Discipline in the Church

     When people think of discipline in the Church, there's an assumption that this is either a Jamestown style beating system or a theocratic replacement of law and order. Neither of these have any scriptural merit- the Bible does not ask us to flog anyone who fails or falls short, nor to replace the secular governments of the world. Rather, discipline in the Church is like a pruning. The parable of a tree with branches with good fruit being spared and branches without fruit being cut off is more accurate: The Church should never punish individuals, but should control the congregation. The justification comes from Paul's epistles which state that immoral Christians should be cut off from the body of Christ unless reformed and other teachings about conflict management in the Church. (Church with a capital C refers to the Church Universal, or the community of all believers, whereas church is an individual structure of subset)

     First, there is a necessity to protect the Church from negative internal influences. If anyone sins in the Church, they are to be confronted, first by a few (a couple of witnesses and a leader to mediate), then a council (the elders of a church), then the entire body as a whole. This is adding a step to the scriptural guidelines, but with the scale of individual churches shifting from gatherings in households to buildings housing thousands of believers, this shift protects the time of the many, especially since we have compartmentalized church time to an hour/hour and a half on Sunday morning. The importance of this action is the elimination of complacency- a self policing body will be more likely to follow its tenets than a body that doesn't enforce the rules. This isn't to say that the violators should be rejected, but rather isolated so as not to corrupt the body. Even more importantly, no one is to be held sacred above guilt- even the highest leader must be examined and criticized if doing something wrong. An impure stream does not become pure by simply adding pure water, but rather the contaminant must be removed, same with the body of believers and with the lives of members of the Church. Preaching on Sunday is insufficient to promote any substantial change in the lives of individuals, some other focus must also accompany the routine action of attending services. Confrontation provides this impetus to change that simply being told an action is wrong doesn't. Be  sure to give the accused a chance to speak and explain themselves, so as not to wrongly judge and therefore be judged. We will be judged for our judgements, so let them be just and fair, not hasty or overly critical.

    Second, this regulation should *NOT* be used to exclude those outside the church from being allowed in. Sanctification (being made holy) is a goal of the church, and as Paul states, it is not to the immoral stranger that we make our judgement, for they have not been taught the rules, but rather to the immoral companions who have been taught but ignore. If we reject those who have not heard the teaching of Christ because they have not heard, then who will tell them? We too have at one point in time been without Christ, and therefore in sin and death. We were also accepted in, despite our failings, and taught to pursue sanctification. To reject others systematically would be to essentially reject ourselves (admittedly our former, flawed selves) for sake of a few. Christ did not come to save a few or a group, but to save the world and all within it.

     Third, do not exclude any because of their sin if they struggle. If someone is struggling with an addiction, or circumstances that force them to sin, or simply failing in the moment of temptation, do not shove them away but rather offer them support and forgiveness, lifting them up with your support. Throwing away all life in an individual because of one illness is fallacy; so too is rejecting a soldier because they have not won the battle. Defeats come at all points in life, and all struggle and fall at one point or another, but this is not merit to reject them. The only time a believer should be removed from the Church is if they reject Christ by choosing to pursue sin over life. Give a clear dichotomy: serve either the Lord through a pursuit of sanctification, or admit that you have forsaken Him and leave the Body for a time. Do not lock the door that they have exited through, but do close it, so that a return would have to be out of more than simply mechanical habit or false repentance. It is unwise for a man who has been poisoned by a snake to just let the snake keep biting because he is already poisoned. However, as our goal is the salvation of souls, if there is true reform and dedication to Christ, allow the individual who has been rejected to enter back into the Church. If an individual struggles, but is not a corrupting influence (is dedicated to Christ, but has a persistent sin), do not shun this individual, but keep a constant environment of accountability and support for them.

     Discipline in the Church relies upon the values of faith and accountability. Anyone who is in the Church for the sake of anything other than Christ is to be rebuked, first by a few, than by many, than by all, and then cast out the offender for the sake of the integrity of all the Church. This stance is exclusionary, but necessary to protect the Church from corruption. Yet do not shun anyone because of sin, but rather because of their heart, and who they serve. It is not the failings that matter, because all fail and fall short of the glory of God, but rather the rejection of God and Christ for pursuit of sin or other masters.