Matthew 18: By the Book – Part 8
October 27, 2009
Dear Friends,
If they refuse to listen to the entire ecclesia, we are told to “treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.” This seems simple and straightforward enough.
It isn’t.
It is interesting how people get so dogmatic on the nuances of this step. We get extremes and dogmatism in equal measure all the way from “kick the bums out” to “who are we to judge anyone on anything.” To them, it is so simple.
Depending in which Biblical passage you chose to prove your point, the Bible provides an array of possible answers on how to treat the unrepentant brother. We have some verses that appear to be telling us to cut them off completely and others that seems to suggest a more gentle approach. Which is it? May we suggest to you that it is all of them depending on the circumstances and that a thoughtful approach to this third and final step will not take a “one size fits all” approach?
To some the issue is simple; when Jesus says to “treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector” this means that we would treat them as the Jews treated the Gentiles and tax collectors of their day which is to say rudely and offensively. This interpretation would be a very hard thing to reconcile coming from the lips of Jesus when we see how he treated those classes of people. Jesus often associated with both pagans and tax collectors. We also see from the life of Jesus that he practiced a nuanced approach to dealing with sin. Sometimes Jesus was very tough on sin and sometimes he was very gentle depending on the situation.
We would suggest four key questions to ask in order to answer the question of how to deal with them.
- Are they teaching or influencing others negatively by trying to win people over to their way of thinking/living?
- How willing are they to continue to work with the ecclesia in their restoration?
- To what kind of discipline are they most likely to respond?
- Is the problem on-going or an historical, one-time event?
There is a general Biblical principle regarding negative influences to consider which Paul brings up in 1 Corinthians 5.
I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people- not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat. (1 Cor. 5:9-11 NIV)
Notice Paul has placed this person in a category different than the pagans and tax collectors. We are not to “keep company” (Gr. sunanamignumi) with them. This literally means “to mix up with them.” Paul uses the same word in his letter to the Thessalonians where he says “And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed.” (2 Thess. 3:14) As is evident from the second passage, the desired effect is to make that person feel bad and change. More importantly, though, this is an issue of leaven. Earlier in the chapter, Paul said “Don’t you know that a little yeast works through the whole batch of dough?”(v. 6) The reason you treat this person differently is because they are a leavening influence. Their behavior or teaching is causing others to stumble and is propagating – like leaven through dough – in the ecclesia.
Not associating with someone is tough for many among us – especially the soft-hearted. Remember, however, that this is for their good as well as for the ecclesia. We wouldn’t withhold medicine from a child that needed it even if it was unpleasant to take. To do so would be incredibly irresponsible. How can we justify not administering spiritual medicine to the spiritually sick simply because we don’t have the stomach to do so if it is required?
Another factor in how we are to treat them is how they respond to discipline. I have two children. Each of them responded to discipline in different ways. If I treated them the same in an effort to be “fair”, I would have done a great disservice to my children. They each had their own unique personality and therefore needed to be disciplined in the way that worked best for them. A person who is acting inappropriately because of an addiction may need to be handled differently from someone who actively and unrepentantly promoting false doctrine. A person who is proud of their sin may need to be handled differently that someone who is utterly ashamed of their sin. This makes ecclesial discipline more of an art than a science. It also opens up the elders to charges of favoritism, bias or inconsistency. Such is the life of an elder (or of a parent for that matter!).
Have a great week,
