Well, I will try to answer the first question. Let me first tell you a little bit of my background. I am a Brazilian young pastor, got saved at the age of 5, my dad past away when I was seven, and then I was raised by my mom, with a 3 years older sister. My mom was always my big example of faith, mercy, service, she was always an example of a lover mom, become a widow at such early age, but never got married again and always was willing to serve at church specially with kids.

Three years a go, one neighbor asked my mom if she would try to help her brother through the church, the neighbor’s brother was an alcoholic, and addicted to drugs. My mom went to talk to the pastors and since she was someone to whom they had complete confidence she was told by them to take care of the situation. So she found a place (a Christian clinic) to receive this guy, and through the whole clinic program she was the one taking care of him, going and visiting him, at this time I was living out of town doing my Seminary course.

After a while I heard the news that the guy got saved and was baptized at the clinic and not too long after that the guy’s diagnostic was “clean” from all his addictions, so my mom was the one who found a house to him and talked to many people from church to help him paying his rent and donating some stuff for him until he would found a job. Well, at that time she was spending lots of time with him, trying to help him in his re-start his life.

At this point the church leadership become aware of their proximity since the guy was not living with his wife (after years of his drunkenness and drugs, she was not willing to stay with him, neither to have him close to their daughter) but was still legally married. The leaders tried talking to my mom many times, and she would always agree that she was wrong but she would continue too close of him, with the excuse that no one was truly willing to help this guy like she was. At this time I was doing my pastoral internship in the States. Making a long story shorter, during that same year, my mom assumed her relationship with that guy, got “excluded” from the church, the guy dot divorced and at the day before I came back from the States they got married.

With all that in my back, my answer for your first question is, Paul told us to don’t have fellowship that is what partaking a meal meant at that time, with those who call themselves believers and yet are living in the practice of sin. Thus I can’t have fellowship with my mom, for example, as I prepare to get married I can’t share with her some prayer requests, but yet I ought to honor my mom. But taking a meal with her is not a clear act of approving her sin but just a routine act of two people who live under the same roof.

It’s hard to judge each and every situation and say do it and don’t do it, but I clear believe that by having lunch at the same table with my mom, no one would believe that I am approving her sins. So that is my job, until she repents and pass through the process of reconciliation with her church, ask my self in each situation, by doing that would anyone think that I approve my mom’s sin? If the answer might be yes, I won’t do it, to do not bring shame to the name of our Glorious God.

Hope you all got to understand my poor English. I hope to get some good answers here and by them got to grow in my understanding of those maters.

By His Grace and for His Glory,

Filipe Niel

Wow. I think that this could be split into two posts. However let me take a stab.

#1) If this man is the bread-winner and I am dependent on his income then I am in a tough spot. I think that I Corinthians 7 ought to be brought to bear: recognize the church discipline and treat him as an unbeliever. If I am no longer his dependent I could envision occasions when I could spend time with him while still recognzing the church discipline. Let's not be too 'wooden' with I Corinthians 5:11. Church discipline moves the man from being a brother to the category of an unbeliever. He may claim to be a believer but the church has declared him to be an unbeliever because of his unrepentance.

#2) In the PCA (where I serve) we have a screening process for men considering vocational ministry called "coming under care." Such men must be members of their church (for at least 6 months) and have the endorsement of their Session (board of elders). They then must present themselves to the presbytery and give their Christian testimony and their call to ministry. They are to be examined as to their experiential religion and their motives for seeking ministry. If this is met with approval then he is added to the membership roll of the presbytery as a candidate for ministry. He must still pursue his education, perform an internship, become licensed and eventually ordained before actually serving as a minister. So there are lots of hurdles along the way that he must successfully cover.

Sometimes you don't know if the man has all the gifts upfront. However, in the interest of charity you can be honest with the man about the weaknesses you see and still allow him to go forward. Who knows how God might work in his life (I speak from personal experience). Remember Paul, Barnabas and Mark?

Dave Sarafolean
Christ Covenant Church PCA
Midland, Michigan

To follow-on Dave's comment on Question #2: The PCA Book of Church Order at Chapter 16 "Church Orders -- The Doctrine of Vocation" at 16.1 reads "Ordinary vocation to office in the Church is the [and here I'll break down the answer-JOB]

1. the calling of God by the Spirit
2. through the inward testimony of a good conscience
3. the manifest approbation of God's people, and,
4. the concurring judgment of a lawful court of the Church."

Assuming that the brother has numbers 1 & 2 9 and I would ask a LOT of probing questions concerning this -- too many candidates committees don't )

You have to seek out by trials of his gifts numbers 3 & 4.

Interesting post. I guess I have a few questions? Wasn't having a meal among believers in the early church a real, strong time of communion of fellowship?

Every time in American culture when we have a meal, is that time a time of fellowship? Well, of course not. My guess, I may or may not be right here, was that Paul was stressing, because there was a strong connection especially among believers that when they had a meal, it was a time of fellowship.

So the question is, since the priniciples of the Bible never go away, and never are outdated, first, what is the priniciple, and how should it be applied today.

The principle is simple. We are not to have Chrisitan fellowship with those folks who have been excommunicated. How does that manifest today in our culture. Well, there are a couple of examples. Let's say you are planning a Reformation Day party at your church or your house - there is going to be food and fellowship, etc. Then you could not invite your excommunicated family member.

But, you could invite your excommunicated family member to dinner for his birthday or any other day and use that opportunity to preach the gospel. Treat him as a unbeliever, (e.g., don't pray with him), but use that time to admonish him in a loving way.

Or let's say, you were having a Christmas party at your house. Obviously, Christmas is a time for believers to celebrate the birth of Christ. And for some families, Christmas may be a time for a family to invite unbelieving family and friends and show their unbelieving family and friends how they celebrate Christmas. I know one family who always uses Christmas to celebrate in their home. They visit others during Christmas Eve or what have you, but always celebrate Christmas Day in their home singing praise songs and what have you and tell family members they are welcome to join with them.

So, you could even invite the excommunicated family member over for the holidays as long as the expressed purpose of the invite is not necessarily for Christian fellowship, but for evangelism and restoration or what have you. The sit down of a meal together in American culture does not have the same meaning as it did for believers in the early church. That may or may not be a bad thing. But the principle always applies. Under no circumstances are we to have Christian fellowship with someone who is excommunicated and however that fellowship is expressed in our culture today (Reformation Day celebrations, bi-weekly together times for praise, worship and study, etc. etc. etc.) we are forbidden to have that kind of fellowship with that excommunicated person. And we as believers don't want to blur that line. We don't want that excommunicated person to feel, that he is participating in Christian fellowship and enjoying all the benefits.

Maybe what needs to be clarified Jonathon for us and your friend is what is Christian fellowship and once we've done that, we can be sure that we do not violate the principle of Christian fellowship with an unbeliever. Anyway, that's my two cents.

On the second question, biblically speaking the only call we non-apostle types receive is the call to be Christian. So the language of 'call', whilst common, is probably best avoided when it comes to full time paid Christian ministry.

That said, I would have thought that an individual's lack of giftedness for a particular type of ministry would suggest that God does not have in mind for that person to be a minister of that sort. 1 Corinthians 12

"19 If all were a single member, where would the body be? 20 As it is, there are many parts, yet one body."

On the second question, the Bible isn't overly keep about people who put themselves forwards for leadership. Yes, leaders should want it, but they shouldn't volunteer for it. All the leaders in the Bible who put themselves forwards for it turn out bad.

I've argued this at greater length on my blog (search for Ish-Bosheth)

I should have added - I'm a seminarian (Church of England). I could only honestly say that I knew God had called me to train when my bishop agreed to train me. It's the church's job to discern calling to this sort of thing, not the individual's.

I'll only be able to say that God has called me to get ordained once the bishop agrees to ordain me and I get to the service.

In regard to question #1:

Is there evidence that "not even to eat" in 1 Cor. 5:11 refers not to sharing lunch or dinner but to the Lord's Supper (particularly since Jesus ate with publicans and sinners... but it is clear that an unrepentant church member is a different class from your average publicans and sinners, actually being worse in how they misrepresent God)? Could verses 7-8 imply communion as what we are not supposed to eat with such so-called brothers?