Questions about the "Keys"

Status
Not open for further replies.

irresistible_grace

Puritan Board Junior
Matthew 16:19
I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven
That is the authority to admit entrance into the kingdom through PREACHING THE GOSPEL, an authority that is subsequently granted to all who are called to proclaim the gospel.
and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
That is the authority to exercise discipline concerning RIGHT & wrong conduct for those in the kingdom.

Matthew 18:17, 18
If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.
He who refuses to listen is to be excluded from the fellowship and thought of as an unbeliever until he is reconciled (restoration & reconciliation should always be the goal of discipline).
Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
That is the authority to declare the terms under which God FORGIVES or refuses to forgive the sin of wayward disciples.

Why is it that, when one reads the above passages or hears the word "discipline," the word "excommunication" is the first thing that comes to mind?

Why not, "preaching the gospel?" The same sun the melts the wax hardens the clay!
Why not, "exercise discipline concerning the 'right' conduct of those in the kingdom?" That is, to disciple!
Why not, "restoration & reconciliation?" Isn't that what the Good News is all about? Restoring us to a 'right' relationship with God?
Why not "forgiveness of a wayward disciple that shall eventually be restored?" The prodigal Son!
Why is it that we treat a wayward disciple as "WORSE than an unbeliever" rather than simply "as an unbeliever" who is NOT beyond the grace of Christ? Peter denied Christ thrice and thrice he was restored!
Do we give ourselves MORE authority than Scripture?
Wasn't the same apostle who was originally given the "Keys" also told to forgive his enemy "not 7 times" but 77 times or 70 times 7 times?
 
The reason isn't too hard to figure, and it explains a lot, including why many today (probably more likely to be pew-sitters, than elders; but probably too many of the latter) jump to images of formal censures and eviction. If you start there at "really bad," discipline only gets worse.

The fact is that proper church discipline is a constant. It is 24/7/52/365. In a manner analogous to a family with children, the people of God are never without oversight. We don't usually call the positive aspects of discipline "discipline." And so we forget that it is discipline, it is "exercise" in godliness.

Each Sunday, a coming to worship and a submission to hearing the Word of God preached, and an observing the sacraments of our Lord, are acts of discipline. Self-discipline, and ecclesiastical discipline. Like an athlete is coached in sport, put through his paces, and forced to extend himself--that is discipline, and unobjectionable to the wise man.

One of the great errors of those who think fathers are the ones to serve communion to their families (and babes) is that they don't see such distribution of the elements as an act of church-discipline. We make a huge deal about the fact that exclusion from the Table is a matter of discipline--forgetting that admission to the Table is also a matter of discipline. As individuals, we seem to think that we have a "right" to come to any church's service of the Table, no matter what elders are responsible for the service. What? Aren't these men "those who must give an account?" Aren't ministers "stewards of the mysteries?"

So, the big problem is, because we tend only start thinking about discipline in cases of extremis, as soon as the subject comes up we are instantly thinking in atomic-option terms. Lowering the boom. I don't think we mean to do this. But individualistic Americans are already mainly interested in the unmediated "experience of the divine." It's a cultural malady, and our Reformed churches are not exempt. But we do have remedy.
 
The reason isn't too hard to figure, and it explains a lot, including why many today (probably more likely to be pew-sitters, than elders; but probably too many of the latter) jump to images of formal censures and eviction. If you start there at "really bad," discipline only gets worse.

The fact is that proper church discipline is a constant. It is 24/7/52/365. In a manner analogous to a family with children, the people of God are never without oversight. We don't usually call the positive aspects of discipline "discipline." And so we forget that it is discipline, it is "exercise" in godliness.

Each Sunday, a coming to worship and a submission to hearing the Word of God preached, and an observing the sacraments of our Lord, are acts of discipline. Self-discipline, and ecclesiastical discipline. Like an athlete is coached in sport, put through his paces, and forced to extend himself--that is discipline, and unobjectionable to the wise man.

One of the great errors of those who think fathers are the ones to serve communion to their families (and babes) is that they don't see such distribution of the elements as an act of church-discipline. We make a huge deal about the fact that exclusion from the Table is a matter of discipline--forgetting that admission to the Table is also a matter of discipline. As individuals, we seem to think that we have a "right" to come to any church's service of the Table, no matter what elders are responsible for the service. What? Aren't these men "those who must give an account?" Aren't ministers "stewards of the mysteries?"

So, the big problem is, because we tend only start thinking about discipline in cases of extremis, as soon as the subject comes up we are instantly thinking in atomic-option terms. Lowering the boom. I don't think we mean to do this. But individualistic Americans are already mainly interested in the unmediated "experience of the divine." It's a cultural malady, and our Reformed churches are not exempt. But we do have remedy.

:agree:
 
It's also interesting how often the term 'discipline' is restricted to a very narrow, most extreme sense.

Discipline, in one sense, is merely the willing and obedient sitting under the preaching of the Word by one qualified and called to do so.
It can be a gentle word (informal admonition), it can be a condition of participation or behavior to get something (we'll be able to help you if first get a job, etc.).

It's much, much broader than the formal steps of formal admonition, suspension from the Lord's Supper, excommunication.
 
As sinners going along by the flesh without restraint, we tend to dislike any discipline because it denys the whim of the flesh.
So, we rationalize the most extreme case as being reason not to seriously consider the underlying concepts.

:2cents:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top