the matter", or "to bring back a factual account of the confrontation. They are to serve to verify both the position of the offender as well as that of the person offended. They are to bring testimony as to the spirituality of the confrontation, and the attitude of the characters involved.
POINT FOUR: THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CHURCH
This aspect of Church Discipline, found in Matthew 18:17 is without a doubt the hardest for us to act on. We aren’t just dealing with people here, but with friends and relatives. We are dealing with people we care for deeply. For the church to have to resort to this extreme measure of Church Discipline our hearts should be breaking and there should be sleepless nights spent in prayer asking for the leading of the Holy Spirit.
In dealing with the responsibility of the church we need to keep in mind that the ultimate goal is restoration of the fallen member. Anything that is done, including the suspension of church membership, must be done with restoration in mind. This leads us then to the responsibilities of the church.
1. The first responsibility that the church has in issues involving church discipline is to realize that we are all vulnerable to fall. As such the church must make sure that preventative measures are taken to keep people from falling. Work on interpersonal relationships in the church, check on people who are experiencing a lot of stress in their lives, or who due to their jobs may be away from home for great lengths of time. Make sure that there is teaching on the strength of the family, and how to resist temptation. Remember the best way to avoid having to deal with church discipline is to do our best to make sure such situations don’t happen in the first place.
2. The church has the responsibility to deal with sin in the camp. We have no option on this. 1 Corinthians 5:6-8 tells us that a little yeast or sin infects the whole loaf. As church members you do not have the option, should our church ever have to act in this way, of evading the issue. 1 Corinthians chapter 6 speaks of settling our trials inhouse because the outside world is not led by the Spirit. It is Church Discipline and each member of the church is accountable and responsible in the process.
3. The church has the responsibility to make sure that the discipline fits the act, and the attitude of the fallen member. Suspension of membership may not always be needed. Removal of a member from certain offices such as where the offence occurred, and leading positions where they could be seen by young people as role models, may be sufficient. In all cases though a statement of accountability and responsibility must be given by the offender.
4. The church has the responsibility to pray for the individual. Ray Stedman states this:
I would say first pray for the offender. Prayer is everywhere urged in Scripture as a powerful weapon to change people’s thinking and attitudes. Pray that God will grant repentance to the offender, that God will so move that he will turn and recover himself from the snare of the devil. And pray for those who have been hurt by the sin. Other innocent ones are always involved and they are being damaged and hurt; we need to support them and love them in prayer. So if you cannot do anything else, pray for such a one.
Stedman suggests in his sermon "Tell it to the church" that we have a special prayer meeting specifically for the church and the individual involved. That we continue to hold that individual up in prayer, praying for restoration.
5. The church has the responsibility not to cut itself off from the offender. Now this can raise the eyebrows of some in the congregation when they refer to 1 Corinthians 5:11, where we are told not even to eat with the offender in this passage. I would suggest to you that the passage here and in Matthew are addressing two different groups of people. The Corinthian church was surrounded by sin and a total separation was needed to maintain the purity of the church.
But Matthew 18:17 is addressing a different type of individual. Jesus says treat them like a pagan or tax collector. How did Jesus treat the pagans and tax collectors. Well we can start by realizing that Jesus appointed a tax collector as one of the twelve disciples. Consider Matthew 9:9-13. Jesus ate and stayed with tax collectors and pagans. Do not allow them the privileges of a believer in that you want to protect them from taking them unworthily (1 Corinthians 11:27; Acts 5:1-11) but we do associate with them. A kind word on the street, checking up on them just to see how they are doing, sharing from your own experiences, keeping the door of communication open is vital in restoration. Ray Stedman states:
Then the second thing a congregation can do is to express love and concern to the individual involved. Urge him to repent, to give up sin, and to give in to the pleadings of the body and of the Spirit of God. Especially is this true of people who are friends of the individual and have known him for a long period of time. The cooperative effort of many to help the one involved see what he or she has done is a very powerful weapon to turn him from evil.
Thirdly, individuals in a congregation can share with this person experiences the themselves may have had in finding God’s grace sufficient in their own lives to resist evil, or to turn from it, once it has been discovered or indulged in. That will encourage the individual to realize that the only way out of his situation is to return to the Lord, who will forgive.
6. The church has the responsibility, not to enter into a usage of Church Discipline without first having a plan of restoration in place. This plan is usually devised by the church leadership, based on the nature of the situation. It’s goals must always be positive in nature, and if the plan includes financial outlay in the form of counseling for example, then the church should be prepared to meet that financial obligation. Part of the restoration plan can also include different forms of restitution if the issue is financial in nature. Galatians 6:1 states clearly that it is the responsibility of the church to restore a fallen brother, gently, always keeping in mind that it could easily be us in that situation. 2 Corinthians 5:18 tells us that God has given us the ministry of reconciliation. Joel Smith in his sermon "Confronting Conflict and Sin" states:
Sins that require confrontation because of their potential for harm to the sinning person include serious doctrinal error, moral failure, repeated instances of the same offense, sinful habits or destructive tendencies, or any other transgression that poses a serious danger to the offenders well-being. Your motivation should be for the other person’s good. If you just want to turn the screws on them then your motivation is wrong. Restoration in the key.
7. The church has the responsibility to restore and forgive if true repentance is shown, and the plan of restoration is being followed. This is sometimes hard to do, but in the church we are called to do some things that may go against everything our natural nature tells us to do. That is one of the things that sets us apart. After restoration takes place the church also has the responsibility to chose carefully the ministry of the individual. The individual needs to be brought back gradually, avoiding positions of great responsibility until well established in the church again. They need time to just be a part of the fellowship again, to just enjoy people caring about them.
CONCLUSION:
The issue of Church Discipline is one that we would all like to avoid, but in some cases cannot.
The ultimate goals of Church Discipline is always the restoration of the individual, the protection of the church with reference to holiness and purity, and dealing with a serious situation in an open manner so that there can be closure to the situation. This is why I advocate the third method of dealing with the offender, that being taking it to the church.
We have to have faith in the church to be the church. We are not taking matters to the church for gossip’s sake, nor do we take a matter to the church in the hopes of turning the people against one that has fallen. We turn the matter over to the church in an open forum to make sure that we have conducted a through investigation, and that we have lived up to our responsibilities to the fallen individual and to God. We conduct the matter in open forum to make sure that the church realizes that there is no other option but the action taken. We conduct the matter in open forum to give the church the final say, as Matthew 18:17 states we are to "tell it to the church". We take it to the church for the church’s forgiveness of the individual and once that forgiveness is given, then the church has dealt with that matter and it may never be brought up again.
But the best way to avoid the issue of Church Discipline is to lead our lives walking daily with the Lord. Let Him be our guide, even when life is difficult. We are all vulnerable on our own, and only the power and grace of God can sustain us through this life.
