What is excommunication in the Bible?

Excommunication then, as the word implies, affects the person's rights, which as a Christian he has in common with others. By it he is put away from the company of the saints at the table till such time as he repents; and the assembly, judging that he has repented, restores him to his privileges in common with them. What then is to be the character of the carriage of the saints toward such an one? 1 Cor. 5:11 is explicit, and 2 John 10 agrees with it. It is not only that the offender cannot be received at the table, but those who have had social intercourse with him on Christian grounds must abstain from it. Are there not instances where, from ignorance of Scripture rules, and perhaps a mistaken desire to manifest brotherly love towards the guilty one, the discipline of the assembly, so far as it relates to ordinary friendly intercourse, has been entirely set aside, to the detriment of the offender, and to the loss really of all? The action of the assembly becomes thereby enfeebled, and a party feeling is in danger of being encouraged. If saints looked at the question in this light, "Can I have ordinary Christian friendly intercourse with one whose presence at His table my Lord refuses to sanction?" would not the right way of conducting themselves towards such be seen at a glance?

Again, if one brother had committed a trespass against another, and manifested a hardened spirit, which neither brotherly dealing nor the assembly's admonition could subdue, he was to be to the one against whom he had sinned as a heathen man and a publican. (Matt. 18:17.) Now a heathen man no Jew would admit to any ecclesiastical privileges (Acts 21:28-29); with a publican, or tax-gatherer, no Pharisee or scribe would associate. Hence the offender's position is clear, and what 1 Cor. 5:13 sets forth would be the only course open for the assembly. From how small a beginning such grave results might flow. The wicked person then would also be such an one as 2 John describes, and such an one too as Matt. 18:17 treats of; and at times it might help an assembly in deciding on a case if they asked themselves the question, "Has the one whose case is before us shown that he is a wicked person?" A Christian may have done wrong, and yet not be a wicked person. So also, if it be a question of rebuking, "Does the person whose case is in question come under the category of one who sins?"

Excommunication then, as the word implies, affects the person's rights, which as a Christian he has in common with others. By it he is put away from the company of the saints at the table till such time as he repents; and the assembly, judging that he has repented, restores him to his privileges in common with them. What then is to be the character of the carriage of the saints toward such an one? 1 Cor. 5:11 is explicit, and 2 John 10 agrees with it. It is not only that the offender cannot be received at the table, but those who have had social intercourse with him on Christian grounds must abstain from it. Are there not instances where, from ignorance of Scripture rules, and perhaps a mistaken desire to manifest brotherly love towards the guilty one, the discipline of the assembly, so far as it relates to ordinary friendly intercourse, has been entirely set aside, to the detriment of the offender, and to the loss really of all? The action of the assembly becomes thereby enfeebled, and a party feeling is in danger of being encouraged. If saints looked at the question in this light, "Can I have ordinary Christian friendly intercourse with one whose presence at His table my Lord refuses to sanction?" would not the right way of conducting themselves towards such be seen at a glance?

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 if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established." Is it possible he may resist one or two who come to him, witnesses of the love of Christ? He has refused Christ pleading by one; can he refuse Christ now that He pleads by more? It may be, alas, that he will. "And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the Church." The Church means the assembly of God in the place to which these all belong. "If he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the Church; but if he neglect to hear the Church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican" (ver. 17). The assembly, then, is told of the guilty person's fault. The thing has been investigated and pressed home. The Church warns and entreats this man, but he refuses to hear; and the consequence is — "Let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican." A most solemn issue! A man who is called a brother in the verse before is to me as a heathen man and a publican now. We are not to suppose the man to be a drunkard or a thief; but showing the hardness of self-will and a spirit of self-justification. It may arise out of small circumstances; but this unbending pride about himself and his own fault is that on which he may, according to the Lord, be regarded as a heathen man and a publican — no more to acknowledge him in his impenitent state. And yet it may spring mainly from the spirit of justifying oneself. In the case of open sin or wickedness, the duty of the Church is clear: the person is put away. Nor would there be reason in such a case for going one at a time, and then one or two more. But the Lord shows here how the end of this personal trespass might be that the Church has finally to hear it — and it may lead to something more.

The assembly, then, are told of the guilty person's fault. The thing has been solemnly investigated and pressed home; and the Church now pronounces upon it. The Church warns and entreats this man, but he refuses to hear; and the consequence is — "Let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican." A most solemn thing! A man who is called a brother in the verse before, is like an heathen man and a publican now. We are not to suppose that the man was a drunkard or a thief; but what he has shown is a hardness of self-will and a spirit of self-justification. It might have arisen out of small circumstances; but this unbending pride about himself and his own fault is that on which God may pronounce him to be regarded as an heathen man and a publican; that is, that you no more acknowledge him in his impenitent state as a Christian. And yet it may spring mainly from the spirit of justifying ourselves when we are wrong. In the case of drunkenness, or anything of that kind, there would be no necessity for adopting any such mode of dealing with it. If there were not the least question on the mind of any one as to the sin, the duty of the Church is clear: the person is put away. He might not have been seen by a number of persons: there is no absolute need for that. Nor would there be reason in such a case for going one at a time, and then one or two more. This is only where it is unknown to any one but the individual against whom the trespass has been done. But the Lord shows here how, out of a little spark, a great fire may be kindled. The end of this personal trespass might be that the Church are convinced that the man displays not a trace of Christian life about him. "Let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican." "Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven." It is not a mere question of agreement. What gives the validity is that it is done in the name of the Lord (see 1 Cor. 5:4). "Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven. Again I say unto you, that if two of you shall agree on earth, as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of My Father which is in heaven. For where two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I in the midst of them." Whether for discipline, or for making requests of God, the Lord lays down this great principle, that where two or three are gathered together in His name, He is in the midst of them. Nothing could be more sweet and encouraging. And I am persuaded that the Lord had in view the present ruin of the Church when there might be ever so few gathered aright.

Whatever the character of the day in which God has been pleased to cast our lot, we have, for the way to behave ourselves, the most implicit instruction. The Corinthians were told to put away from among themselves a wicked person. Yes, but this is direction for the “Church of God,” I may be told, and where are we to find it today? True, it is to the “Church of God” in its collective and concrete character, and this may be impossible to find today; but the epistle is just as individual in its directions as it is in its collective character, for it includes “All that in every place call on the name of Jesus Christ our Lord.” And assuredly it commands me to put a wicked person out of my company. Should those with whom I am associated refuse to obey the plain commandment of the Lord, I cannot be excused if I continue with them and the wicked person. They prove themselves to be as indifferent to the expressed will of the Lord as to the gravity of the sin in their midst. I can do nothing but withdraw from all, or confess myself as disobedient as the others. If one refuse to separate from evil when it is pointed out to him, I fail to see how he could be said to be clear of it himself. One of the charges God brings against Israelites, “When thou sawest a thief, then thou consentedst with him, and hast been partaker with adulterers” (Ps. 50:28). Evil must be refused; first, in ourselves, and second, in others. Neither wicked doctrine nor wicked conduct can be tolerated.

Those with whom we walk must be such as call on the Lord out of a pure heart; and with these we are to follow righteousness, faith, love, peace (2 Tim. 2:22). Should evil creep in amongst these the Word is plain enough, “Purge out the old leaven.” “Put away from among yourselves that wicked person.” If reproof and the discipline of the house of God has no effect upon the sinner, excommunication is the only course that can be taken.

It is important to notice that it is wicked persons and only such that are to be put away from the company of believers. "Put away from among yourselves that wicked person." It would be very wrong to put away one who had merely been overtaken in a fault or one that had only committed an offense. In applying this discipline of I Corinthians 5:13, the prime necessity for the Assembly is to be sure that the person is really wicked. This must be established and manifest to all. Mere suspicion of evil will not do.

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.

The one thus excommunicated is put outside the entire sphere of Christian fellowship. With such an one we are not to keep any company or to even eat a meal. "With such an one no not to eat" (I Cor. 5:11) . "Put away from among yourselves that wicked person" (v. 13). We should note that the injunction is not just to put the evil one out of the Assembly, but "from among yourselves." That means outside of the whole circle of Christian fellowship, ecclesiastically and socially. Such an one is to be left alone and made to feel the seriousness of his sin, so that he may be broken down, brought to repentance, and restored to the Lord.

(V. 9-13). In the verses that follow, the Apostle shows that, in exhorting Christians to exercise holy discipline and live a life of sincerity and truth, he is referring to the Christian circle. To extend either to the man of the world would be unreal and impossible. If, however, one “called a brother” is living in open and unjudged sin, we are not to have company with him, or show any fellowship with him by eating a meal with him. It is no business of the Christian to attempt to put the world right by judging its evil. This God will do in His own time. Our responsibility is to judge any evil that may manifest itself in the Christian company. “Therefore”, says the Apostle, “put away from among yourselves that wicked person”.