Church Discipline Outside of One's Own Congregation

[m_elizabeth]

Hello, everyone! I have recently been studying the context of Matthew 18:15-17, Galatians 6:1, and other church discipline passages. Is the context of these verses one's own local church? In other words, should believers attempt to carry out the steps found in Matthew 18 if the sinning brother in question is not apart of one's own congregation? Thanks for any insight!

 

[TheInquirer]

Yes, there are times where it is entirely appropriate. If it were not, we would have no way of reconciling with Christians outside of our own congregations.

There are times when the situation can and should involve contacting the other Christian's leadership and involving them in the process. I have seen this most when dealing with other Christian family members or when Christians change churches and there are unreconciled issues at a prior church.

 

[m_elizabeth]

Hi, thank you for your response! I was more so wondering about the process of church discipline when the believer (who is not apart of your church) is sinning unrepentantly. I was not necessarily thinking of a reconciliation issue. I've often heard that Matthew 18:15-17 applies to all sin (not just personal offenses).

 

[Polanus1561]

Hi, thank you for your response! I was more so wondering about the process of church discipline when the believer (who is not apart of your church) is sinning unrepentantly. I was not necessarily thinking of a reconciliation issue. I've often heard that Matthew 18:15-17 applies to all sin (not just personal offenses).

Who are the other witnesses here, church members?

 

[SeanPatrickCornell]

Hi, thank you for your response! I was more so wondering about the process of church discipline when the believer (who is not apart of your church) is sinning unrepentantly. I was not necessarily thinking of a reconciliation issue. I've often heard that Matthew 18:15-17 applies to all sin (not just personal offenses).

Obviously if you reach the point of "bring it to the church", you bring it to THEIR church, through THEIR elders.

 

[Ben Zartman]

Why is it your business to expose someone's sin to their church when it doesn't involve you? If they haven't noticed it or don't care, their discipline is probably gonna be pretty lax anyway, and you'll be found to have meddled in other men's matters to the destruction of your reputation.
God has declared that a person's sin will find him out. Unless it involves you personally, I'd stay out of it, and let God sort it out.

 

[m_elizabeth]

Thank you all for your responses! I suppose I'm just trying to get a better understanding of how Matthew 18:15-17 would be applied in a setting where most professed Christians one would encounter wouldn't accept correction or be attending a church with any kind of "discipline" policy. I see how church discipline ought to be applied in one's own local church where the members have committed to following such a process, but beyond that, it wouldn't seem feasible/appropriate to apply this process to every believer someone may encounter or know personally. That is why I was wondering if the specific context of such passages is the local church.

 

[iainduguid]

Why is it your business to expose someone's sin to their church when it doesn't involve you? If they haven't noticed it or don't care, their discipline is probably gonna be pretty lax anyway, and you'll be found to have meddled in other men's matters to the destruction of your reputation.
God has declared that a person's sin will find him out. Unless it involves you personally, I'd stay out of it, and let God sort it out.

There are situations where it would be appropriate. For example, if you discovered the other church's pastor was involved in an extramarital affair, of which his congregation was unaware. It can be hard to get the other church to listen to an outsider though, so you would need a fairly compelling case (and even then might be ignored). If the other church is within your presbytery, there are additional ways to address the issue.

 

[Ben Zartman]

There are situations where it would be appropriate. For example, if you discovered the other church's pastor was involved in an extramarital affair, of which his congregation was unaware. It can be hard to get the other church to listen to an outsider though, so you would need a fairly compelling case (and even then might be ignored). If the other church is within your presbytery, there are additional ways to address the issue.

Maybe I'm a chicken, but I'd be inclined to leave it be and let someone else find out--some burdens are too heavy for the likes of me.

To your last suggestion, the OP is a Baptist, so lacks the oversight of a presbytery.

 

[Northern Crofter]

I believe it's important to remember that in Matthew 18 (you can't read vv.15-20 in isolation - Peter continues the conversation in v.21) Christ is giving instruction about a private offense known only to you. It is regarding a sin "against thee" (v.15 - see also the singular me/him in v.21). The teaching in Matthew 18 is that private sins/offenses should be dealt with privately if at all possible, working towards concord with a brother or sister instead of immediately seeking revenge for injuries. Public sins should be dealt with publicly - if everyone knows someone is in sin, that person's elders have the duty to deal with that situation.

But there is a question of what to do if you discover someone involved in sin that does not directly involve you - Matthew 18, which speaks to someone sinning against you, would seem not to apply. Yet I believe the principle can still be wisely applied to a secret sin you providentially discover- you have a duty as Jude writes to "save with fear, pulling them out of the fire." Going to them first in private to call them to repent, and then involving others if they do not turn away from their sin is wise, all the while being mindful that in multiple places Paul warns against becoming "gossips and busybodies" as it is no one's calling to search out the sins of others.

Finally, if it is a sin that involves other people (i.e. not just the offense of one person that you discover) this cannot be handled privately. In the example of adultery mentioned above, this seems quite clear: "Marriage is to be held in honor among all, and the marriage bed is to be undefiled." (Hebrews 13:4) Sins which affect the Body must be dealt with by the Body. There is a corporate duty to uphold certain things such as marriage or essential doctrine. In the example of discovering adultery, you would take such a case to their elders (which could also be yours, or could involve more than one set if you are dealing with members in different congregations) and leave it with them (also telling the offenders you are doing so or have done so). Each one of us will give an account of himself to God, but the leaders we submit to will give an account for how they kept watch over the souls of those placed under their care.

 

[m_elizabeth]

I believe it's important to remember that in Matthew 18 (you can't read vv.15-20 in isolation - Peter continues the conversation in v.21) Christ is giving instruction about a private offense known only to you. It is regarding a sin "against thee" (v.15 - see also the singular me/him in v.21). The teaching in Matthew 18 is that private sins/offenses should be dealt with privately if at all possible, working towards concord with a brother or sister instead of immediately seeking revenge for injuries. Public sins should be dealt with publicly - if everyone knows someone is in sin, that person's elders have the duty to deal with that situation.

But there is a question of what to do if you discover someone involved in sin that does not directly involve you - Matthew 18, which speaks to someone sinning against you, would seem not to apply. Yet I believe the principle can still be wisely applied to a secret sin you providentially discover- you have a duty as Jude writes to "save with fear, pulling them out of the fire." Going to them first in private to call them to repent, and then involving others if they do not turn away from their sin is wise, all the while being mindful that in multiple places Paul warns against becoming "gossips and busybodies" as it is no one's calling to search out the sins of others.

Finally, if it is a sin that involves other people (i.e. not just the offense of one person that you discover) this cannot be handled privately. In the example of adultery mentioned above, this seems quite clear: "Marriage is to be held in honor among all, and the marriage bed is to be undefiled." (Hebrews 13:4) Sins which affect the Body must be dealt with by the Body. There is a corporate duty to uphold certain things such as marriage or essential doctrine. In the example of discovering adultery, you would take such a case to their elders (which could also be yours, or could involve more than one set if you are dealing with members in different congregations) and leave it with them (also telling the offenders you are doing so or have done so). Each one of us will give an account of himself to God, but the leaders we submit to will give an account for how they kept watch over the souls of those placed under their care.

Hi there, I appreciate your response. I have a just a few follow-up questions about how to involve someone else’s elders practically. If someone attends a church that doesn’t have official elders, should you find just any “leader” in their church to inform? I definitely agree that the Church ought to uphold essential doctrines and other important things, but would that necessarily require believers to ensure all the Christians they encounter/know are doing so? Throughout my life I have met countless Christians who aren’t upholding any kind of Biblical standards in their lives, and it seems very difficult to confront ALL such individuals and go tell their churches.

 

[Deleted member 13126]

Hi there, I appreciate your response. I have a just a few follow-up questions about how to involve someone else’s elders practically. If someone attends a church that doesn’t have official elders, should you find just any “leader” in their church to inform? I definitely agree that the Church ought to uphold essential doctrines and other important things, but would that necessarily require believers to ensure all the Christians they encounter/know are doing so? Throughout my life I have met countless Christians who aren’t upholding any kind of Biblical standards in their lives, and it seems very difficult to confront ALL such individuals and go tell their churches.

There's an awful lot of practical wisdom that folks have already chimed in with. I just dropped in to say that I recognize how impractical Christian accountability can be in our highly mobile, transient and connected society. With that being said, I believe if by 'confronting people' you mean reproving, rebuking, exhorting, etc., while speaking the truth in love, then it's a biblical command no matter how impractical. May I say that it's an oft neglected command also?

There are certain types of professing believers we ought to separate ourselves from (personal separation as opposed to ecclesiastical separation) if when confronted they remain unrepentant. These would include, to quote Fred Moritz from his book on separation, Be Ye Holy, page 82-83:

1. The sinning brother - sin by one brother against another about which the sinning brother will not be reconciled (Matt. 18:15-17)

2. The immoral brother - Moral sins that the sinning brother continues to practice. These are fornication, covetousness, railing, drunkenness and extortion (1 Cor. 5:11)

3. The unequally yoked brother - The doctrinal, or theological, error of idolatry, or being unequally yoked with unbelievers (1 Cor. 5:11; 2 Cor. 6:14)

4. The lazy brother - The sin of laziness in which the brother will not work for a living (2 Thess. 3:6-15)

5. The disobedient brother - Open disobedience to Scripture (2 Thess. 2:15; 3:6-14)

6. The heretical brother - Heresy, or deviant doctrine, that is promoted out of self-wiled divisiveness (Titus 3:10)

 

[m_elizabeth]

There's an awful lot of practical wisdom that folks have already chimed in with. I just dropped in to say that I recognize how impractical Christian accountability can be in our highly mobile, transient and connected society. With that being said, I believe if by 'confronting people' you mean reproving, rebuking, exhorting, etc., while speaking the truth in love, then it's a biblical command no matter how impractical. May I say that it's an oft neglected command also?

There are certain types of professing believers we ought to separate ourselves from (personal separation as opposed to ecclesiastical separation) if when confronted they remain unrepentant. These would include, to quote Fred Moritz from his book on separation, Be Ye Holy, page 82-83:

1. The sinning brother - sin by one brother against another about which the sinning brother will not be reconciled (Matt. 18:15-17)

2. The immoral brother - Moral sins that the sinning brother continues to practice. These are fornication, covetousness, railing, drunkenness and extortion (1 Cor. 5:11)

3. The unequally yoked brother - The doctrinal, or theological, error of idolatry, or being unequally yoked with unbelievers (1 Cor. 5:11; 2 Cor. 6:14)

4. The lazy brother - The sin of laziness in which the brother will not work for a living (2 Thess. 3:6-15)

5. The disobedient brother - Open disobedience to Scripture (2 Thess. 2:15; 3:6-14)

6. The heretical brother - Heresy, or deviant doctrine, that is promoted out of self-wiled divisiveness (Titus 3:10)

Hi, thank you for your reply! In regards to reproving or rebuking fellow Christians, would that be commanded even if you don’t know the individual personally? For example, if you hear of a fellow believer living in sin (but don’t really have a personal relationship with them) would it be appropriate to try to confront them anyhow?

 

[Deleted member 13126]

Hi, thank you for your reply! In regards to reproving or rebuking fellow Christians, would that be commanded even if you don’t know the individual personally? For example, if you hear of a fellow believer living in sin (but don’t really have a personal relationship with them) would it be appropriate to try to confront them anyhow?

In my view it would be generally inappropriate, but there could be some exceptions depending on the circumstances. 1 Corinthians 5:3 comes to mind as an example of an exception.

I've seen the sentiment captured in your example taken to the extreme with folks like Andy Stanley who would rebuff any sort of biblical reproof because concerned Pastors in other parts of the United States haven't taken the time to get to know him. So this sort of reasoning can cut both ways.

At the end of the day, we don't need to get to know heretics in order to point out heresy.

When in doubt, James 4:17 and Romans 14:23 are excellent guardrails that have withstood the test of time.

Hope this helps!

 

[Northern Crofter]

Hi there, I appreciate your response. I have a just a few follow-up questions about how to involve someone else’s elders practically. If someone attends a church that doesn’t have official elders, should you find just any “leader” in their church to inform? Whatever they call themselves, find the person/people who are functioning as overseers per Biblical criteria. I definitely agree that the Church ought to uphold essential doctrines and other important things, but would that necessarily require believers to ensure all the Christians they encounter/know are doing so? I would suggest, generally, no - only ones that you commune with, although I have relatives and coworkers/friends who are professing Christians, and if they went astray morally. Throughout my life I have met countless Christians who aren’t upholding any kind of Biblical standards in their lives, and it seems very difficult to confront ALL such individuals and go tell their churches. I would suggest if they aren't upholding any kind of Biblical standards, then they aren't really believers and you should treat them as such and share the Gospel with them.

Those are good follow-up questions - I inserted some thoughts in bold above.