Church Discipline

One profound way to respond to Jesus’ command to love one another is through church discipline, properly carried out. Discipline of erring Christians is not optional but mandatory, since it is intended to protect God’s reputation, to reconcile and restore sinners, to maintain the purity of the church, and to deter sin.

            The recovery of individuals to a life of godliness and ministry ought to be the focus as a congregation disciplines in sorrow, not in glee, disciplines with caution, not in haste, and disciplines to restore, not for retribution.

            Applicants for certification by NANC are expected to belong to a church that practices church discipline or is not opposed to it. When a congregation of which an applicant is a member does not practice church discipline, he will seek to influence the church to make the appropriate changes.

Pastoral Implications

First, a background comment. Nouthetic counseling seeks to fill many voids in the community life of the church. We are concerned about every aspect of the interpersonal cure of souls – pastoral counseling, lay counseling, discipleship, informal one-anothering… and church discipline. NANC has a mission to accomplish. By definition, a mission means there is a problem to be addressed. We all know the problems in each of the areas just mentioned. Pastors may have little training in counseling, or faulty training, or little vision for the role of counseling in overall ministry. They keep busy elsewhere, avoiding counseling, preferring to refer out to mental health professionals. Lay counseling is often limited to teaching people how to take a kindly interest in others, with no agenda for biblical change. Structured discipleship usually involves a course in basic doctrine, Christian ethics, discovering gifts, and learning to have a devotional life. Those are good things, but the organic link to progressive sanctification is rarely made explicit. One-anothering most often means a collage of socializing, personal opinions, common sense, pop psychology, and “let go and let God.” And church discipline? Most often it’s non-existent. Where it does occur, the practice is often capricious, and perhaps focuses only on the sin of unrepentant adultery.

So there’s work to be done! That’s why the grader’s guide mentions “extraordinary circumstances.” On other issues – e.g., the authority and relevance of Scripture when it comes to counseling – there are no such circumstances to extenuate non-compliance with standards. But in a matter of church practice such as this, the grader must explore and weigh variables.

How do we define an extraordinary circumstance? The most common circumstance arises when a candidate is personally committed to practice church discipline, but the church is not committed, or is theoretically committed but non-practicing when a case calls for action, or is even opposed to the practice.

When an applicant is a member of a congregation that does not practice church discipline, the applicant should seek to influence the church to make the appropriate changes. Graders will want to know the history and results of such efforts.

It might be helpful to provide the candidate with some specific questions to pose to those in authority. For example, here are some first-person questions that can get the discussion off and rolling.

• If I betrayed my spouse by committing adultery, what would the church do? Would the church love me and my family enough to pursue me and call me to repentance, or would I be allowed to simply go on in the lifestyle I was choosing?”

• If I betrayed my Lord by falling away from Christian faith, or by abandoning church attendance, or by teaching falsehoods, what would the church do? Would I be pursued in love, or would I be allowed to make my own choices without questions or consequences?

• In these and other cases, what would happen? If I were pursued what would the process be like, and who would be involved? Would I be lovingly and firmly warned and urged to repent? Called back to faith and faithfulness? If I refused the admonition of the church, would I be barred from communion at the Lord’s table? Or would I still be considered a de facto Christian, remaining on the church roll, and free to participate in the Lord’s supper at my own discretion?

Such an approach is humble – asking if the church will love me and my family. It’s not adversarial, as if I’m the wise guy who just want to come in and criticize, telling everyone else how they need to change.

If a church has simply not thought about the question, along with not doing anything about it, such first-person questions can make the issue pointed rather than theoretical – and even a bit shocking. What pastor wants to think that adultery and unbelief don’t matter?! And a pastor who really doesn’t think it matters reveals that his church’s ministry is far, far from the gospel. Perhaps the leadership will be awakened out of sleepy inertia, and begin to take seriously the explicit call of Jesus Christ. And if the church simply won’t agree or act, that non-action might awaken the applicant to think seriously about finding a new church home. Inertia can operate on both sides.

            Here’s a second kind of question to ask.

• Did our church or denomination have specific negative experiences with church discipline that cast it in a purely negative light?

• What does our church’s constitution or book of church order say? Do we even have a procedure in place that could make church discipline work?

These questions recognize the reality that errors often beget reactive errors, and that churches may be ill-prepared with a positive model. Perhaps “church discipline” had been used by a previous regime in ways that were self-righteous, hasty, and vindictive. An applicant's church may not practice church discipline in part because of history. They’ve overreacted to disastrous malpractice in the past, the very idea and words have negative connotations. Getting such things on the table is all part of the process of seeking to influence. The applicant wants to show – in manner and attitude, as well as in content – that church discipline really can be loving and constructive. If there’s openness, a book such as A Handbook of Church Discipline or materials from Peacemaker Ministries can provide grist for learning and implementation of changes.

If the church makes progress, the issue is resolved. But what if after a reasonable process, the church shows no signs of movement? Ordinarily, the applicant should find a better church home. But an applicant might still qualify under extraordinary circumstances, on a case by case basis. For example, perhaps this church is overall the most biblical church in a town or region, despite the defect in church discipline practice. Some applicants may have few, if any, desirable options. Or, though there may be other biblically-oriented churches in an area, there may be compelling personal or ministry reasons to remain in this particular church. Or, perhaps the applicant is a pastor seeking to bring his congregation around, redressing failures that became institutionalized decades ago. These and other such reasons need to be explored carefully by the grader.

As stated earlier in the Graders’ Guide, a candidate who does not personally believe in biblical church discipline cannot be certified by NANC under any circumstances. But as in other areas of disqualification, the grader or supervisor can seek to turn it into a matter for ongoing edification and education if the applicant is willing. A study of the relevant biblical texts, as summarized and discussed in A Handbook of Church Discipline or Peacemaker Ministries materials would make an appropriate assignment.