Church Discipline - Part 2

Discipline in 1 Corinthians 5

For some, this practice seems quite difficult to actually carry out. For various reasons, churches are afraid to actually follow this command and discipline their members. Paul encountered one of these situations in writing to the believers in Corinth. In 1 Corinthians 5, Paul addresses a problem in the Corinthian church where one of their members had committed a sexual sin with his father’s wife, presumably his step-mother. The Corinthian church had neglected to discipline this man adequately, and Paul appears to be more concerned over their failure to discipline than this man’s sin. Gordon D. Fee suggests that “the horror [in this situation] lies in the fact that there is sexual immorality among them, but they are taking no action.” This example that Paul uses stresses the importance of using church discipline. Those who neglect to discipline are only hurting themselves by allowing sin to reign in their midst, being too prideful to do anything about it.

So Paul commands the Corinthian church to “hand this man over to Satan,” which could mean one of two things. Blomberg suggests that this does not mean physical death; rather, it refers to the removal of the man from their fellowship. According to the formula laid out by Jesus in Matthew 18, such an action is not for the destruction and the humiliation of the man, but is to be used in order to cause the man to seek repentance so that he may come back into the fellowship. Fee further suggests that by handing this man over to Satan, it serves as a contrast to what he would have experienced within the church; instead of the loving environment of the church, he would have to endure the hatred of the world where Satan’s powers were at work. This may appear to be a harsh punishment for the man, but once again, this action is intended to be done out of love, in order that the man would see his errors and desire to ask for forgiveness.

Discipline in Church History

This formula given by Jesus and modeled by Paul’s ministry became the basis for centuries of church discipline. In the centuries that followed, the Church took the job of discipline seriously, and Laney points out that a process was even developed to reinstate those who had been kicked out of the church. Now while Jesus never gave clear instructions on how to go about reinstating someone who eventually came to repentance, it appears as if the early Church was on the right track in their tactics. They were not neglecting their duties to discipline the disobedient, and they were making sure that the person was truly repentant when they brought them back into the church. Overall it appears as if the first few centuries of the Church understood the importance of instituting discipline.

Then, in the Middle Ages, the Church decided that discipline should be a more private matter. They determined that when an issue arose, it should be handled between that person and the priest, not before the entire congregation. While they were correct in making this situation a private matter between two people, they were wrong in suggesting that it was the only way to handle the situation. They obviously missed out on the rest of Jesus’ commands in Matthew 18, where He commanded that the situation be brought up before the entire church when repentance was not sought. Furthermore, Jesus also seemed to suggest that anyone could fill the role that the priest was filling in the Middle Ages. There was no command that limited that role to a select group of people. Any believer who saw their brother stumble had the responsibility to confront him.

At the time of the Reformation, Luther was not as strict about discipline as Jesus had commanded. Although he did believe that discipline was necessary and that being cast out of the church was the final step, he did not emphasize the importance of private, small group discipline. Instead, he believed that discipline “should come from preaching the Word.” Calvin, however, made a much larger contribution to church discipline stating:

“As the saving doctrine of Christ is the soul of the Church, so discipline forms the ligaments which connect the members together, and keep each in its proper place. Whoever, therefore, either desire the abolition of all discipline, or obstruct its resolution, whether they act from design or inadvertency, they certainly promote the entire dissolution of the Church.”

Although Luther supported discipline in its simplest form, Calvin was the Reformer who made a point to keep discipline a central part of the Church. He understood that a church that does not practice discipline will fall apart. Rather than looking at discipline as a practice that would hinder the relationships between believers, he viewed it as a practice that would bring believers closer together.

Likewise, the Anabaptists understood the necessity of discipline, emphasizing the importance of using it to build one another up rather than destroying each other. From the time of Calvin to close to the twentieth century, several of the Protestant denominations held to a strict form of discipline. Anabaptists, Methodists, and Puritans alike supported a rigorous form of discipline. Until the twentieth century, discipline has always been a major part of church life. Laney states that “its neglect today is not consistent with the rigorous efforts of the past to correct sinners and maintain a pure church.” So the question that arises today is why discipline is no longer practiced. Granted, there are some congregations that still obey the commands of Matthew 18, but for the most part, the modern Church has abandoned the call to discipline its members.

Matt