Objections Against Church Discipline.

Objections Against Church Discipline.

1. "The implementation of discipline will cause division in the church."

Christ has commanded the exercise of loving discipline (Matthew 18; etc.) both for moral and for doctrinal offenses. His word is determinative for the church; the church is not to walk according to pragmatic considerations. Should division result (assuming that the disciplinary steps are taken in a spiritual manner) then that division is not carnal. The church would have been obedient, and Christ's blessing would be upon it.

2. "To discipline someone is to judge someone, we would be guilty of disobeying the Lord's teaching."

It is not judging; rather it is the recognition that the sinning member has proved himself unworthy of fellowship with the saints; he has judged himself. And as long as he continues unrepentant, the church should make him all the more aware of his guilt...to help him in the way of restoration. If the church is silent she is automatically complacent; indirectly she is approving sin. Paul rebukes the Corinthians for failing to judge (1 Corinthians 5:1,2), and the Lord himself rebukes the local church (Revelation 2:20). Let us make it clear that there is a world of difference between the right act of judging (1 Corinthians 5:3,4) and the wrong act of judging (Matthew 7:1-5).

3. "As we are all sinners, how can we judge and condemn another?"

Admittedly every person, converted or unconverted, is a sinner. But there's a difference between a repentant sinner, contrite in heart and humble in spirit, and a sinner that virtually brags of his sin and does not combat it, mortifying it daily.

So all those who persist in open sin without repentance, remorse, or desire to change, would be subject for discipline, whoever they may be.

The church does not condemn anybody. In discipline she only pronounces Christ's disapproval and judgment upon those who bring this censure upon themselves by persisting in open sin without repentance. For a Christian does not practice sin.

4. "Church discipline seems to be so unloving, especially excommunication. Is it not better to work with the offender, to counsel him and try to lead him gradually out of his sin?"

Many reject discipline in the name of love. But which kind of love? It is ironic that this rejection is often justified by eloquence over love. When John wrote that we should "love one another," he also wrote: "And this is love, that we walk after his commandments" (2 John 5,6). When properly carried out discipline is a profound display of Christian love. For the Spirit-filled Christian dares not ignore the use of the various forms of discipline wherever they are applicable. Love necessarily challenges sin, for sin is fatal to the soul. A surgeon is not unloving when he operates; his act of removing the cancerous member is praiseworthy. No loving parent watches his wayward child, moving towards disaster, without protest. If we look for God's blessing in our churches, it is essential that we conduct ourselves according to his directives. He tells us how to conduct ourselves in the house of God (1 Timothy 3:15). And for this purpose the Scripture is profitable for reproof and rebuke.

Indeed there should be nouthesia, individual attention to give counsel where needed, but in the case of a person who is progressively becoming fossilized in sin, action should be taken (Galatians 6:1ff). We are not advocating rashness, but on the other hand passivity is not the answer either.

5. "Does not the phrase "against you" (Matthew 18:15) limit disciplinary action to the one or ones who have been sinned against?"

Christ speaks thus not without reason, for it is the sinned against member that usually takes (or should take) the initiative. Every sin, if persisted in unashamedly, is a sin first of all against Christ and then against his church, as well as against any specific person involved. Therefore, more is at stake than the feelings of the one currently sinned against (cf. Psalms 51:4). Comparing Matthew 18:15 with other scriptures we find that in no other text is the right to exercise discipline limited to offended persons. Is the offended one mentioned in Romans 16:17, 1 Corinthians 5, or 2 Thessalonians 3:14?

6. "Why proceed with public censure if the offending member decides to withdraw membership from the local church?"

All the more should the church proceed with censure, seeing that a man should not be allowed to lessen the judgment against himself for his course of sin by committing another sin (leaving the church without proper cause and becoming a schismatic). Besides, a quiet withdrawal can only be seen as sweeping sin under the carpet. The issue is not solved. Again, failure to administer proper discipline is a tacit admission that there is no spiritual power or authority in the act, but simply a breaking of outward ties. It is also seeking peace through compromise rather than obedience. This kind of peace is cheap and unbiblical.