Why should we warn a divisive person once (Titus 3:10)?

Such an one is to be admonished once and twice. He is thus reminded of the seriousness of his sin and warned of the grave consequences. If the double warning of his heretical and party-producing behavior is not heeded, he is to be shunned and "done with." By repeated refusal to yield to admonitions he manifests his real state. He is perverted, turned away from the right, and sins. A spiritual pride is manifested and he is self-condemned. His unfitness for fellowship is apparent and he is to be refused as a sect-maker.

It may be supposed that such a man would go out of the Assembly because he could not impose his own will and way upon it. There is no mention here of putting him out of the Assembly as a wicked person. Perhaps because this Epistle of Titus was written to an individual. If people do not listen to him and he is shunned, the result will undoubtedly be (if he persists in his course) that he will eventually go out of his own accord. This form of discipline will either break down his self-will or further manifest his spirit as he withdraws from the gathering. Should he remain in the Assembly, he should certainly be put under public rebuke, silenced as to any public activity in the gathering, and no company be kept with him. The case may develop into that of a wicked person and necessitate his being put away as such according to I Corinthians 5:13.

When a man tried to set up his own opinions, and by that means to form parties in the assembly, after having admonished him once and a second time, he was to be rejected; his faith was subverted. He sins, he is judged of himself. He is not satisfied with the assembly of God, with the truth of God: he wants to make a truth of his own. Why is he a Christian, if Christianity, as God has given it, does not suffice him? By making a party for his own opinions he condemns himself.

Again, writing to the Romans (Rom. 16:17), he tells them to mark those that caused divisions and offences, or stumbling-blocks, contrary to the doctrine they had learned; and to avoid them. Divisions (dichostasiai) might arise amongst the saints — they were of the works of the flesh (Gal. 5:20) — but such as caused them were to be marked and turned from, the doctrine the saints had learned being the measure or standard by which they were to judge of and discern such. To avoid them (ekklino) is the apostolic injunction; the same word used by Peter when exhorting us to eschew evil — ekklinato. (1 Peter 3:11.) Now in neither of these cases does the apostle Paul direct the saints to resort to the severe measure of excommunication. Withdrawing from them is not putting them out. Their place at the table they would still have, but the saints were to mark their disapproval of such ways by withdrawing in ordinary Christian intercourse from them, in the hope, as in the case of the disorderly walker, that such might be ashamed, and learning the evil of their course, forsake it.

Again, Titus is taught how to deal with an heretical man. First he must admonish him; then after a second admonition, if that failed, he was to reject or have done with him — paraitou, the same word as is used in 1 Timothy when enjoining him to turn from profane and old wives' fables (1 Tim. 4:7), and to decline the younger widows (v. 11); for an heretical man does not of necessity mean one who denies the faith, but it is literally one who chooses his creed. Thus Paul, speaking of the Pharisees, to which party he had once belonged, called it the most straitest sect — hairesis (lit. heresy) — of our religion. (Acts 26:5.) The sect of the Pharisees was regarded as orthodox in their creed; but Paul uses of them that word which has been engrafted into our tongue, and with which most Englishmen are familiar, heresy. An heretical man, then, need not be one who denies any article of the Christian faith. He is an heretic who allows his mind or will to work in connection with doctrine, thereby producing or countenancing a sect; as we see from 1 Cor. 11:19, where the apostle, writing of sects, uses the word hairesis. Such a man was to be avoided, if admonition failed to have its due effect upon him. Patience in dealing with him there was to be; but if a second admonition failed to lead him to reject his error, he was to be avoided; for such an one "is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself." (Titus 3:11.)

Now this is of importance in helping us to a true and just discernment of the apostle's injunction to Titus, where there is an advance in fact on the warnings to the Corinthians and the Galatians. It does suppose that there was, or might be, a sect-maker in Crete, who had to be dealt with. Such an one had gone out in the pride of his heart and was after admonition to be declined. "An heretical man after a first and second admonition refuse, knowing that such a one is subverted and sinneth, being self-condemned" (vers. 10, 11).

Here the evil is not expressed in the aggravated form of false teaching; and consequently we are not entitled to lighten the sin of faction in itself, of which alone the passage speaks, by supplementing the case with its far more serious shape when denounced by Peter at the later day. By "heretical man" the apostle means any one active in originating or adopting a sect, even if he were orthodox. Not content with "schisms" inside, such were forming a separate school without. They might, as a general rule, fall into destructive views, more or less diverging from those whom such had wilfully and deliberately left, in order to justify themselves or oppose others vainly. But the apostle does not add a word, either here or elsewhere, to the evil of "faction" or "sect" in itself. Titus was to admonish once or twice. For there might be differing measures in his selfwill that had gone outside: one so determined that a first admonition would prove enough; another not so far gone might encourage the Lord's servant to persevere and admonish a second time.

Hence also explains, at any rate in part, why there is not a word about putting away the evildoer. Titus was to "eschew" or "avoid" him. Now παραιτοῦ is said of shunning old wives' fables (1 Tim. 4:7), younger widows (v. 11), foolish and uninstructed questions (2 Tim. 2:23), as well as a heretic in the scripture before us. In no case is excommunication meant, but just avoiding alike things or persons. It is granted that the Epistle does not embrace within its scope, like 1 Corinthians, all ecclesiastical action even to the last extremity; any more than excommunication is prescribed in the Epistle to the Galatians, or in those to the seven Apocalyptic churches whence the advocates for tolerating the worst evils within the assembly draw their unwise and unholy arguments. Only the heretic was outside.

Defectiveness of doctrine does not make it to be heresy, nor is all error heresy. What constitutes heresy is, it is the fruit of "human mind and will having been at work in connection with doctrine." The word heresy means "a choice" (from "to choose"). If the evil is present in an upright mind, get the thing once clearly before his mind and he will be set free. If a second time the mind turns back to it, there is reason to fear that there is want of ingenuousness, his having turned away from it before (after the admonitions) condemns him, if he turns back to it. For he had admitted that the root out of which his doctrine flowed was a bad one. His will had been at work. Its reappearing looks as if he had changed his doctrine without giving up the root of it. "Reject, or pass by such;" that is, do not sanction with your authority, which is from Paul, any such as teachers.

As to heresies, I feel a difference between one who, for want of light or from early prejudice, cannot get rid of error, and one who propagates it ever so secretly (for in general where there is an evil will, it is secretly propagated at first), because then there is the love of error, and the will of the flesh is at work, they are the fruits of the flesh. What is written as to heresy - not as to every one that is in error, even where the error is grave - is, "after the first and second admonition reject." But I doubt not, you have been better directed of the Lord in waiting on Him, than anything I could thus write, but I believe these principles correct. But all these exercises are good. Surely it would be happier never to give the Lord occasion thus to exercise us; but it is much more merciful to be put through the exercises, which brings out faithfulness, than to be left in what separates us from the Lord - far, far better.

A sectary was to be rejected after due admonition; it is always God's own way, in dealing with men, to warn offenders before judging them, and this should be carried out in the assembly.

Up to now we have considered false teaching. This must be refused as poisonous. Yet we must carefully distinguish it from mistaken views of Scripture. A believer may take impressions from the Word of God which he later realizes need correction. We need to apply Philippians 3:15 in such cases: "If in anything you think otherwise, God will reveal even this to you." We must not require absolute conformity in teaching but leave room for the Holy Spirit to teach each individual. For example, Romans 14 speaks of abstaining from certain meats and of observing certain days. A person with a weak conscience may be mistaken as to what God requires in these things but that is no reason to refuse fellowship with him. Also, there are many views on prophecy. Grace will enable us to help each other in these areas. However, a "divisive man" who pushes wrong views on others must be rejected after a second admonition (Tim.3: 10).

By constantly maintaining and affirming the truth Titus would be enabled to avoid all those foolish questions and contentions about the law which were so common in those days. There is nothing like diligence in what is good to shut out evil. There might of course be a man who carried these questions and strivings to such a point that he became a leader of a faction in the church, a maker of a sect — for this is what the word, "heretic" means. Such an one was to be admonished once and twice, but if then he still remained obdurate he was to be rejected. To make oneself into a leader of a party is a serious sin.

(Titus 3:10-11). Moreover, there are not only certain things to be avoided, but there may also be persons that we should reject, or "have done with." An "heretic" is not necessarily one that teaches false doctrine. In the Scriptural meaning of the word he is one who makes a party to uphold certain views. If deaf to a first and second admonition, it is evident that he is perverted from the path in which we are called to walk, and having refused all admonition, we are to refrain from further intercourse with him.