What does the Bible say about church discipline?

Here, then, the power of binding and loosing, before conferred on Peter, is given to all the disciples. The assembly is to act in cases of discipline, such as that of one of its members injuring another, and refusing to acknowledge his fault. The grace and gentleness of Christ are first to be shown. If these fail, the dishonour done to His name must be thought of, and the assembly must purge itself by putting away the evil-doer. This is the power of binding and loosing, which is given, not to the apostles, but to the Church or assembly. It is the authority to put away and to restore those who have sinned. Such, at least, is the particular case given, though the language itself would include a wider range, and doubtless does include the reception of believers into the assembly. The narrower authority, with its accompanying responsibility of dealing with questions of sin, is again bestowed after Christ's resurrection, where He says to His disciples, "Receive ye the holy Ghost; whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained" (John 20:22-23). This authority, conferred, not upon the apostles, but the disciples — that is, on believers as a whole — is not the power of putting away sins, which belongs to God only, but of exercising a divinely-guided judgment as to what offences demand the excision of the wrong-doers or what measure of repentance justifies his restoration. The power is given in connection with the Holy Ghost. While guided by Him, their authority could not but be rightly used. But the moment they ceased to be guided by Him, the sole ground of their authority vanished.

Administration is also committed to Peter, both in binding and loosing; it is authority to act publicly here below, with the promise of ratification above: "Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." That is first said to Peter; and doubtless, from what we have in Matt. 18:18: "Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven," the binding and the loosing applies also to the other disciples; not to the apostles only, but, I believe, to the disciples as such. Compare also the charge in John 20:19-23. On that principle people are received into the Christian Church, and on that principle wicked persons are put away till repentance justifies their restoration. Apostles or disciples do not forgive sins as a matter of eternal judgment, of course, which God alone has the power to do. But God requires of us to judge a person's state for reception into or exclusion from the circle which confesses the name of Christ here below. In Acts 5 Peter bound their sin on Ananias and Sapphira. This does not prove that they were lost; but the sin was bound upon them, and brought present judgment. Neither Peter nor Paul was at Corinth; and there the Lord Himself laid His hand upon the guilty: some were weak and sickly, and some had fallen asleep. This does not decide against their final salvation — rather, indeed, the contrary. When they were judged of the Lord they were chastened, that they should not be condemned with the world (that is, that they should not be lost). They might be taken away by death, and yet be saved in the day of the Lord. The Church puts away a wicked person. The man at Corinth, whom they were told to excommunicate, was guilty of heinous sin, but was not lost. He was delivered unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit might be "saved in the day of the Lord Jesus." In the next epistle we find this person so overwhelmed with sorrow on account of his sin that they were charged to confirm their love to him. Simple indeed is the binding and loosing which people often make so mysterious. The only sins that the Church ought to judge are those that come out so palpably as to demand public repudiation according to the word of God. The Church is not to be a petty tribunal of judgment for everything. We ought never to claim the assembly's intervention except about the evil that is so plain as to be entitled to carry the consciences of all along with it. This I take to be the meaning of binding and loosing.

It is noteworthy that personal trespass between brother and brother is the first disturbing element mentioned in Scripture in connection with the gathering together of the saints to the name of the Lord Jesus, and He proceeds to lay down in the most simple and explicit manner what is to be our line of conduct under such circumstances. Let us carefully consider these important communications. "If thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone." Mark well, in the first place, there is to be no making light of the trespass: "Tell him his fault." In the gospel of Luke (Luke 17:3) it is even stated more strongly than this: "If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him: and if he repent, forgive him." The natural course might be to avoid him, and to say nothing to him about his fault; or we might be determined in our own mind to bear the injury in longsuffering towards the offender, and, as it is sometimes expressed, "try to live it down." Such might at first sight seem very plausible, and have the appearance of grace on my part; but it omits one all-important item of consideration; viz., the spiritual condition of my offending brother; and whoever may commend it, it is certainly not the Lord's way of treating the matter. Besides, staying away from my brother might leave a tinge of bad feeling in my own heart; and even if it did not, am I to rest while knowing that the conscience of my erring brother is defiled? (See Lev. 19:17.) No. I am to go and plainly lay his fault before him; for if he is to be truly recovered it must be through the exercise of conscience and the judgment of his state before God. "Go and tell him his fault" are words that cannot very well be mistaken. It is not even, "Go and write him a note." Alas! who can measure the mischief that has come in among God's people by this very thing, either through ignorance of the Lord's mind about such matters, or through failing to act upon it when known. To send what I think a very faithful letter may both spare my feelings and suit my pride; but He who knows us far, far better than we know ourselves says plainly, "Go and TELL him his fault."

Then, again, what wisdom and grace are embodied in the next few words - "Between thee and him alone." Yet is it not sadly too common to discuss a personal trespass somewhat more publicly than this? Perhaps there is some brother whom we know to be not on the most amicable terms with the one who has injured us. We have but little doubt that he (i.e., the brother just referred to) will lend a ready ear to the tale of our wrongs, and the danger is that, in our selfishness, we go to him, though, if we considered his soul's welfare, he would be the last person in the assembly to whom such a thing would be breathed. But it suits us better to share the story of our grievance with others, who may be ready to sympathize with us, and tell us how shamefully we have been treated, and the like, than to go and seek "to gain" the one who has done us an injustice. How is this? It is much to be feared that we are not altogether sorry to be able to inflict a punishment upon our brother by lowering him in the estimation of others. But is it obedience to the Word thus to act? Is it the Spirit of Christ? Is it not rather only another, though more subtle, form of the same flesh that manifested itself in our brother's trespass?

Next comes a sentence of the very deepest importance to us - "If he hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother." Does not this let us into the secret of why I am to tell him his fault, and why it is to be between him and me alone? It is "to gain" my brother. The Lord had, just before (v. 12), been speaking of His own search among the mountains for the lost sheep, and of His joy when the straying one was brought back, in order, no doubt, that we might see the value which He put upon one of His own, and that we might learn to act toward them accordingly. Notice here that nothing is said about the redress of any wrongs. The Lord does not say that "if he hear thee, all thy wrongs shall be put right," but, "If he hear thee, thou has gained thy brother." No doubt, if grace really works in him, if he is really "gained," one of the earliest fruits of it will be an ardent desire for the redress of those injuries; but the securing of this is not to be the motive which prompts me to go to him. Leaving my wrongs with the Lord, I am to seek my brother's blessing. But this going to "gain" him will necessarily put my own soul through deepest exercises. If, in true love to him, I am set upon his recovery in a righteous way, what godly watchfulness and carefulness will be wrought in me? With what earnestness and fervent desire shall I plead for him before God! When a bird has left his cage, any rude hand or discordant voice can drive him further away; but how great the care and caution that is exercised by the one who really desires to bring him back to food and shelter! If my errand to my brother were only to pain him, the task might easily be accomplished without a particle of exercise; but if I am to gain him, then grace must work both in him and in me.

But now we proceed a step farther. Suppose that the best-intentioned efforts to restore my brother prove fruitless, what then? Am I therefore to take it for granted that he is henceforth beyond recovery? Not so. How do I know that my manner of dealing with him was not the cause of my failure? Or perhaps our interview has made the discovery to him that I have put what he considers to be an unwarrantable colour upon his conduct, or attributed motives to him which he is conscious he never had. In that case, I should only have given to him what he judges a righteous ground for resisting me, and have left him harder than I found him. I am therefore now to take with me "one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established." And even should this prove unavailing, another step is yet to be taken; the assembly must be told. If, after all this, the offender still manifest wilfulness, if repentance be not wrought in him, the word then is, "Let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican;" for there is no higher court of appeal for the saint upon earth than the "two or three" gathered to the name of the Lord. (vv. 18-20.)

"Hear the church" in Matt. 18:17 is a favourite appeal for such as seek scriptural support for ecclesiastical pride, or, as they would say, its magisterium. But the context is perfectly plain that there it is simply and solely a question, not of teaching-authority, but of local discipline in a case of personal trespass.

Excommunication was a fearful thing in those days. The “within” was the sphere where God was known, and whence the light of His truth radiated. The “without” meant the world of paganism and Judaism, Satan’s sphere. One might have thought the excommunication of this sinning saint would have been for his destruction. But, no, it was for the destruction of the flesh. It was that his spirit might be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. The discipline of the house of God is for the blessing and recovery of the one disciplined. Excommunication is a solemn matter at any time, but in apostolic days to be outside the assembly of God upon earth was to be outside everything Christian, and to be thrown into Satan’s sphere. That the discipline of the Lord, which may come in connection with assembly discipline, is for ultimate blessing, is plainly taught in Scripture. We read:

But while the Lord's supper, being the central expression of fellowship in the assembly, is specifically denied to a fornicator, yet this is not all. The saints of God were to have no fellowship with him whatever, not even to eat a common meal with him. There is a necessary distinction here, however. Fornicators of the world, covetous, extortioners, idolators, the believer is not told to avoid, for they are everywhere around. Their evil was not a direct dishonour to God, as was the case with one who was called a brother, and was guilty of a course of sinful practice. This was a denial in practice of the Lord he claimed to serve. Love for him would dictate this serious disciplinary treatment, as well as faithfulness to God, and concern for the purity of the assembly. In fact, added to this is the concern that the world itself would recognize that Christianity refuses to embrace evil, and specially in one who professes to be Christian.

For it is evident that they had obeyed Paul's instructions to put away the man. Now it is just as serious that the man be restored. The discipline had achieved its proper end in leading the man to self-judgment and ceasing from his sin. It is to be noted that the "punishment" or "rebuke" had been inflicted by "the many." Perhaps not every individual in the assembly had fully concurred in this (as is sometimes the case), but it was nevertheless a true assembly judgment, in obedience to God. Now he is to be forgiven publicly, and comforted, or encouraged: otherwise discipline might be carried to such an extreme as to swallow up the offender in sorrow. Paul entreats them to assure the man of their love. Once the guilt is properly judged and stopped, this should always be the case.

By Christian discipline I understand the believer's privilege, under grace, and the loving endeavour incumbent upon him, to warn, exhort, instruct and advise a fellow Christian who has erred or is in evident danger of straying, in the spirit of that wisdom which is from above, and in the "spirit of meekness" (James 2:17-18, and Gal. 6:1) as in the presence of God; and (in case of repentance) to encourage, comfort and strengthen him, and to help him to renewed communion with God, and thus bring him back to the path of holiness, righteousness and peace, that is, to "restore" him.

It has often been said and acknowledged that discipline which consists in putting away from among yourselves (1 Cor. 5:13) ought to be the last means to which we should have recourse and only when all patience and all grace have been exhausted and when allowing the evil a longer continuance, would be nothing else but a dishonour to the name of the Lord, and would practically associate the evil with Him, and with the profession of His name. On the other hand the discipline of putting away is always done with the view of restoring the person who has been subjected to it, and never to get rid of him. So it is in God's ways with us. God has always in view the good of the soul, its restoration in fulness of joy and communion, and He never draws back His hand so long as this result remains unattained. Discipline, as God would have it, carried out in His fear, has the same thing in view, otherwise, it is not of God.

Then the Lord applies it to our practical conduct. Supposing your brother does you wrong; an evil word, perhaps, or an unkind action done against you — something that you feel deeply as a real personal trespass against you; it is a sin, of course. Nobody knows it, probably, but himself and you. What are you to do? At once this great principle is applied: When you were ruined and far from God, what met your case? Did God wait till you put away your sin? He sent His own Son to seek you, to save you. "The Son of Man came to seek and to save that which was lost." This is the principle for you to act upon. You belong to God; you are a child of God. Your brother has wronged you? Go you to him, and seek to set him right. It is the activity of love which the Lord Jesus presses upon His disciples. We are to seek the deliverance, in the power of divine love, of those who have wandered from God. The flesh feels and resents wrong done against itself. But grace does not shroud itself up in its own dignity, waiting for the offender to come and humble himself and own his wrong. The Son of Man came to seek the lost. I want you, He says, to be walking after the same principle, to be vessels of the same love — to be characterized by grace, going out after that which has sinned against God. This is a great difficulty, unless the soul is fresh in the love of God, and enjoying what God is for him. How does God feel about the child that has done wrong? His loving desire is to have him right. When the child is near enough to know the Father's heart he goes out to do the Father's will. A wrong may have been done against him, but he does not think about that. It is his brother who has slipped into evil, and the desire of his heart is to have the brother righted who had gone astray — not to vindicate self, but that his soul may be restored to the Lord.