A Pastor’s Rebuttal on Church Discipline: Responding to the Mars Hill Controversy
Photo credit: flickr/Cornelius Flickerman. Usage does not represent endorsement by the photographer.
Note from Ian Ebright: We typically do not feature guest posts on this site, but due to the recent Mars Hill Church discipline scandal (my thoughts on the matter and the problem of insulated churches here) and legitimate concern, curiosity, and questions that are being raised about the idea of church discipline, I reached out in the hope of getting credible feedback. Fortunately, a prominent pastor responded. His post is below, and has been kept anonymous by request.
I’ll be teaching a group of students today out of I Corinthians 5, which is a sort of ‘classic text’ regarding church discipline. The subject has been in the news a fair bit lately, and even if it hasn’t, it’s an important subject in it’s own right. Over the past years, there’s been shock over the repeated passivity of church authority when priests have been charged with molestation, pedophilia, and other abusive activities. Protecting predators is viewed, rightly, with anger – especially when predators are in positions of authority. If a church knows that one of its own leaders is involved in activities that utterly misrepresent Christ, the church is called to act, according to both Matthew 18 and I Corinthians 5.
These two passages, though, apply to more than just leaders. They apply to everyone in the church, because everyone who has declared their commitment to a particularly local expression of church life is committing to that church’s value structure, a structure that hopefully represents, in some measure, the heart of Christ. We’re called to hold each other accountable because, if we’re going to wear the t-shirt that says we belong to Jesus, we need to help each other look like Jesus.
This is, of course, precisely where the rub comes because without severe limitations on this action, we run the risk of becoming the Taliban, both in our levels of scrutiny, and punishment, and hypocrisy. Unrestricted control of fallen people, in the name of ‘discipline’ doesn’t just turn people off from a particular local church- it turns people off to Christ. For that reason, the misuse of discipline needs to be held up to the light of scripture and exposed. So let’s consider these two important passages in the Bible in order to get a clearer picture of the principles at stake:
1. In Matthew 18, the road to church discipline begins with someone whose sin is in need of exposure because they’re hiding it, at least from others, probably from themselves. The passage reads, “If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private…” This means that if someone goes to the church and preemptively exposes their fault, it’s not discipline time, it’s restoration time. The person has confessed their sin, and the word confession, “to say the same thing” which means that they agree their action/activity was wrong and destructive.
2. In I Corinthians 5 the pattern of an unhealthy sexual relationship is the context, but again, Paul makes it clear that the reason discipline is enjoined is because the person is involved in destructive patterns but either refuses to acknowledge that it’s destructive, or refuses to take steps to change. To apply the passage to someone who has preemptively confessed a sin is to foster exactly the opposite environment of both Paul’s and Jesus’ intent, namely that of living freely in the light. This is too important to pass over, because it’s right here that the church has historically failed over and over again. Called to invite people into the light of grace, and the transforming power of Christ’s forgiveness, we’ve overwhelmingly created environments where it’s easier to hide in darkness because “if people really knew…”
This isn’t just about sexual sin. “If people really knew my drinking problem” or “my anger problem” or “my addiction to shopping and financial mess I’m in because of it” or whatever it is; your pride, your arrogance, your cold marriage. It’s actually liberating to take discipline as seriously as Paul takes it, because then you begin to see that Paul’s trying to create an environment where the bar remains high, and people are encouraged, as James exhorts, to confess their sins to one another, that they may be healed.
In I Corinthians 5 the person isn’t confessing, and the church isn’t confronting. Instead everyone’s ignoring. Many of the pixels spilled in the last week seem shocked that the church would take any role of intervention at all in someone’s personal choices. Part of Paul’s point in this letter to Corinth, though, is that personal choices are no longer personal when you associate with a community. The company for which you work has values, ethics, which represent their culture. Try ignoring those. Show up late, barefoot, smoking weed, and spend your day in chat rooms. I promise you, your employer will be less gracious than the church. You can’t belong to anything worth joining without agreeing to live within the ethos and culture of that thing – and the church has, or should have, a high ethos.
On the other hand, a healthy church won’t be filled with people who embody perfection, because perfection doesn’t exist (see I Jn. 1:8-10). Instead we’ll embody a trajectory, both individually and collectively, of transformation – as Paul says, “from glory to glory…” (II Corinthians 3:18) This means our brokenness will be seen sometimes, just like David’s was, or Moses’, or Jacob’s, or Abraham’s, or Peter’s. We can all find snapshots of sin with which to vilify one another. But God is interested in the movie, not the snapshot, and that’s why David, who was quick to confess his sin once it was exposed, was called a ‘man after God’s own heart’. Churches that fixate on the snapshots and use them to control others are missing the point in both big, and bad ways.
I’ll note that the scriptures offer no precedent for mining confession of further sin, no precedent for shunning one who has confessed. Every indication is that Paul calls the church to restore the man in I Corinthians 5 when he writes II Corinthians 2, warning that someone who’s repented but continues to be treated like someone who is sinning, knows he’s sinning, and doesn’t care, is a terribly destructive thing to do.
So there you have it. Some might be angry because I’ve challenged the idol of unrestricted individualism that saturates our culture. Others will be angry that I challenge the unrestricted authority of church leaders to intervene in the lives of broken people whose hearts are tender enough to confess sin and seek to live like Jesus. But both paths miss the point, which is to create a community of truth and grace. Unrestricted elevation of individualism kills truth. Unrestricted elevation of church authority kills grace. A third path is needed… one that fosters truth AND grace. That path, narrow though it be, is the only real way of Jesus.
Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 5:11 pm
Well stated, Pastor. Grace and peace to you.
Friday, February 3, 2012 at 9:38 am
My own take on the recent confluence of these issues (directed at Piper’s “masculine” Christianity, but still applicable here): http://whitherthougoest.wordpress.com/2012/02/03/of-piper-and-power/
Friday, February 3, 2012 at 6:37 pm
It bothers me that everyone is afraid to have their name associated with something critical of Mars Hill. Is everyone afraid Driscoll is going to show up at their house with a baseball bat?
Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 11:36 am
Hi Lee. The previous post below this one was me, by name, challenging Mars Hill. I was not the first writer to do it, and I won’t be the last, in fact, many far more well-known writers than I have done so publically.
I can understand your feelings about the way this might appear on first glance, but I think pastors have a different set of issues to consider when going public. In this case, I don’t believe the reasons have anything to do with being afraid.
Monday, February 6, 2012 at 1:46 pm
Understand and good point. I just wish more local pastors would try to engage Driscoll. Maybe they are and we just aren’t hearing about it. My concern is that people are just hoping he’ll self destruct or go away.
Saturday, March 3, 2012 at 6:48 pm
Those of us who have been through the process understand that Mark Driscoll and/or his adulators will come at you any way they can no holds barred. Socially, politically, emotionally, mentally, spiritually, and will at least threaten physical harm indirectly.
I came to Mars Hill broken by physical illness. Part of it was harm from Severe Sleep Apnea with Extreme Hypoxia undiagnosed for many years and part by injury from a murderous assault and robbery by a man who our State saw fit to release from prison after serving for only 17.5 years for stabbing a friend who had helped him and stealing his electronic equipment as he bled to death. His rampage hurt more than us three plaintiffs.
As the climate at Mars Hill changed some of the doctrine also appeared to me to change. When I spoke up about this I did so understanding the scripture I spoke so no argument toward what I said was made. What did happen was a heart sickening game when I became more needy as the anniversary of my assault approached. First would come a promise of help, then, that was taken away and replaced by commands to do those things I was asking for help with. Eventually, all help was taken away. Being in shelter was hard.
They constantly mined for mud mostly by accusing me of sinning but never actually pinning down what the sin was. So I requested that they write out my sins and give me the document. They agreed and we set up at time for this to happen wherein they would go over the list with me.
I arrived about 15 minutes early. As I kind of expected they were fifteen minutes late getting to me. The small group leader drew up the list but only the small groups pastor and an elder were present. The elder started the meeting telling me he would not provide the document as promised and continued by making an impasse of an issue already worked out with the small group pastor. They then told me I was wicked and then proceeded to make several statements. All were indirect accusations that I was against Mars Hill, the one I remember is “I want you to tell me all of the bad things you have said about Mars Hill”. At the time I could not think of any.
These statements went on for about twenty minutes not really giving me a chance to speak. When I did get a chance I said “gentlemen, we have an impasse – thank you for your time” and left. The small groups pastor, in a following e-mail, related my last statement as “I am out of here”.
I am not welcome on Mars Hill property (actually, I kind of wonder if I ever really was).
If they will do all of that to a man already beaten up, what will they do to you? That is why no one speaks up. Mars Hill is a bully just as Mark Driscoll is obviously a bully (in KJV English, a “striker”).
May they be made quickly “like chaff before the wind” so that no further needy souls be harmed.
Tod Merley
Saturday, March 17, 2012 at 2:36 pm
Tod I apologize for leaving your comment hanging without a response for so long. I thank you for sharing your story and am sorry to hear about your pain inside and outside of the church.
Pingback: A Pastor on "Church Discipline" | MUSICSRADIO ..Your Listening Station
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 2:27 pm
“But God is interested in the movie, not the snapshot”
Beautifully put.
Pingback: Wednesday Link List « Thinking Out Loud
Friday, March 2, 2012 at 6:47 am
I come from a church tradition (Anabaptist) that practices church discipline. In the old days, before one joined the church, the practices of Matthew 18 were thoroughly explained to you, and in your membership service, you accepted that as part of your life.
Obviously, it could be done in a harmful way. However, confessed sins were honored as done and past. My Dad looked at his church minutes back a century and saw the records of the all church council. People were discplined for going to a circus parade, for dressing too fancily, for wearing hats, etc. But the procedure was for the deacon to verify if this had happened and for the sinner to come before the council (members of the church, confess and then be forgiven.
In one instance, a young woman was pregnant and unmarried. She came before council, confessed her sin of extra-marital sex, and was forgiven. Then the head elder said, “The subject is now closed and anyone who mentions it again will come under danger of discipline.”
Several years ago, I was privileged to attend a church practicing discipline with a couple in adultery. The woman came, but not her husband. The man’s wife came, but not the man. They had both written apologies to the church. They both had teenage children in the church. I asked a member why this was not dealt with privately. She told me that the affair had become public knowledge across the community and so had to be publicly acknowledged. In any event, I saw such a loving outpouring of love to both women that it still makes me cry.
Following the correct steps of Matthew 18 keeps things private. It is meant to be healing and restorative.
I always felt that the purpose of shunning was to model where someone was in relationship to the community of God. Their lifestyle choices were putting them outside the life they had hoped to have, a life of fullness of joy in Jesus.
We had a young woman who was pregnant out of wedlock. Our church offered to financially support her and the baby until the child was grown, so that she would not feel a need to stay with the father for that reason. She refused. She was more than welcome to stay in the church and worship, but was asked to relinquish her leadership positions. Several years later, I was officiating at her marriage. The family all stays in touch with me, and wanted me to come back to officiate at the children’s weddings. Loving kindness…that is what is needed.
Saturday, March 17, 2012 at 2:38 pm
Marla thank you.
Friday, July 20, 2012 at 9:17 pm
Pastor, This is a well written article. Thank you. I agree, too often, we lose sight of the fact that there are several purposes to church discipline. In addition to protecting the flock and God’s name, it is a tool for restoration of sinners (and we are all sinners). As a result, the desired end point is repentance not confession. I know that you talked about the tender heart that is confessing, but there are people who confess because they have been caught. There are also people who say that they are sorry not because they have empathy for those that they harmed, but because they have been caught. Exposing sin is important, but repentance is the key.
In addition, when church discipline is practiced, the goal is to do it in a loving fashion. This includes not gossiping. As a result, the church often times is unable to share all of the details of the case.
In light of this, we must be very careful since we are really only seeing one side of the story. None of us were there. The principals that you wrote about are right on and I am not implying that you are pronouncing any judgement on Mars Hill, but we as Christ Followers reading this article must be aware of this potential pit fall.
Blessings,
Sunday, November 11, 2012 at 12:53 pm
WOW! This blows me away. My family and I just moved to the Seattle area from out of state. We had heard of Mars Hill from a friend back home who found Pastor Mark’s teachings on the web. We attended a sermon last year while visiting and very much enjoyed it. I like the teachings and lessons found in the sermons that I have heard so far.
An acquaintance in the Seattle area knew that my family and I were looking to join Mars Hill. He provided me with some web links, including this one here. I am blown away is all I can say! Mars Hill was made out to be scandalous. I’ll admit, I watched a web sermon and saw how Pastor Mark was asking for more money for their Everett Campus I believe it was. A graph was displayed showing how donations have gone down recently and need to go back up. That raised not only my eyebrow, but my wife’s as well.
We have been looking so hard for so long for a good church to belong to, even back home. Then I read all of this stuff about Mars Hill and it plants a seed of doubt. I know the devil loves to do things just like that. However; hearing others accounts of a church who’s pastor will have his congregation shun you if you speak out against him…. That is INSANE! How can this be? Did Jesus himself not preach tolerance? Now, don’t get me wrong, as tolerance in itself can be a double edged sword. One can tolerate some things wile not others. I know I fit into that category.
I really like the sermons that I have heard and think that Pastor Mark is a great speaker. I felt like God was speaking and delivering a message through the man. Then I read, and that shakes my very foundation. There are pastors who want nothing more than power and will stop at nothing to get it. Please don’t interpret that as anything against Pastor Mark, as it’s not. I’m referring to some pastors I know from back home who really had control issues.
What I have been reading about a scandal and people accusing Pastor Mark as being a controlling type and will sick his peeps on you so-to-speak if you question him or disagree with him has made me question where I want to go to worship. God said that I am the spiritual head of my household. It is my responsibility to provide spiritually for my family. If a pastor would have you shunned and go after you for questioning him, then that is not a church that I want to belong to. I understand that there is a time and place for everything, but we are supposed to question our leaders should we think that something is out of place or not accurate.
The impression that I am getting is that Pastor Mark is not the person that he preaches to be and that scares me as someone new to the area. I am a very vocal person and sometimes question authority. I remain respectful and will do it with tact, but if I view something as wrong, I would like a clarification if the need arises. I would not however; want the very person that I question to come at me with both barrels so-to-speak simply because I had the audacity to question them. That’s just lunacy! I was raised in a very strict Christian atmosphere that taught me that God is loving and tolerant but also jealous and will cast you out should you deny him. I don’t view Jesus as the preacher when he was alive who would have turned his back on a member of his flock for questioning him. But rather, take the time to show them the right way and speak to them while genuinely showing compassion and love while guiding them.
So, I guess I will hold off on any decisions to join any church like Mars Hill until I find out more about it. I am not casting stones as anyone as again, I enjoy the sermons that Pastor Mark preaches very much. I simply don’t want my family attending any church that doesn’t seem to be on the up & up. I’d welcome any replies as I really want to learn more as my family and I really need a church to attend as were lost in this city.