Church Discipline: The Forgotten Art
Two extremes seem to exist in American Christianity: either churches are very quick to carry out discipline, often for all of the wrong reasons, or they are unwilling to carry out church discipline.
Church discipline is complicated. From a pastoral perspective, it’s often hard to know just when it’s time to apply it and because it involves people, it can be very challenging and messy. When are we to carry out church discipline? And what disciplinary actions should be taken? What is the goal of church discipline? Many questions arise when we are thinking about this subject.
But make no mistake… church discipline is a necessary process because it’s connected to discipleship. But if we aren’t clear on when and how, it’s easy to also miss out on the why.
A Biblical Theology of Church Discipline.
Michelle Clifton-Soderstrom notes,
“In Scripture, “discipline” refers to correction, teaching, and punishment initiated and carried out by persons in positions of authority for the sake of one in need.” (Dictionary of Scripture and Ethics, 234)
Key biblical texts include Jesus’ teaching in Matt. 18:15-20, where he spoke about correcting someone who sins against you and how to go about the process. Though discipline is painful (for all involved!), if carried out well and people respond to the process with grace and repentance, there is a “peaceful harvest” (Heb. 12:11). The goal of church discipline is always restoration with the desire to redeem people and situations in the spirit of forgiveness (Eph. 4:29–32; Col. 3:12–13; 1 Thess. 5:14–15; cf. 2 Cor. 2:5–11). While Jesus’ teaching in Matt. 18 is a great starting point, Paul provides a lot of detail toward the necessity of church discipline in the life of the Church (Rom. 16:17; 1 Cor. 5:1–13; 16:22; 2 Cor. 13:1–2; Gal. 6:1–5; 2 Thess. 3:6–15; 1 Tim. 1:18–20; 5:19–22 and Titus 3:10–11).
Scripture lays out the “radical middle” between church discipline being used as a weapon to destroy people in an ultimately harmful way and church’s being unwilling to carry out church discipline. As Craig Keener notes,
“We should keep in mind that the whole context of this passage [Matt. 18:15-20] on church discipline is mercy and forgiveness; forgiveness qualifies (but does not annul) the force of this passage on disciplining unrepentant offenders in the Christian community. The contextual emphasis is the hope of bringing back the erring, not confirming them irreparably in their guilt.” (Craig S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament).
Church Discipline as a Mark of a Healthy Church.
While many are quick to dismiss all of John Calvin’s writings, the majority of Reformed theologians and church leaders believed that church discipline was a significant responsibility for the Church. Calvin writes,
“Those who think that the church can stand for long without this bond of discipline are mistaken; unless by chance we can afford to omit that support which the Lord foresaw would be necessary for us” (John Calvin, Institutes IV.XII.4)
This sentiment was held by Luther, Bucer, and a host of other Reformed voices. The same commitment to church discipline as a necessary aspect of discipleship is found throughout the historic Church.
Church Discipline as Abuse.
Sadly, while Scripture and church history indicates the necessity of church discipline, I think a lot of us are hesitant to carry church discipline out because of how often church discipline has been wielded as a weapon to crush than a means to restore.
One can think recently of a Texas church that carried out church discipline on the wife of a pastor who had been viewing child porn because she sought to annul her marriage. The church went on to apologize to her, but as Matthew Paul Turner notes,
“And honestly, even biblically, contracts and discipline are a stretch at best. And most of the time? They’re tools for abuse.” (emphasis mine)
After nearly twenty-five years of pastoral ministry, I can tell you dozens upon dozens of stories of people who went through church discipline that were either foolish, tragic, or, worse, abusive. From wives who were “disciplined” for standing up to abusive husbands to people disfellowshipped simply for asking questions, church discipline can be and often is used as a tool to crush and destroy people in an evil and lack-of-Christ-like manner.
And we should be ashamed of that and concerned with that and repent from it. But despite the abusive practices, we are still challenged to see the value of church discipline and if we keep the goals at the center, our methods may need some adjustments.
3 Practical Goals of Church Discipline.
Repentance. When people are going through church discipline, a goal is to have them recognize the harm they have done and to take responsibility for it. This is the only way for people to truly reach repentance. So while they are outside of full inclusion, they are, by God’s grace, being forced to acknowledge the harm they have done and take responsibility for it, and also make restitution (shout out to my recovery folks for emphasizing this!).
Prevention. When churches carry out church discipline, it serves as a warning to others that this is a serious matter and that to participate in such practices will bring about action and response. Some sins are so grievous and so harmful that to not act sends a message far more than we realize. This especially applies, I think, to those who have sexually abused and/or assaulted spouses and children. “We take this seriously,” is the message that needs to be sent (cf. 1 Tim. 5:20).
Restoration. Those under church discipline are placed outside of the unity of the local church. That is why Jesus said to “treat that person as a pagan or a corrupt tax collector” (Matt. 18:17). They are not to be afforded the same rights and responsibilities as followers of Jesus. And make no mistake, this does not mean “treat them poorly,” for Jesus gives us another command: love your enemies (Matt. 5:43-44) and love your neighbors (Matt. 22:39). But the goal of church discipline is to help those under discipline to be restored to right fellowship. This is a process and should have mile-markers along the way. A lot more could be said about this, but the abuser should never set the mile-markers and should not be in control of the narrative.
The Table as Central to Church Discipline.
According to Paul, those who are outside the bounds of church unity are to be avoided. He even goes so far as to say “purge them” (1 Cor. 5:13), “stay away from them” (2 Thess. 3:6), ‘rebuke publicly’ (1 Tim. 5:20)… and not to even eat with such a person (1 Cor. 5:11). Yet while they are under church discipline, Paul also says, “Don’t think of them as enemies, but warn them as you would a brother or sister” (2 Thess. 3:15).
Excommunication is generally a final step in a process, for excommunication is:
“The permanent or temporary exclusion of a church member from fellowship within the community.” (Samuel Lamerson, Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible, 438)
Throughout church history, this final step follows a process of investigation, communication, and follow-through. It prevents people from being in “full fellowship” with the local church by removing them from the ability to participate in a public sacrament, namely the Lord’s Supper. As baptism is reserved for people upon evidence of repentance and confession of faith in Jesus, the Lord’s Supper is, at it’s very minimum, a remembrance of Jesus’ death for our sins and a means by which we experience God’s presence. Those who are unwilling to respond in repentance to warnings, corrections, and fact-finding investigations with detailed examples should not be allowed to receive Communion. A scan of church history indicates that the Lord’s Table is one of the primary spaces in which excommunication takes place. Not to mention that people under church discipline should not be allowed to lead or carry out ministry.
The Elephant in the Room.
In today’s ecclesial landscape, people leave churches left and right. If the music is too loud one week, they can just go to another the following. If they don’t like the message or find the kid’s ministry to be boring, it’s easy to go to a church across the street. But sometimes people leave churches because they are in the process of church discipline. Maybe they have been confronted by the senior leadership for their behavior or treatment of someone, and rather than stay and finish the process, they determine it’s time to move and go somewhere else.
What should be done in those situations? I know for a fact that I’ve had people that have attended the churches that I’ve served who came after disagreements with their pastors. And sometimes I’ve had conversations with those people and sometimes I haven’t. Sometimes they seemed to have left what appears to be an over-reach from pastors or, worse, spiritually abusive situations, and on other occasions I simply haven’t had those conversations.
What have I learned throughout this: it’s good to have conversations and be clear and communicate as much as possible.
Let’s think about this in the context of a denomination or network or association of local churches. If a local church carries out church discipline, how should other churches respond to that church’s decisions? Assuming that due diligence has taken place and investigations have been done, should we accept those investigations and honor the hard work done by the local church that has discerned that church discipline / excommunication was appropriate? Or should we just start over and avoid the controversial and difficult?
Sadly, I think we generally under-perform on this task. At least I know I have under-performed and not honored the hard work that some pastors / local churches have done. But we can’t expect global leaders to honor the investigations and testimonies of victims of Alan Scott and Jeremy Riddle if we’re not willing to honor the investigations and process that our own local churches have carried out (see the March 14, 2024 update). And I can’t expect other local churches to honor the hard work we do in our local church in order to address harmful patterns of abuse from people who have attended our church if we don’t honor that work from other churches.
In other words, we can’t have our cake and eat it too.
Conclusion.
I know that church discipline is abused, and I’m very, very, very sympathetic to victims of spiritual abuse, for that is what it is. But I’m equally concerned that abusers will continue to abuse if church discipline isn’t taken seriously.
So along with Brian Metzger, I believe accountability, clarity, and expectations in a church discipline process matter.
About the Author
Luke Geraty is a pastor-theologian in northern California. With a few theology degrees and nearly twenty years of pastoral leadership, Luke loves the Bible, theology, fly fishing, coffee, and books. All opinions are his own and not the views of any other organizations he’s affiliated with. You can follow him on Twitter, Instagram, and subscribe to his YouTube.