Church Discipline: 3 Practical Reasons

One of the reasons why church discipline should be practiced is the practicality of it. This is by no means the most important reason for church discipline. In fact, it is probably the least important one, but it is a reason and for some it may be the most compelling. Unfortunately our culture is results-driven, one that wants to see "the bang for the buck." Acknowledging that propensity, here are three practical reasons why churches should use discipline in its proper time.

1. The uneven standard for those joining versus those who have already joined.

When a person joins our church, we expect them to believe certain things. Obviously, we should welcome someone to attend our church regardless of their beliefs. We recognize that the best place one could be, should be where they are surrounded by followers of Christ who will love them and hopefully help them to see their need of Him.

However, once someone decides to make the commitment to join our church, we require them to believe certain things. One cannot be both an atheist and a member of a Christian church. One can obviously be a former atheist, but a change of belief has to be present. The person is not expected to be perfect in their theology or practice, that is part of the sanctification process, but they should at least acknowledge their belief and trust in Christ as their Savior and Lord.

If someone walked the aisle to join the church and they were asked to share how they came to know Christ and their response was, "Well, I've read about Jesus and seems like a nice guy, but I don't believe He was God or that He can really do anything to help me today. I just want to be part of the club and make some friends." Would we allow that person to become a member? Surely, we would lovingly tell that person that we would love to be friends with them and they are more than welcome to continue to attend, but that joining a church involves more than simply being part of a club.

More accurately, what if a person came forward and said,"I sorta believe what you said about Jesus and all. That's nice. I want to go to heaven, but I don't really want to do anything. I mean, honestly, I really don't want to come to church but a couple times a year. I just want to have the assurance that my name is on the church roll and the membership list at heaven. Is that OK?" Again, hopefully, we would carefully and patiently work with this individual, but hopefully we would not allow them to join our church. They obviously do not understand what it means to commit to Christ and His local body.

With all that being said, why do we not hold our current members to the same standard? Should they not be held to an even higher standard than the ones we have for those who are just beginning their relationship with Christ and His church. I should be able to expect more from someone who has been saved 10 years than someone who has only known Christ 10 days. Yet so often in our churches, we hold new members to a much more rigorous standard than we do our older members.

Older members can never darken the doors of the church once after they graduate high school, go off live a completely immoral life, even deny the very existence of God and we still consider them a member in good standing - the same as the elderly saint who has been faithful for decades through numerous trials. We will automatically refuse membership to an unrepentant gay man, while we allow a man whose been married six times, cheated on every wife and is currently living with his girlfriend serve as a Sunday School teacher. Should that be the case?

It is not that the works or faithful attendance to church saves anyone. They do not. But often time those things reveal the true intentions of individuals. We have no idea what really has happened in the heart of an individual when they come forward and say they have accepted Christ. We should respond at that moment as if we have no doubts and rejoice with them. However, we should also, as Christ commanded us, examine their fruits to see if what they vocalized to us is truly evident in their life. Hopefully it is, but we should not be naive and believe that is always the case. Scripture warns about wolves within the church trying to harm the sheep. The church should care for the sheep, but call on the wolves to repent.

Practically, we make new members express their commitment to Christ, but we do not require the same from current members. This should not be the case. If someone, whether they are inquiring about becoming a first time member or if they have been a member for 50 years, cannot express vocally and with their actions their commitment to Christ and to His local body then they should not be a member.

2. Large numbers of unregenerate church members can corrupt the direction of the church.

Everyone has a story of an important vote taking place in the church and seeing tons of "members" crawl out of the wood works to vote a certain way. More often than not, they vote with a minority of active members and prevent progress which was proposed by those individuals who care about the church the most.

I recently heard of a church where a few members wanted to oust the pastor because he was stepping on their toes. They did not have enough votes, so they called in dozens of people who were on the roll, but who hadn't been to church in years. With the inactive members, the small minority of complaining members were able to vote out the pastor. Unfortunately, that is an all to common occurrence.

The church's future was dramatically changed because of members who did not care enough to come to services except to vote out a pastor. However because the church had not exercised church discipline, those members were able to redirect the future of those members who actually did care.

It is not that one member has more of a right to a vote than others, but it is that actual members have a right to determine the direction of the church. Those who have demonstrated their lack of concern for the church do not have the right to be a member. No one has a right to belong to a certain church. It is, in every sense of the word, a privilege.

Practically speaking, someone who has no idea what any of the passages the pastor preached from over the last year, has no right to determine if that pastor should remain pastor. Church discipline prevents those individuals from doing just that.

3. A lack of church discipline prevents a mixed, at best, picture of Christ to the community.

I grew up in a small town. All I really know is small town life. The most often repeated words in a small town are "Did you hear ..." as in "Did you hear about him cheating on his wife?" "Did you hear about her getting drunk last night?" Quite frequently those questions are followed up with "And he's a member of First Baptist Church!"

Whether we like it or not, the reputation of the church gets sullied based on the mistakes of the members. More importantly, the reputation of the church's Christ gets sullied based on the mistakes of the members.

Mistakes are part of the human existence, even large ones. Christ died for those past, present and future. They do not prevent us from loving and serving Him. However just as with our children, sometimes God needs to discipline us to let us know we are in the wrong. Often times we ignore that discipline and continue in our sin until it becomes part of our lifestyle. At that point, the church can and should step in to confront the individual.

This is not about a witch-hunt. This is not about naming everyone's sin at a business meeting. This is about a loving church family prayfully seeking to restore a fellow member or hoping to illustrate a pretending member's need for a Savior. Hopefully, the individual will respond to Christ and the need for church discipline will be avoided.

No one should take joy in exercising church discipline, but we should take joy in how it can be used to remind Christians of their first love and redeem lost people from the clutches of sin.

I have heard countless personal stories from individuals who were living in sin, have since corrected that lifestyle and expressed regret that no one took the time to lovingly call them out on their mistake.

The name and reputation of Christ and His bride and body are adversely affected by our unwillingness to confront the sin in our midst. Often times in the Old Testament, God would allow the entire kingdom of Israel to suffer defeat because of the hidden sin of one individual. Do we not worship the same God today? Would God not allow defeat and conflict in a church which refused to hold their members to His standard?

Obituaries very often include the church membership of the deceased individual. More times than I can count, I have read obituaries of individuals who were members of my church, but I had never seen them there. Unfortunately, I often knew the person lived a totally unregenerate lifestyle. It is not my place to judge their salvation or not - only God can and will do that. However as a member of the church it is our place to point out to individuals that their behavior is harming them, their church and their Savior and unless they agree to change actions will be taken to further encourage them to recognize their sinful lifestyle.

Practically speaking, when we read those obituaries of "members" of our church that have not been in 20 years, we could be reading the obituary of our own church. The more and more we allow sin to remain and grow in our church family, the more difficult it becomes for God to work in the lives of even those who are living for him. Satan should not have a foothold in their church, but we allow him there in the lives of individuals that care more for Friday night than Sunday morning.

Church Discipline: Why should we?

Church discipline is probably one of the easiest topics to discuss. Everyone has an opinion on if, when and how it should be done. If a church member raises the issue during a business meeting, the number of ideas in the room will match the same of people. You haven't really graduated from Bible College or Seminary unless you've had an all night argument over Calvinism and the implementation of church discipline.

It reminds of me of one of the vague, over-repetitive songs we sang in Children's Choir: "Love, Love, Love, Love, Everyone's talkin' 'bout Love, not doing it." Everyone's talkin' 'bout church discipline, not doing it.

So we aren't doing it. The question becomes: should we? Wouldn't that open up too big a can of worms? Aren't we setting ourselves up as judges of other people - you know "he who is without sin, cast the first stone" and all? Won't that just lead to a witch hunt that will end badly for everybody? Is it really worth it when you think about all the feelings that will be hurt of people in and out of the church? Shouldn't we just leave well enough alone and try to do better in the future?

There is one big reason not to do church discipline - it's hard. It is extremely hard. It is even harder to do well.

I will be the first to admit that church discipline done right and done well is next to impossible to accomplish. I will also be the first to say that we should do it anyway. Impossible is not a problem for our God.

So why do I say that church discipline, which is next to impossible to accomplish and will likely result in hurt feelings and misunderstandings, should be done? Three reasons: It's practical. It's historical. Most importantly, it's biblical.

In the coming days, I will further explain these three points, but as a bit of a preview, here is a short explanation of each.

Practical: We do not allow people to join our churches if they are living in unrepentant sin or if their theology does not line up with ours. Why do we allow people to continue to be members of our church if we would not allow them to join? How does it reflect on Christ when people are allowed to live openly in sin without any comment from the church of which they are a member?

Historical: In what seems like a paradoxical statement, from the beginning of the church to the modern era, the time periods and the specific churches which practiced church discipline saw church membership grow more than when the concept of membership became lax. Church discipline has been practiced and practiced successfully from the first century AD to the present.

Biblical: No one can deny what the Bible says about the subject through the words of both Jesus and Paul, but people often do not think about the impact ignoring church discipline has on biblical concepts like the priesthood of all believers. If you truly believe that every Christian is a priest unto God, do you not think He would expect His priests to behave in a certain way?

Is an inspired Bible enough?

I grew up a huge Ken Griffey, Jr. fan. I had all of his baseball cards (still have all o his baseball cards). My wife makes fun of me for my Junior figurine Christmas ornament. I knew all about his batting average, home runs, Gold Gloves and All-Star game appearances. I had all those facts stored in my head, but none of that really meant anything to my life. None of that meant I actually knew Ken Griffey, Jr. The facts were one thing, the person was something (someone) different.

Pastors are often fond of making a similar comparison when speaking about our relationship with Christ - we can know about Him, but still not know Him. But I'm not sure I've ever heard someone speak in a similar way about His word, about the Bible.

In the academic setting where the Bible is one of our textbooks, it is tempting to treat it simply as a textbook. I can know that the Bible is God's word. I can know that the Bible is inspired and infallible. I can know those things and attempt to convince others to believe those things as well. None of that means that I know the Bible and that I allow it to change me.

It is tempting to let the Bible become just one of the many books I read for my education, while mouthing out the platitudes of its importance.

While Satan has convinced the Bible is inspiring, but not inspired, he often subtly convinces the conservative to behave as if the Bible is inspired, but not inspiring.

It is not enough to read to Bible, memorize some verses, learn some facts and go about our lives content in the fact that we believe what we read is without error. Unless we read it and absorb it into our lives, it may be without error, but it is also without impact.

The Bible is both inspired, God-breathed as Paul said, and inspiring, a sharp two edged sword that cuts deep as Paul also said.

Knowing that Ken Griffey, Jr. and his dad were the first father and son duo in the major leagues to hit back-to-back home runs, did nothing to help me know who Griffey was. Knowing the Bible is inspired, is not enough to help you know the Author behind it. It must be both inspired (past tense) and inspiring (present and future) to fulfill the role God has for it.

Green brings it all full circle

Ted Dekker has a way with words or better yet, Ted Dekker's words have a way. A way of grabbing your mind and taking it on a whiplash inducing roller coaster. A way of keeping you up late at night pondering life's biggest questions and hoping that shadow at your window didn't just move.

Dekker's latest heart-pounding fantasy, Green, completes (and begins) the Circle series. The color-coded series (Black, Red, White, Green) follows Thomas Hunter through two realities and countless adventures battling evil, seen and unseen. The mythology of the Circle has weaved through 15 different novels with everything culminating (and beginning) in Green.

Thomas and the rest of the Circle are faced with doubt and questions about Elyon's plan and even his existence. It's been years since he last appeared to save them from the Horde and themselves. There life is spent on the run with too many having fallen by the sword. They were told to love the Horde and seek to reach them with Elyon's hope, but many are tired of running and loving, including Thomas' son Samuel.

Thomas is forced to find a way back into our world, his "histories," to save those he love and demonstrate that Elyon has not forgotten. But every decision has consequences and Thomas' quest is mirrored by a young man from our world, Billy, whose life is linked to Thomas, but whose goals are the mirror opposite.

Green is an ambitious writing exercise by Dekker, whose no stranger to the task, but the concept behind Green was perhaps the most difficult. How do you satisfactorily conclude a beloved and ground-breaking fantasy series, while at the same time attempt to write the novel in a way that could serve as a beginning point for new readers to the series. Is even possible for the work dubbed "Book Zero" to actually serve as the final piece of a circle that continues the last story and bleeds into the first one?

Honestly, I was initially slightly disappointed with the ending. I had come to expect so much from Dekker that I almost wanted him to create an entirely different way for Green to end as a lead-in to Black. But the more I thought about it, the more I found brilliance in the simplicity. The Circle series is truly circular. It is a never-ending circle of love and hate, death and live, second chances and missed opportunities.

The story of Green captured me from the start, pushing me to experience live as Thomas, to experience his loss, to ponder his questions, to embrace his joy. But true to Dekker form, the story takes the reader to the dark side of humanity. With Billy, you see humanity at our worst, fallen, exchanging the truth for a lie and loving it.

Not since Lewis and Narnia, has a writer been able to tell the story of failure and redemption in such a captivating and appealing manner. Dekker doesn't preach. He doesn't have to. His stories, like the parables of Christ, carry deeper meanings, carry the truth past the defenses of the skeptical but visible to those who have eyes to see.

For more information about Green, the Circle series or any of Ted Dekker's book, go to http://teddekker.com/readgreen and use the code 6596.

Contextualization before it was cool

One of the things that has surprised me the most in seminary is how much I have enjoyed my history classes. Granted, I have had some great, interesting professors to sit under, but the readings from theologians of the past have really encouraged and convicted me.

They have also surprised me. Many of the same debates within Christianity today have been discussed by these great men of the past.

In 1881, John Broadus published his The Duties of Baptists to Teach Their Distinctive Views. As part of that treatise, Broadus has this to say about communicating Baptist beliefs:

If we wish to teach our distinctive views to others, it is necessary to understand those whom we propose to reach. I remember a teacher of modern languages who would often elaborately explain some French or German or other idiom with which we had no difficulty at all, and then pass over as not needing explanation many a phrase we could not understand. He know the language he was teaching, but was not well acquainted with the language of his pupils. If we would in any way teach effectively, we must know how things look to the persons addressed; we must get their point of view.

Those who argue against contextualizing the Gospel speak as if that has been a recent phenomenon. Not only is it biblical, it is and has been a historic Christian and Baptist position.

Religous freedom encouraged by the religious

Who wrote the first English statement declaring that the king or any governmental leader had no authority over the religious or non-religious convictions of the people under their rule?

Perhaps shockingly enough given current perspectives, it was a Baptist theologian in England: Thomas Helwys. He bravely wrote a book about religious freedom and dedicated it to King James, who was at that time punishing both Catholics and other dissenters from Anglicanism, like Baptists. For his troubles, he died in jail likely because the stance he took. In 1611, he wrote:

"For we do freely profess that our lord the king has no more power over their consciences than over ours, and that is none at all. For our lord the king is but an earthly king, and he has no authority as a king but in earthly causes. And if the king’s people be obedient and true subjects, obeying all human laws made by the king, our lord the king can require no more. For men’s religion to God is between God and themselves. The king shall not answer for it. Neither may the king be judge between God and man. Let them be heretics, Turks, Jews, or whatsoever, it appertains not to the earthly power to punish them in the least measure. This is made evident to our lord the king by the scriptures." [emphasis mine]

Al Mohler, President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, describes the benefits to Baptists (and by extension, other Christians) of having a somewhat declining cultural influence and being increasingly out of step with current political and popular trends.

"For all the challenges we will face in the future, this is a great time to be a Baptist. We now have the opportunity to recover our nonconformist roots. That is where we began. We were outsiders, not insiders. In fact, Baptists have always been better when we are outsiders. When Baptist are forced to be nonconformists, we are forced to go back home."

The church in Europe has been on the downward trend for decades. Much of that can be laid at the feet of the intertwined nature of European nations and state sponsored/supported churches. American has retained a religious identity partly because of the seperation of church and state that was pushed for by Baptist like Roger Williams and other Christians working to found the nation in the new world. The areas of the world where Christianity is growing most rapidly are those that have the least cultural trappings of the faith - areas where Christianity is outlawed or certain faiths are dictated by the government. Those nations and regions are taking the reigns of global Christendom.

While Christians in America should always have the right to participate in the democratic process and have the responsibility to do so in light of and at the spurring of their faith, they must also remember that political change will never equal Kingdom change and rarely will it equal individual change.

Christianity, from its founding, works better as an outside influence, changing individuals who in turn impact society for the better, even while the government tries to hinder that influence. There's a reason why Jesus invested His life in common fishermen and not governmental bureaucrats. One is unhindered by the need to please other people. The other, by the very nature of his position, seeks to placate the masses, which means a shying away from anything controversial.

This does not mean the American Christian should avoid political engagement, as the early Anabaptists did in Europe. They should simply recognize the priority level of political activism, while always remembering that our faith calls for a free people with the ability to respond to the Gospel, but never a coerced people repeating a mandated faith statement.

Gaining a lost life

Since moving to seminary, something has been missing from my walk with Christ. It's like a story without a driving plot device. All the characters are there, but there's nothing to move them forward.

It's not about knowing more stuff. I've learned more in my first semester than I can remember. I've got a ton of knowledge bouncing around my head.

It's not going to church. We have been attending church like a good Baptist in the South, every time the doors are open (Sunday morning, Sunday night and Wednesday prayer meeting).

It's about life. It wasn't quite there. It wasn't there because I had found life instead of losing it. I was "getting mine," but I wasn't giving it away. I was a dead sea with no outlet of service.

How often do we "know" what Jesus says, but fail to really know it. I knew that Jesus said, "Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it." But I found myself in the routine of going without giving. I don't know how any follower of Christ can live like that for too long.

Thankfully, God opened the door for me to begin teaching Sunday School (thanks to my wife). That has helped to reinvigorate and re-inspire my walk. Being able to go see a church plant working to plant a church before they even hold their first service really convicted me of my need to do even more. Being at a service at another church that is the culmination of an act of faith in working hard to planting a church, while being faithful to God and recognizing his sovereignty.

The Christian life can only be lived to the fullest when you are giving until you are emptiest. The story God is writing for you will never develop without the plot device of service. It drives the walk with Christ. Story feel boring? Are you serving?