21 November 2002 Editorial:
Pastor, Please Help Us Understand Church Discipline, Part 2

Control and Scripture

Larry Kirkpatrick

Editorial #117

The church is a place of boundaries. Where two or three (or more) are gathered in God's name, His name means there are boundaries. To be gathered in His name is to be gathered together into His group, separated out of the world and to His gospel. It means that the principles of His kingdom are operational there in that gathering.

If His principles include the truth that, "In Christ's kingdom there is no lordly oppression, no compulsion of manner" (Ellen G. White, Desire of Ages, p. 550), then that is the way it will be when the members of His kingdom are gathered. God's position at the center of the group's attention and devotion rules-out human boundary-crashing. Heaven cannot approve self-centered goals wherein others worship us or are used by us as tools to meet some need to exercise power.

In its statement that God's house is to be a house of prayer for all peoples (Matthew 21:13), the Bible marks an important concept. The worship of God is to be central in places dedicated to such. This means that any and all distractions to that worship are out of order. Worshipers rightly expect that when they go into God's house or associate with the members of a congregation, they will not be accosted or have personal boundaries pressed by others thrusting upon them agendas of distraction.

Nevertheless, some come who've not been sent by God. They've not been asked to run, but they run anyway. Unless the overseers of the Father's house are spiritual and diligent in protecting its sanctity, worshipers will be hindered, sense of sanctuary lost, the purpose of the place of worship defeated.

This sense of sanctuary, quietly expected, an unspoken but intrinsic expectation of church and worship, is profound. The house of prayer for all peoples must not be turned into a meat-market by those pursuing, even if unawares, their own pathologies. A congregation expects its leadership to protect these boundary-lines so that all the children of the kingdom -- trying to seek and find -- may in an unhindered manner pursue that seeking and finding.

If there is any place on planet earth where personal boundaries should be expected to be respected, it is a church. The heart-weary, battle-worn, and experience-scarred do not come to church to close-out the week with a last blasting dose of psychological pressure and stress. We come together as a church family to worship. We come together to express our common convictions as a people -- not to have fanatics impose their distractions upon us.

And what must we say of the guest, the visitor, the new-to-Adventism curious, the tentative explorer? He's been forewarned that churches are places of exploitation, where they want your money, where the psychologically imbalanced come together. What of the important impressions these form in their first halting steps through our doors?

We are responsible that the tenderest lambs or even those engaging in but their first timid steps toward Christ, be treated with respect and care; that they hear the truth drawing them to Jesus without compromise, but also that they have opportunity to form their impressions without being pigeon-holed by those who's behavior is most unrepresentative of our faith.

Every congregation includes some who might be described as unusual persons. But no healthy congregation can agree to stand by indifferently while psychological predators graze on the unaware. Christianity is about release from bondage. Scripture is about God directly intervening to share with us that which He wishes us to know. It is part of His plan to heal His people.

In contrast to God's plan of healing, there is a sickness in some, a desperate insecurity and a need to control. Such sometimes endeavor to use certain Scriptures to control. Some of the most beautiful interpersonal helps in the Bible are beaten, by the harsh mind of one who would control his fellow creatures, into swords and weapons. Those Scriptures are then used as whips and implements of abuse upon those who the controller seeks out and systematically victimizes. They will try to use Scripture to exert control over others.

Satan sought to do some of this Scripture-twisting with Jesus in the wilderness temptations (vis. Matthew chapter four). Why? To control Jesus, to lead Him to do that which would annul the validity of His example for man. There are those who, with the same intent, seek to use Scripture to achieve their own ends, to manipulate and control and victimize. These will use beautiful interpersonal texts, turning them into sharp-edged implements of control. They will rely upon falsely using the consciences of others to provoke them to return obedience to what is actually a faulty or skewed representation of what the Scriptures mean.

Matthew 5:23-24 Misrepresented

One example passage we can test this on is Matthew 5:23-24. Those verses read as follows: "Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift."

The construction some have put upon this passage has included ideas such as the following. "Keep in mind that the Scripture did not say if you have done something wrong to your brother, but if your brother has anything against you. You are not off the hook simply because you did not do anything wrong. Your work is to change your brother's negative feelings toward you. Therefore it is not good enough to comfort yourselves with the lie that you did the best you could under the circumstances. Your brother has something against you and that is the point of truth that many at the _____ church are failing to see at their own eternal risk. . . . Remember, God puts human relationships before worship!"

The same group as has taught the above has also said, "God puts human relationships before worship, and yet how many times we find many who may not intentionally injure someone but are aware that someone felt injured by them, and they are not moved to inquire and make the necessary reconciliation. Some are singing and praying in the same church and even in the same pew with the false idea that God is accepting their worship, while they at the same time care not that a brother has ought against them. We cannot afford to be deceived in this time of fearful deception. Your worship to God is unacceptable until you make every effort to be reconciled to that brother or sister. If you have knowingly offended someone, and refuse to be reconciled with that person, then it is obvious you have denied your reconciliation with God and are in an unsaved condition."

(To give readers some background, the same group has repeatedly engaged in conflicts with authority figures in the church, teaches that the SDA church rejected the Holy Spirit a century ago and will never be revived, has before been removed from church properties by the police, and has a Shepherd's Rod/ Davidian theological background.)

Are those sound representations of what the passage really teaches? Is Matthew 5:23-24 meant to be used as a weapon which "hooks" people, and which makes it possible for persons to block the worship of others by simply engaging in a controversy with them?

Better Answers

Matthew 5:23-24 is actually part of a broader tract of Scripture. In the passage where this text occurs there are six sayings that Jesus comments on, and this is one of them. You will find each of the six particular comments clearly marked by the phrase "you have heard it said that" or similar phrase at Matthew 5:21, 27, 31, 33, 38, 43. The first section (Matthew 5:21-26) is Jesus' expansion on the meaning of "Thou shalt not kill," the second (Matthew 5:27-30) expansion on "Thou shalt not commit adultery, the third (Matthew 5:31-32) regarding divorce, the fourth (Matthew 5:33-37) concerns oath-taking and communication, the fifth (Matthew 5:38-42) about mercy, and the sixth (Matthew 5:43-47) selfless treatment of others.

Obviously the principles of God's kingdom have much to do with reconciliation. Just as obviously, the principles of Satan's kingdom have much to do with engaging in war against God's government. Satan's plan is, at the fundamental level, to defame God's character and subvert the true meaning of His law. Satan wants God's power, to be in control over the angels of God, to be worshipped. He exalts himself, while Christ humiliated Himself and became as human as we are.

The contrast is true, but so is that fact that When Satan insisted that Jesus do this or that to prove that He was indeed the Son of God, Jesus refused to comply. He wouldn't make stones into bread, He wouldn't leap off the pinnacle of the temple. Finally Satan offered Him reconciliation. All He had to do was bow down before Satan, and Satan promised they would be reconciled. But Jesus refused to do that too.

The point? There are occasions for humbling oneself, but there are also occasions where compliance with a demand is negotiating with terrorists. You don't negotiate with terrorists. Ever.

But let's retreat from that language. What is it that sets apart the behavior of a terrorist and gives it its particular quality? Let's work with that. At the core, such behavior is controlling and manipulative. You do this or I will blow up that. Or, I will blow up that to manipulate through causing a community to fear. People are reduced to objects. They are used simply to attain some end. Who they are, the value they have before God -- those things are not measured by the abuser. And so we see that at the fundamental level it is the manipulative, controlling aspect of behavior that at its essence defines such wickedness.

Continuing, we want to realize that the passage itself tells us what we need to know to understand it aright. Remember, this section runs from 5:21-26. Verses 21-22 warn us against calling our brother a fool, against devaluing him in any way. Such is how Christ presented the extension of His teaching against murder. After this we have 23-24 and after that another admonition is linked.

"Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing." (Matthew 5:25-26).

Here we also have the internal testimony of the verses, which have one delivered to the judge and immediately cast into prison. That is, in the example given by Jesus, the person is truly guilty of a crime -- something sufficient for him to be immediately cast into prison for.

Thus we have a real hint about what would be meant in the parallel in 5:23's "ought against thee." That which one has against you there, is there because this is counsel given in case one is at fault -- if he has in actuality an outstanding debt he owes. For then his adversary has potential power over him, because he has not been responsible in handling his commitments.

The three elements of Christ's teaching on this point call out to us: do not devalue your brother, do be quick to seek personal reconciliation, and do be responsible in paying your debts to others who have power over you (remember, "the borrower is servant to the lender" Proverbs 22:7). All these are extensions of the teaching of the Commandment, "Thou shalt not kill" (Exodus 20:13; cf. Matthew 5:21). Or "don't initiate a conflict by being irresponsible in how you treat others or irresponsible in how you treat your obligations." That is, the whole program here is avoidance of conflict -- not the generation of one.

With that in mind, let's turn back to the two quotations we gave near the first portion of this article that gave the distorted teaching on this text. What are the faulty ideas given in the two quotations by the group that teaches this interpretation of Matthew 5:23-24?

We could say these are that: (1) The feelings of another place you under obligation to them. (2) God's principles, rightly understood, contain manipulative hooks. (3) God places human relationship before worship. (4) Circumstances do not matter. (5) A whole church may be judged by one member. (5) An individual may be declared unsaved by one individual on the basis of a dispute. (6) Reconciliation, even with a manipulator is imperative before God will accept your worship.

In short then, here are why these six ideas are faulty.

The first one is faulty because God gave me a free will and I am to exercise it in connection with my own rational and emotional senses, not those of another. While I must do nothing to cause my brother to stumble, or provoke him to stumble, feelings that he might have are not binding upon me. If we even begin to go down this road we will soon be able to having nothing to do with truth because sometimes its presentation leads to a response of hurt feelings on someone's part.

Coupled with this we must realize that there are people out there who, in order to try to get a hearing for their ideas, while use interpersonal conflict as a method of becoming center-stage participants and acquiring attention. Sometimes the "offense" taken is not genuine. Nine times out of ten perhaps this won't be the case. But strange as it may seem if it has never happened to you, there are occasions where the other is what happens.

The second idea is also faulty; God's principles when rightly understood do not contain manipulative hooks. The Bible is not booby-trapped. Nor are we ignorant of the devil's devices. Here was exactly one of his ploys attempted versus Christ. Remember, Satan quoted Scripture to Him as a justification for His leaping from the pinnacle. Jesus didn't say there was no such Scripture that the angel's would bear one up when they fell, but He rejected the manipulative "hooked" use of the Scripture.

The third idea is particularly insidious. God does not place human relationship before worship. If He did, the Ten Commandments are backwards. As they are written, first comes Man's obligation to God and only then the last six portraying man's obligation to His fellow man. Jesus called the first table "the first and great commandment." "The second," He said, was like unto it, but his expression, while indicating similarity does not indicate identical magnitude. The relation between creature and creature is clearly placed secondary to the relationship between creature and Creator.

The plan of God is that we would come to worship Him with nothing blockading or intervening between He and ourselves. We have a work to do and that is, as the Bible says, to "as much as possible" (Romans 12:18) to live in peace with others. There is no mandate in the text for any required total and absolute, airtight reconciliation between two persons. Such is wonderful if it can be achieved. But our reconciliation, while in no way belittling it, is biblically understood to be accomplished "as much as possible," which, whatever it means, at least stops short of making this a rigid absolute, that everyone must agree at all times in every way before they can proceed to worship.

The fourth idea is that circumstances don't matter. But they do. Perhaps a conflict develops because one person expressed concerns about the ideas of another. But concerns about the ideas of another should not lead him to feel you are attacking his personhood when you disagree with him. One who might be attempting to use this Scripture for leverage to attain some other point is using it manipulatively, and thus out of its context, for its context centers at legitimate interpersonal conflicts and not manufactured ones.

The fifth idea is obviously a case of judging others. God alone knows the heart.

The sixth idea is a variant on the third, fourth, and the fifth. Circumstances, such as the legitimacy of the claims against one do not matter, if what was said were true. What we have here is a boundary problem. One individual is seeking to blockade another's relationship with God in order to attain some other end.

Ken Sande says, "There are people who view conflict as a contest. They see it as an opportunity to assert their rights, to control others, and to take advantage of their situation. People like this generally make little effort to avoid disagreements or to overlook minor offenses. Once a dispute begins, they keep pressing the matter as long as there is any chance they might win. These people often are very aware of the wrongs of others, but they usually find it difficult to admit their own wrongs. Typically, winning a dispute means more to them than preserving a relationship." (Ken Sande, The Peacemaker, pp. 16-17). Surely this holds true for such manipulative ideas as those we've just refuted.

The actual principle of Matthew 5:23-24 is not hard to follow. If you are coming to worship God, and you recall that a brother has something against you, immediate reconciliation is called for, if possible. Note that this is counsel to the one on his way to worship God, and thus addresses his perspective. If you recall that someone has something against you -- legitimately against you -- do your utmost to seek reconciliation right away. Your own convictions are to be addressed by you.

Does your brother have something against you? Legitimately? Or perhaps even some point upon which he is mistaken, an imagined wrong only? Then it makes all the sense in the world to seek to address that. But remember, it is your own convictions which are addressed. Is it your perception that your brother has anything against you? And is it your perception that the issue is legitimate, not manufactured? None are to hold us hostage by their assertions in such a matter.

What if someone is trying to have something against you; what if someone is trying to turn a matter of church propriety into a personal matter vis. Matthew 18:15? What if, in spite of the false nature of such a charge you have sought for reconciliation repeatedly, first in one-on-one and then in the presence of witnesses? Are you, according to Matthew 5:23-24, under obligation to never worship God again until the combative, non-reconciliatory party grants you leave? Or, put more succinctly, does a proper understanding of this verse make it into a coercive weapon to use against anyone one wishes to consider oneself as at odds with?

It is fanaticism, no more and no less, that would venture to use this text as a platform to hold another hostage to manipulative wiles. Scripture's purpose is redemptive, not coercive. The Bible is not a rulebook for people who insist on generating conflict. Texts such as this and others dealing with the interpersonal relationships of brethren and sisters never give coercive power over others to those who insist on divisive behavior. We must never put evil for good, never allow God's beautiful Word to be hijacked by interpretations that are unbiblical. We seek for reconciliation with others, if it be possible. But if they refuse, we go forward with life and the worship of God. Otherwise, those who are evil would have coercive power to stop us from worshipping.

Summary

These brief pages have taken a look at the use of one Scriptural passage by some in an attempt to control others. There are persons out there bent upon making merchandise of God's word by spinning its interpretation until it is recast as interpersonal weapon. They are anxious to impose their reality upon others. There is a pathological model that turns the purpose of healing by God's Word onto its head and remakes it into a psychological weapon. Let us be wary of such. We have opportunity to be part of the ministry of reconciliation through the Word. Heaven calls us out of our pathologies.

Church discipline is also sometimes necessary to protect against those who would rule the consciences of those whom they can manipulate. Where we are gathered in God's name, His name means there are boundaries. Let us never venture to cheapen the witness of God's church by standing back while the wolves feed upon the flock. Let us uphold God's principles where we function in His name. "In Christ's kingdom there is no lordly oppression, no compulsion of manner." Thank God for the opportunity to be such a people.

Next week: Continuing with part three of "Pastor, Please Help Me Understand Church Discipline." Next up, religious liberty.

Pastor Larry Kirkpatrick is an ordained minister of the gospel. Since 1994 he has served in the American Southwest as pastor to several churches. He received his BA in Religion from Southern Adventist University in 1994 and a Master of Divinity from Andrews University in 1999 with a specialization in Adventist Studies. While in Michigan he was employed by the General Conference at the White Estate Berrien Springs branch office. More important than his scholastic preparation has been his immersion in the biblical and Spirit of Prophecy materials. He is author of the 2003 book Real Grace for Real People. Presently he serves as Pastor of the Mentone Church of Seventh-day Adventists, located near Loma Linda, California. Larry is married to Pamela. The couple presently live in Highland, California along with their two children, Etienne and Melinda.