If you are in church leadership, you have heard the argument that one of the reasons for the weakness of the contemporary church is its failure to exercise firm discipline. The argument is usually buttressed with a story or two of church discipline resulting in the reclaiming of a wayward sinner.
I am sensitive to pull of this argument and to the impact of these stories. What any who have been in leadership know, though, is that normally discipline of the formal, judicial variety can be difficult, messy, and full of ambiguity, uncertainty, and pain. It can be terribly difficult to discern when certain sinful behavior demands the disciplinary process and how to proceed. And there are always plenty of people looking in from the outside ready to tell you that you have acted precipitously, or not acted when you should have.
It was in this light that I read this morning about a man, his name was Jesus, who had something like a church around him, twelve main guys, and a number of others. Among these twelve, there was one named Judas, who was the treasurer of the group. Another of the twelve, John, charges, at least privately, that Judas was a thief and would often help himself to church funds. The group’s leader, Jesus, is a man with quite a bit of insight and little goes on which escapes his notice. I think it is reasonable to assume that he knew the truth of the suspicions which John harbored.
If anything would demand discipline, it would seem to me, pilfering funds from the church till would. It is odd to me that this man Jesus does not see things the same way. He seems to overlook this grave offense. Of course, as the story goes, Judas the treasurer goes from bad to worse, proof that we need to be more willing and quick to apply church discipline when the situation demands it.
Or perhaps this story simply muddies the issue? Any thoughts?
To read the story yourself, click here.
MagistraCarminum
My first thought is that if we were all Jesus, with his level of access to the hearts of others and his understanding of the Scriptures, church discipline would be much easier… :-PIt is messy and painful, and rarely clear-cut. When a public sin is obvious, the elders have no choice but to try and deal with it, or they neglect their God-given duties. However, don't you think most of the good work of church discipline should come from our bumping up against one another in our daily lives, challenging and encouraging each other to live more consistent, Christ-centered lives? This is the "informal" aspect of discipline, when one believer comes alongside another and says, in real love, "I see this is difficult for you. Let me help…" That is a beautiful thing.Now, I am one of those people who have what some have said is the "gift of exhortation". That means I am bossy, and articulate about it. My tongue gets me into too much trouble, and I need to take more care with my readiness to be "helpful" to others. I have learned that because my brethren have loved me despite my trying to 'fix" them. They have been brave enough to tell me the truth, and they have been a vital part of my life, so they have earned the right to do so. And I am so glad they have "disciplined" me in this way!
Gus/Adri
I agree that believers can and should exercise discipline on each other (gently). In the case of Judas, he was predestined to do what he did in the end. As in Joseph's case evil intents are turned around for good. We don't have that eternity point of view, so we–the church–have to act in the face of notorious behavior as in the Corinthian church.G
Randy Greenwald
Absolutely, Chris, bumping around is the best form of church discipline. That is what the bulk of the NT language encourages. It is the best corrective to sin.And formal discipline only exists for lack of repentance, does it not? Egregious sin does not lead to painful discipline if there is repentance.And, Gus, if we wanted to argue the point, we could play the predestined card on any situation, couldn't we? I'm not sure we can plead that Jesus did not come down hard on Judas because of predestination. And I'm not sure that the situations which we think demand discipline are so clear cut. I'm not sure we have thought as carefully about it all as we should. Covetousness, greed, pride, racism, anger, harshness and the like can be pretty serious sin, but we lay it all out for sexual sin. Why the distinction?I posted this only to consider the fact that perhaps there are times that we do not pull the trigger on discipline, and that in waiting, we are not necessarily neglecting our duty.