Avoiding Discipline?
The brother who commented on "nuancing these scenarios to death" is correct. Please take what I'm about to write as a general response to a general question. Here are a couple things we've done at Capitol Hill Baptist in Washington (a body of believers that understands and embraces church discipline as a means for our own good):
- We would almost certianly NOT allow a man to resign his membership in a preemptive fashion in order to avoid discipline if the case involved public, heinous sin.
- We have had some scenarios where we allowed a person to resign his/her membership...with comment. In other words, the elders encouraged the congragation to accept the resignation, but warned the congregation that the former member was in sin or almost certainly going that direction.
- If the member is resigning because the leaders of that local church have talked to him about non-attendance, then by all means let the member resign; they are responding to the challenge.
- If the member is resigning because the leaders of that local church have talked to the person about the lack of evidence of salvation in the person's life, then let the member resign; it is clarifying for the community to see a distinct, holy church that is set apart from the world around it.
We often say that church discipline is practiced for the benefit of three groups: 1) Those in unrepentant sin; 2) The younger believers in the church who would be confused if unrepentant sin went unchallenged and 3) The unbelieving community around the local church looking in.
When done well, the unrepentant person is biblically called back to a right relationship with Christ and his church, the young believers are rightly taught about the dangers and deceptiveness of sin and the unbelieving community looking in sees a difference between those in the church and those out.
Hope this helps.
It is unfortunate that this isn't practiced as often as it should be in local churches.
Good post.
Posted by: Shane Vander Hart | Oct 4, 2007 5:17:57 PM
This was a very helpful post.
I would add a #4 to the list of those who benefit from church discipline, and that is the church itself (i.e., all the believers of that body). I think that this was true even in the way God had all the Israelites participate in the judgment handed down to those who broke the Mosaic Law. Not to be crude, but I have to think that in casting stones upon the guilty in cases of capital offenses, they were to learn to hate sin, love righteousness, and preserve and protect holiness.
Of course, I am very thankful that we are not required to stone adulterers, etc., in the life of the church, but there should still be a corporate dimension in carrying out the corrective discipline toward the sinner (e.g., voting to excommunicate, then treating him as an unbeliever) which should simultaneously serve as formative discipline for the whole body.
Bruce McKanna, Associate Pastor
Evangelical Free Church of Mt. Morris (IL)
Posted by: Bruce McKanna | Oct 4, 2007 8:31:07 PM
Not to nitpick, but I would add a #5 to Bruce's #4, with that group being the Triune God (I invoked the trinity b/c it's a "group," get it?). Certainly God is not glorified when those who profess to be members of his family malign his name and misrepresent his grace, even his holy character, through public, unrepentant sin.
Posted by: Mike | Oct 4, 2007 10:44:05 PM