Church Discipline in Matthew 18 and 1 Timothy 5

by Jessica G. and Quinn

First, some introductory thoughts. 

Scripture offers two primary passages on the process of church discipline. We acknowledge that there are different teachings on how to apply Matthew 18 and 1 Timothy 5.  Friday Night does not have a written (or unwritten) process for holding an elder accountable. We also are unable to trust Dave to create a written process. Dave misled Jessica about SBC’s and CRU’s oversight and authority of Friday Night (see The Peerless Papa Dave). When Friday Night attenders had concerns or conflicts with Dave, he would use tactics like avoidance and lying by omission in order to deceive the men he claimed were holding him accountable (see Inner Circle Dynamics for more info). This has necessitated the development of our own process. Thus we leaned heavily on 1 Timothy 5. We have interpreted it to the best of our ability, attempting to be faithful to the text, consistent with general scriptural principles, and focused on protecting the church from spiritual abuse. We have also worked to prioritize protecting victims because we are also aware that Matthew 18 has been used to silence victims.

The primary argument used to defend Dave Cottrell and justify why he should not be held accountable or face any actions that might threaten his position in ministry is the claim that he has produced significant "good fruit." Dave himself uses this argument to defend his ministry, and his supporters say the same thing. Even some who acknowledge his abusive behavior admit that Dave has done some good. We assert though that regardless of the definition or measure of good fruit, no amount of good fruit compensates for Dave’s spiritual abuse.  We see this principle both in the Bible and in the secular justice system. Within the justice system, no amount of philanthropy can erase a crime. Biblically, we needed Jesus to die for our sins, because our good works could not justify us.

*********************************************

Matthew 18:15–17 (NAS95)

““If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother. “But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that BY THE MOUTH OF TWO OR THREE WITNESSES EVERY FACT MAY BE CONFIRMED. “If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.”

Matthew 18 deals with the generic case of church discipline: “if your brother sins” (my emphasis).

Four steps are outlined:

-       One on one

-       [Two or three] on one

-       [The church] on one

-       Excommunicate

Notes:

-       This isn’t talking about someone who listens, acknowledges fault, and simply falls into the same sin again.  It’s talking about someone who does not listen when you confront them with their sin.

-       There is a principle at play of protecting the reputation of the alleged offender, but gradually removing that protection as he digs his heels in.

-       Excommunication is required if he won’t listen to the church, not an endless cycle of “showing grace” or “keeping them in community” when they don’t even acknowledge fault.  “Showing grace” to an arrogant person who refuses to acknowledge their own sin puts the rest of the body in danger.

1 Timothy 5:19–22 (NAS95)

“Do not receive an accusation against an elder except on the basis of two or three witnesses. Those who continue in sin, rebuke in the presence of all, so that the rest also will be fearful of sinning. I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of His chosen angels, to maintain these principles without bias, doing nothing in a spirit of partiality. Do not lay hands upon anyone too hastily and thereby share responsibility for the sins of others; keep yourself free from sin.”

These verses pertain specifically to accusations against elders.

Key differences between these verses and Matthew 18:

-       The assumption seems to be that Timothy would be there to receive an accusation against an elder.  Timothy himself is not labeled an elder in scripture.  However, he seems to have a prominent role – see 1 Tim 1:3, for example.

-       Whereas in Matthew 18 the testimony of a single witness must be taken seriously, Timothy is supposed to disregard an accusation unless there are at least two witnesses.

-       However, once two or three witnesses are brought and the elder continues in sin, the command is to rebuke in the presence of all.

-       The Greek for rebuke here is elencho.

-       To express strong disapproval of someone’s action, reprove, correct (BDAG definition)

-       If a pastor is caught in adultery, rebuke means expressing strong disapproval of his adultery, not having him step down from ministry for unspecified reasons.

-       All means all. 

-       A closed-door meeting with a board of directors is not “in the presence of all.”

-       Paul explicitly says the purpose is to inspire fear in “the rest.”  It’s unclear whether “the rest” is the whole church, or the other elders.

-       Regardless, the other elders would be included.  In general, it is important for people in positions of power to have a healthy fear of those under their authority.  Otherwise, the temptation to abuse that power becomes too great.

-       A very strong warning is made against bias / partiality.  What does bias look like in a situation with a sinning elder?

-       It could be negative bias:

-       I don’t like his teaching, or he said something that offended me, so I will err on the side of the accusers.

-       However, it seems more likely to be positive bias:

-       “Yes, there appear to be credible accusations / evidence, but he’s done so much good it’s hard to believe he could be guilty of these things.”

-       “There is some bad fruit, but if we go forward with a public rebuke, it will destroy the ministry / stop the good things from happening / cause people to lose their faith”

-       “We need to show grace / give the benefit of the doubt” (where the same degree of leeway would never be afforded to anyone else)

-       “We need to forgive” (where “forgiving” means retaining a disqualified elder in a position of authority)

-       “We need to focus on unity” (deflecting the conversation away from the accusations)

-       “No one’s perfect” (ignoring the requirement to hear the accusations and follow the process outlined by Paul)

-       Don’t be hasty.

-       Don’t sin in the process of bringing accusation / rebuke.

For specific information on why we went about this process the way we did, see FAQ.