The Biblical Practice of Church Discipline

By J. Carl Laney

[J. Carl Laney, Associate Professor of Biblical Literature, Western Conservative Baptist Seminary, Portland, Oregon]

The Belgic Confession (1561), which grew from Reformation soil, identifies three characteristics “by which the true church is known.” These marks are (a) the preaching of pure doctrine, (b) the administration of the sacraments, and (c) the exercise of church discipline.

Renewed interest in the third characteristic has risen out of several highly publicized cases in which church discipline resulted in lawsuits against the pastor and church leaders. As a result many churches are reluctant to take disciplinary procedures to deal with sin among their members. Many church leaders would like to take disciplinary action but are uncertain as to the proper steps and necessary precautions. A fresh look at the biblical doctrine of church discipline may prove helpful in providing answers and encouraging the scriptural restoration of fallen saints.

The Necessity of Discipline

R. C. Sproul states, “The church is called not only to a ministry of reconciliation, but a ministry of nurture to those within her gates. Part of that nurture includes church discipline.”[1] Congregational discipline is really an act of discipleship that functions as the corollary of evangelism. Evangelism ministers to those outside the church who are in bondage to sin. Congregational discipline ministers to those within the church who are in bondage to sin. Jeschke says it well: “In discipline, as in the presentation of the good news to the non-Christian, a person is presented the opportunity of being liberated from the power of sin in all its forms by coming under the rule of Christ and walking in His way.”[2]

Church discipline may be defined as the confrontive and corrective measures taken by an individual, church leaders, or the congregation regarding a matter of sin in the life of a believer.[3] Unlike the “scarlet letter” in Nathaniel Hawthorne’s classic novel, biblical church discipline is designed to restore not to punish.[4]

Is church discipline necessary? Few would dispute the necessity of pulling a drowning man from a flooding torrent or recovering a fallen climber from a mountain crevasse. Most decent people would skip the verbal exercise and give themselves to the rescue! Should less concern be demonstrated for the believer who has fallen morally and whose spiritual life is in danger? With some justification the church has been accused of being the only army that shoots its wounded.

Church discipline is required by common decency but it is also a clear biblical imperative. It is commanded by Jesus (Matt 18:15–17) and by Paul (1 Cor 5:1–13). The Corinthian church neglected its responsibility to exercise church discipline and suffered the consequences.

The church that neglects to confront and correct its members lovingly is not being kind, forgiving, or gracious. Such a church is really hindering the Lord’s work and the advance of the gospel. The church without discipline is a church without purity (Eph 5:25–27) and power (cf. Josh 7:11–12a). By neglecting church discipline a church endangers not only its spiritual effectiveness but also its very existence. God snuffed out the candle of the church at Thyatira because of moral compromise (Rev 2:20–24). Churches today are in danger of following this first-century precedent.

The Pattern for Discipline

God Himself has provided the church with a pattern for discipline. The pattern is His own fatherly love (Heb 12:4–13). The Writer of Hebrews appealed to Proverbs 3:11–12 to demonstrate the truth that God disciplines those whom He loves. Love and discipline are vitally connected (cf. Rev 3:19). The world often views discipline as the expression of anger and hostility but according to Scripture God’s discipline is the expression and outworking of His love.

The writer of Hebrews further pointed out that God’s discipline involves a family relationship (Heb 12:7–9). When believers experience divine discipline their heavenly Father is dealing with them as “sons.” The point is driven home with the rhetorical question, “For what son is there whom his father does not discipline?” (v. 7). The implied answer is None! All faithful and caring fathers will, when necessary, exercise loving discipline.

Since God’s discipline involves a family relationship, the absence of discipline in the life of a disobedient believer is said to be evidence of an illegitimate birth (v. 8). In the Roman world an illegitimate child was denied the privileges and benefits of the father-son relationship. Such a child did not share the rights of inheritance along with other progeny. Divine discipline is one of the privileges and benefits of being a child of God. It stands as a “token” that one is “really a beloved son.”[5]

The writer to the Hebrews also indicated that respect for one’s earthly parents has theological implications (v. 9). If respect and subjection are demonstrated in the face of discipline by earthly parents, how much greater reason is there to respect and submit to God’s discipline? Earthly parents inspite of their best efforts sometimes make mistakes. God’s discipline on the other hand is always correctly and justly applied.

Divine discipline wrought in God’s infinite love yields wholesome benefits. God’s discipline is “for our good, that we may share His holiness” (v. 10). The writer acknowledged that all discipline, whether by human fathers or by the heavenly Father, is sorrowful rather than joyful. “Yet to those who have been trained by it, afterwards it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness” (v. 11).

The believer’s response is the key to benefiting from God’s discipline. The Hebrew Christians were allowing themselves to become disheartened and discouraged by the trials coming their way. Drawing on two Old Testament texts (Isa 35:3; Prov 4:26), the Writer challenged them, “Therefore, strengthen the hands that are weak and the knees that are feeble, and make straight paths for your feet” (Heb 12:12–13). In other words believers responding to discipline are to shake off their paralyzing discouragement and appropriate God’s resources through the Holy Spirit to gain new spiritual strength.

God’s purpose in the disciplinary process is indicated next (v. 13). He intends for the “limb which is lame” not to be “put out of joint, but rather be healed.” God’s design in discipline is not to disable permanently those who have experienced the crippling effects of sin. Rather His purpose is to heal and restore the repentant to spiritual usefulness.

Careful attention to God’s pattern of discipline will enable Christian leaders to approach church discipline with a divine perspective—motivated by love and committed to healing.

The Purpose of Discipline

Luis Palau presents a sound biblical perspective on church discipline when he points out that it “is not carried out in cruelty to destroy, but rather in love to produce conviction, sorrow, repentance, and restoration.”[6] Church discipline is designed not to execute judgment on fallen saints but to awaken people to their sin and assist them in returning to their former, spiritually healthy condition. This purpose is evidenced by Paul’s words to the Galatians: “Brethren, even if a man is caught in any trespass, you who are spiritual, restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness; looking to yourself, lest you too be tempted” (Gal 6:1).

Paul visualized a situation in which a believer was literally overtaken” in or by a trespass. Since the Greek preposition ἐν can have a locative meaning (“in, on, within, among”) or an instrumental meaning (“with, by means of”), scholars debate whether the verse describes a Christian who is surprised in the midst of the transgression (i.e., “caught red-handed”)[7] or overtaken and caught by the transgression (i.e., “ensnared by the deceitfulness of sin”).[8] The last phrase, “lest you too be tempted,” suggests that Paul had in mind a kind of situation that might endanger even the most spiritual person. Thus the context supports the latter viewpoint.

The word “transgression” (παράπτωμα) means “to fall beside” and suggests the idea of “failing along the way.” Here the word refers to an ethical violation or moral blunder. It is a sin that constitutes a departure from God’s straight and narrow way.

What is to be done when a Christian brother or sister is discovered ensnared by the clutches of sin? Often there is first an expression of shock (“I can’t believe that Joe would do that!”) and perhaps dismay (“What is the church coming to?”). This is followed by the starting of a rumor (“Say, did you hear what happened to…?”). Is this the way Paul wanted believers to respond?

Paul directed his instruction to Christians “who are spiritual” those who are walking by the Spirit’s control and manifesting the fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:16, 22–24). Paul seems to have been emphasizing that spiritual maturity is a qualification for dealing with sin in the lives of others. Not all may be qualified. Those who are weak, easily tempted, or unable to forgive should allow others to take the lead in the task of restoration.

The key to God’s purposes in church discipline is found in the word translated “restore” (καταρτίζω). In classical Greek the word had a wide variety of meanings that can be gathered under two headings: (a) “to adjust, to put in order, to restore,” (b) “to equip or fully furnish someone or something for a given purpose.”[9] καταρτίζω is used thirteen times in the New Testament, twice in quotations from the Old Testament (Matt 21:16; Heb 10:5). The basic meaning of the word is “to restore to its former condition.” It is used in Matthew 4:21 and Mark 1:19 with reference to the “mending” of torn or tangled fishing nets. In Luke 6:40 καταρτίζω is used in the sense of being “trained” for ministry. The word is used in secular Greek of outfitting a ship for a voyage and a soldier for battle. In medical texts καταρτίζω is used with reference to setting a fractured bone. Paul may have had this idea in mind when he encouraged the Corinthians to make an adjustment (κατηρτισμένοι) so that divisions and factions in the Corinthian church could be healed (1 Cor 1:10).

An understanding of the meaning of καταρτίζω has some implications for church discipline. First, the discipline of a saint is designed not to destroy but to “mend” and “repair” someone who has been injured or damaged on the battlefield of life. Second, restoration involves equipping the wounded saint with the spiritual principles necessary to avoid further injury and to meet the demands of the Christian life. Third, restoration is not simply the expression of forgiveness toward the sinning saint; it is a process of restoring him to his former condition. The present tense of the verb (καταρτίζετε) suggests the necessity for patience and perseverance in the process of restoration.

The Steps for Discipline

In a recent survey of 439 pastors on the matter of church discipline 50 percent acknowledged situations in their ministry where discipline would have been appropriate but no action was taken. Three major hindrances to the practice of church discipline were mentioned: (a) fear of the consequences or outcome, (b) preference for avoiding disruptive problems, and (c) ignorance of the proper procedures.[10] Of these hindrances the most serious—yet the easiest to overcome—is the third, for Jesus outlined the proper procedures for confronting and correcting sinning saints (Matt 18:15–17). The four basic steps include private reproof, private conference, public announcement, and public exclusion.

Private Reproof

The first step is private reproof. Jesus declared, “And if your brother sins [against you], go and reprove him in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother” (Matt 18:15). Bible students debate whether the words “against you” are part of the original Greek text.[11] These words are absent from several important manuscripts (Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus). Possibly the words “against me” in verse 21 led a scribe or copyist to personalize the matter in verse 15. On the other hand the omission may have been deliberate in order to render the passage applicable to sin in general. While some important texts lack the words “against you,” Gundry points out evidence for their originality.[12] The words “in private” and the next section, which speaks about forgiving a brother who has sinned against a brother (Matt 18:21–35), favor the originality of “against you.” However, Galatians 6:1 indicates that believers have a duty to confront sin in general, not just when it is an offense against one’s own person.

In his sermon “Reproof, a Christian Duty,” Charles Finney remarked, “If you see your neighbor sin, and you pass by and neglect to reprove him, it is just as cruel as if you should see his house on fire, and pass by and not warn him of it.”[13] Reproof is a Christian duty. But it must first be in private as indicated by Jesus’ words “between you and him alone.” Any discussion of the sin must be with the offender, not behind his or her back. Many “pious” gossips express concern for sin, often in the form of “prayer requests.” It is easy to gossip. It takes courage and caring to confront. But that is the Christian’s duty.

The word “reprove” (ἐλέγχω) is a strong word that may mean “to bring to light, expose, convict, or convince someone of something.”[14] It is the same word Jesus used to describe the ministry of the Holy Spirit in the lives of unbelievers. “And He, when He comes, will convict [reprove] the world concerning sin, and righteousness, and judgment” (John 16:8). In Matthew’s context, the word “reprove” simply means to show someone his fault. The most biblical and loving thing one can do for a sinning brother is to rebuke him—confronting him with the truth and the solution for his sinful conduct (cf. Prov 27:5–6).[15]

Pointing out someone’s fault is risky, for there is no way of knowing how he will respond. But if done gently and graciously, the offender will be more likely to recognize the error than become stubborn and bitter. This is loving, caring confrontation.

In some situations the sin is apparent and there is little or no doubt that the brother or sister has sinned. But it is wise in most initial confrontations to allow for the possibility that the sin is not actual. The person initiating the confrontation should explain his concern and then ask, “Am I understanding this situation correctly? Is there a matter of sin that needs to be dealt with or is there some clarification that can be made?”

The last clause of Matthew 18:15 reveals the potential results of caring confrontation: “If he listens to you, you have won your brother.” The word “listens” (ἀκούω) is often used in a sense that goes beyond the idea of merely hearing with the ear. It may take the stronger nuance, “to agree, follow, heed or obey” (John 5:25; 9:27; Acts 28:28). That seems to be the sense of the word in Matthew 18:15. This conclusion is supported by what appears as a summary of Jesus’ instruction on this matter in Luke 17:3: “If your brother sins, rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him.” Repentance involves a change of attitude toward sin followed by a corresponding change of action. Genuine repentance may be evidenced not only by turning from the sinful conduct but also by willingly making restitution and patiently hearing the consequences of sin.

In the history of the church believers have debated whether there must be a public confession of a sin that is dealt with privately. The church of the first few centuries consistently required persons under discipline to make a public confession.[16] Matthew’s text does not give any suggestion that this is necessary. Whether the confession is public or private depends on the stage at which the offender responds to discipline. Repentance means that the sin is forgiven and the issue is settled. Unrepentance means that the discipline for sin must advance to the next stage.

Private Conference

Jesus anticipated that in some circumstances a brother or sister may be unwilling to listen and respond to the private rebuke. So He set forth the second step in church discipline.”But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed” (Matt 18:16). Jesus drew on the Old Testament requirement that a person may not be convicted of a crime on the basis of a single witness (Num 35:30; Deut 17:6; 19:15). Several witnesses were required to ensure that the testimony was truthful and unprejudiced.

What purpose do the additional witnesses serve? Some have thought that the witnesses must have observed the sin and are thereby able to strengthen the rebuke. But as Gundry comments:

Matthew leaves no indication that the one or two others shall have witnessed the sin committed against the one who takes them along. Therefore their going does not have the purpose of establishing the original charge (the truth of which is taken for granted) or of enabling them to act as witnesses before the church in case of a second refusal, but of strengthening the reproof with a view toward restoration.[17]

While the witnesses may serve to bring new objectivity to the situation, it appears that their primary purpose is to strengthen the rebuke and thus lead the offender to repentance.

Bringing a matter of sin to a brother’s attention in the presence of witnesses may sound like a threatening or intimidating situation. Yet the purpose is not to threaten or intimidate the sinner into repentance. The intent is to help the offender realize the seriousness of the situation. Bubna acknowledges, “Although moving into the group process is scary, it does improve the attention level.”[18]

Public Announcement

The third step in the process of discipline is revealed in Matthew 18:17, “And if he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church.” Up to this point in the process the disciplinary procedure is to have taken place in private. But an unresponsive saint requires stronger, public action.

Jesus did not say, “Tell it to the bishop, synod, or church board. He said, “Tell it to the church.” The church (ἐκκλησία) refers here to the local body of believers gathered in assembly. The congregation is the final court of appeal in such disciplinary matters.

This is not to say that the church leaders (i.e., elders, pastoral staff, or deacons) should not be informed of the action being taken. Indeed these leaders are the most likely ones to serve as witnesses in the second stage of discipline. But believers are members of one body (1 Cor 12:14–20) and have a responsibility to “care for one another” (v. 25). That loving care for one another must sometimes take the form of discipline.

A word of caution is appropriate here. When a church member tells a pastor confidential matters in private, that is legally classified as privileged information. It cannot be divulged in a public meeting of the church without the person’s consent. To violate this confidence would undermine the integrity of the church leader and possibly lead to legal claims for invasion of privacy. With due care and precaution the transgression of a sinner can be reported to the church without violating confidence. This can be done by obtaining the offender’s permission to report the offense, by limiting the report to what is known publicly rather than what was told privately, or by focusing the report on the fact that the offender failed to respond to pastoral instruction concerning known sin.

However the church leaders may decide to bring the matter of a sinning saint before the church, they should do it in such a way as to encourage the congregation to recognize its part in bringing the brother or sister to repentance. The people must be encouraged to pray for the sinner, to avoid a critical spirit, and to beware of proudly thinking, “That would never happen to me.” The thrust of such a public announcement should be that “God hates sin but loves sinners.” Christians involved in church discipline must reflect this divine perspective.

In progressing through the stages of church discipline ample time for repentance and change must be allowed at every step. The duration between the various stages depends on the responsiveness of the offender to rebuke. Too much time suggests a lenient attitude. Too little time suggests a punitive approach rather than one striving for repentance. Direction by the Spirit of God is essential in making such decisions (cf. Matt 18:18–20).

Public Exclusion

Jesus presented the final step in the discipline of an impenitent sinner: “And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax-gatherer” (Matt 18:17b). When the church leaders and congregation have made every effort to bring the sinner to repentance without results, they must then disassociate the offender from the church fellowship.

The reference to the “Gentile and tax-gatherer” is illuminated by first-century Jewish culture. According to the popular religious opinion of Jesus’ day, the Gentiles were considered as outsiders with regard to the divine blessings promised Israel. A Gentile was not permitted to pass beyond the outer court into the sacred confines of the temple. The penalty for doing so was death! Tax-gatherers like Zacchaeus (Luke 19:2–10) collected revenue for the Roman government. Such Jews were regarded as traitors who served Rome at the expense of their countrymen. They were regarded as apostates, outcasts from Jewish religious life.

Jesus was saying that unrepentant sinners should be regarded as Gentiles and tax-gathers—outside the circle of God’s people. In ecclesiastical jargon this is referred to as “excommunication,” derived from the Latin ex (“out”) and communicare (“share, communicate”). This refers to cutting off a person from church membership, fellowship, and communion. No longer is the unrepentant sinning saint to share in the activities and privileges of being a part of the church fellowship.

Excommunication is often viewed as punishment designed to isolate, ostracize, or shun the unrepentant. A more biblical perspective is evidenced by Bubna: “This [excommunication] means that you treat the person as a nonbeliever, because he is not walking as a believer. It means to keep loving him as Jesus loved the publicans and sinners. It means to reach out to him in witness, but not to relate to him as a member of the body of Christ.”[19] As strong as this disciplinary step is, it is intended to bring about repentance. The attitude of the church members is crucial in carrying out this most serious step in discipline. As Sproul acknowledges, “God Himself, like the prodigal’s father, lets people depart from Him when they are determined to go, but He lets them go with tears.”[20] Excommunication must be motivated by love and exercised in such a way as to encourage the possibility of genuine repentance and restoration.

The Follow-Up to Discipline

When church discipline leads to genuine repentance how should the church family respond? Often the tendency is to keep the repentant offender at a distance. Full restoration to joyful fellowship with God’s people is frequently denied. This was a problem with which the Corinthian church struggled. Paul directed the church regarding the discipline of a brother who was sexually involved with his stepmother. He instructed the Corinthians to “remove the wicked man from among yourselves” (1 Cor 5:13). The church complied and as a result the offender repented.

When Paul wrote 2 Corinthians, about eight months had passed since his previous correspondence. But during that time no efforts had been made to restore the repentant offender to full fellowship with the church family. The Corinthian believers had shared in the disciplinary process. Now Paul exhorted them to share in the vital matter of disciplinary follow-up.

Three instructions from Paul in 2 Corinthians 2:7–8 highlight believer’s responsibility to a repentant sinner: “forgive,” “comfort,” and “reaffirm…love.” The last two steps of church discipline (public announcement and public exclusion) are like a powerful drug that can bring either healing or great harm, depending on how it is administered. To help assure that spiritual healing results from church discipline the offender should be (a) told of the church’s forgiveness, (b) encouraged in his or her Christian life and growth, and (c) shown tangible evidence of ἀγάπη love.

To neglect disciplinary follow-up is a serious breach of Paul’s commands. Also it creates a situation that Satan may use to his advantage” (2 Cor 2:11) by creating bitterness, discord, and dissension in the church.

The Precautions for Discipline

The spectra of litigation now looms over some churches that have sought to exercise biblical church discipline. What can be done to avoid such legal entanglements?

First, include a complete statement in the church constitution on the church’s beliefs and practices regarding church discipline. Second, acquaint prospective members with the constitution, including the church’s procedures for dealing with sinning saints. Third, when discipline is necessary make sure it is carried out in accordance with the church constitution. Fourth, remember that information communicated in confidence to the pastor, elders, or church leaders acting in their official capacities is privileged information for which there is legal accountability. Fifth, do not make the matter of discipline known outside the church family. Sixth, if a lawsuit is filed, pursue an out-of-court settlement or an alternative means of resolving the conflict.[21]

Church discipline has certain risks. Yet Christ did not give the church authority to ignore sin. By following biblical procedures and administering discipline out of love and with a view to restoration, church leaders can have a clear conscience before God regardless of a court’s decision .

Calling the Church to Purity

Fear of disunity, conflict, and even legal problems has caused many church leaders to avoid confronting Christians who are living in sin. But a careful study of the New Testament indicates that such confrontation is a Christian duty. Church discipline is God’s loving plan for restoring believers to fellowship with Himself and with the body of Christ. Christ desires that the church be “holy and blameless” (Eph 5:27). Caring confrontation may be the means God will use in these days to purify the church so that Christ’s bride will have “no spot or wrinkle” at His coming.

Notes

1. R. C. Sproul, In Search of Dignity (Ventura, CA: GL Publications, Regal Books, 1983), p. 182.
2. Marlin Jeschke, Discipling the Brother, rev. ed. (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1979), pp. 181-82.
3. J. Carl Laney, A Guide to Church Discipline (Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1985), p. 14.
4. Punishment may be viewed as one of the inevitable consequences of church discipline (2 Cor 2:6), but it is not its ultimate motivation.
5. F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1964), p. 357.
6. Luis Palau, “Discipline in the Church,” Discipleship Journal 3 (1983): 18.
7. J. B. Lightfoot, The Epistle of St. Paul to the Galatians (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1957), p. 215.
8. James Montgomery Boice, “Galatians,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976), 10:502.
9. William Barclay, New Testament Words (London: SCM Press, 1964), pp. 168-69.
10. For a full report of the survey and its results see “Church Discipline in America,” in Laney, A Guide to Church Discipline, pp. 140-50.
11. Bruce M. Metzger, Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (London: United Bible Societies, 1971), p. 45.
12. Robert H.Gundry, Matthew: A Commentary on His Literary and Theological Art (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1982), p. 367.
13. Charles G. Finney, Lectures to Professing Christians (New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1878), p. 61.
14. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, trans. William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, 4th rev. ed., s.v “ἐλέγχω,” p. 248.
15. Keith Megillian, “The Ministry of Rebuking,” Journal of Pastoral Practice 5 (1981): 22-25.
16. Jeschke, Discipling the Brother, p. 92.
17. Gundry, Matthew: A Commentary on His Literary and Theological Art, p. 368.
18. Donald L. Bubna, “Redemptive Love: The Key to Church Discipline,” Leadership Journal 2 (Summer 1981): 81.
19. Ibid., p. 82.
20. Sproul, In Search of Dignity, p. 183.
21. For further study see “The Dangers of Church Discipline,” in Laney A Guide to Church Discipline, pp. 127-39.