ARTICLE LXXII.

PRINCIPLES OF CHURCH DISCIPLINE.

BY PREST. A. MAHAN.

It is quite common for individuals to assume particular declarations of scripture designed only to be applied to particular and specific cases, as giving universal rules to be applied in. all cases of every kind. The result is that one part of inspiration is placed in palpable contradiction to others equally important and sacred. An error of this kind has, in our judgment, been fallen into by a large part of the church, in the assumption that the directions given, Matt. 18: 15-17 was designed as law universal for discipline in respect to all forms of offences whatever, whether individual or public; when in fact, as we shall see hereafter, it was given as a particular rule for specified cases, to wit, individual and private offences. The result of this assumption has been that directions equally sacred pertaining to offences of other kinds, have been totally overlooked. The church has also been left without any settled principles which she could intelligently apply to all forms of offences demanding discipline. Suppose for example, a member of a church has gone to distant regions and there become a notorious pirate, or robber. The church has proof the most absolute of his guilt. Yet she can, by no possibility get to him, so as to take the first and second steps with him. What must be done? If the passage under consideration be assumed as giving law universal for all forms of offences, the church must retain the wretch in her bosom till his dying day. She can pass no vote of censure or suspension in respect to him. Indeed, she can, as a body, take no cognizance of his crimes in any form whatever. For the offence, according to this view of the subject, is never to be so much as named in the church, till after the first and second steps have been taken. The church therefore has no right to consider any offence in any form. She has no right to appoint a committee to investigate evil reports, or to take the steps referred to.. She has no right to do any thing about the offences of any of

her members, till after the case is submitted to her adjudication, by those who have, as individuals, in their pirvate capacity, taken these steps and failed to bring the offenders to repentance. To do so, would be to set aside a part of the solemn direction of our Savior, and if a part may be thus set aside, why may not the whole be?

Further, let us suppose that the offender above referred to, should, every time the church is engaged in celebrating the Lord's supper, appear in her midst, and at the close escape without the possibility of individuals taking the first and second steps in a process of discipline. The church in that case, would be bound to distribute the elements to him, as a brother beloved, and continue to do so every time she celebrated the ordinance. She can know no individual of her body in any other relation, till after those steps have been taken. Such are the necessary and undeniable consequences of assuming this passage as law universal for discipline in respect to all forms of offences. More of this hereafter.

Special attention is now invited to a consideration of other passages of Scripture bearing upon our present inquiries, for the purpose of a clear and distinct understanding of the true principles of discipline to be applied in all cases. We will introduce the subject by a reference, as the basis of our elucidations, to 2 Cor. vii; 9-11.

"Now I rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance: for ye were made sorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive damage by us in nothing. For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death. For behold this self-same thing, that ye sorrowed after a godly sort, what carefulness it wrought in you, yea, what clearing of yourselves, yea, what indignation, yea, what fear, yea, what vehement desire, yea, what zeal, yea, what revenge! In all things ye have approved yourselves to be clear in this matter."

Here we have the form which true repentance for a sin with which the apostle had charged the church at Corinth, in the preceding epistle, assumed, in consequence of the expostulations contained in that epistle. An individual, a member of the church, had been guilty of marrying the wife of his own father, the father being still alive. Compare verse 12 of the chapter before us, with 1 Corinthians, 5: 1. The church, instead of excommunicating the offender, as they were bound to have done at once, had not even commenced a process of discipline with him in any form. The consequence of such a sin persisted in on the part of the church,

would be the destruction of the offender himself, in the first instance, and in the next, the fatal corruption of the church who should retain such a criminal in her bosom.

"For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such an one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us."-1 Cor. 5: 3-7.

"That the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus," that is, the only hope of saving the offender himself is his prompt excommunication. ""A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump," that is, you will yourselves, if you do not put him away from among you, become as corrupt and guilty as he himself is. The reader will mark particularly the directions which inspiration required the church to pursue in the case referred to. It was not that they should take the first and second steps in discipline, and if these, failed, then to pronounce sentence of excommunication. was not that they should attempt his reformation in the church, and thus failing to proceed to extremities. One direction and only one was given, and that was, that as soon as the church should come together, to pronounce sentence of excommunication upon him.

It

"And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among. For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus."

The great reason urged for this course was, as we have seen, that it was the only means by which the individual could be reclaimed, on the one hand, and the church saved from corruption on the other.

For a more full understanding of this subject, we now turn to a consideration of the effects produced upon the church at Corinth, by the reasonings and expostulations of the apostle. The first result was deep sorrow and regret on account of the course which they had pursued relatively to

T

the criminal. The next was, that this sorrow, which "was after a godly sort," induced in them a form of repentance in all respects approved of God, a repentance no elements of which they had occasion to repent of. This repentance was followed by a course of conduct in all respects what it should have been. The characteristics of the repentance induced by the godly sorrow exercised by the church, as enumerated by the apostle are the following. Carefulness. "What carefulness it [godly sorrow] wrought in you," that is, what haste, promptitude, earnest effort, forwardness to do the thing required, to wit, excommunicate the offender. "What clearing of yourselves," that is, apologising. Those who had not partaken of the sin of the church in the flagrant neglect of duty, exposed the fact, and showed to Titus, Paul's messenger, that they were innocent in the matter. Those, on the other hand, who had sinned, confessed the fact, and condemned and reprobated the sin of the offender, and their own conduct relatively to it. What indignation, that is, what deep reprobation of the sin, and the sinner who had perpetrated the sin. "What fear," that is, as Mr. Barnes says, "fear lest the thing should be repeated. Fear lest it should not be entirely removed." It implies a fear, that the entire evil might not be corrected, and their duty in the case not fully complied with. "What zeal," zeal to remove the sin by taking the offender from their midst, and doing all that duty required in the case. What revenge, that is, what prompt and ready execution of the sentence of excommunication upon the offender. "In all things ye have approved yourselves to be clear in this matter, that is, the entire state of mind induced by the godly sorrow which you exercised, and the course pursued under its influence is what it should have been. The following important principles pertaining to the discipline of offenders are clearly deducible from the case before us, as binding the church in all similar cases.

1. The first, and only thing for the church to do in all such cases, is to excommunicate the offender, his guilt being clearly ascertained.

2. Any other course, in such cases, tends to the destruction of the individual, and the corruption of the church, and to no other result whatever.

3. No church is in a state which God fully approves, who is not ready thus to avenge all such offences. The carefulness, the clearing of themselves, the indignation, the

fear, the vehement desire, the zeal, the revenge excercised by the Corinthian church, is the only state of mind and course of conduct which God approves, and will sanction in respect to all similar offenders.

Now if we can clearly ascertain the characteristics of the offence under consideration, we shall have developed an important principle of discipline to be applied in all cases of a given character. What, then, are the distinguishing characteristics of this case?

One thing is quite evident in respect to it. It was an offence of such a nature, that it must have been perpetrated with a distinct knowledge of the fact that it was sin. No doubt could have rested upon the mind of the offender in respect to its character as sin. When he perpetrated it, he did it with a distinct knowledge of its criminality.

Equally evident is the fact, that it was a deliberate offence. The individual did not fall in consequence of having come under some sudden, unexpected temptation. The act was deliberately performed with a distinct knowledge of its character as sin.

It was, finally, a crime, perpetrated under such circumstances as clearly to indicate established character. The man had entered upon his career of crime with the purpose distinctly and deliberately formed to continue in it. Such a case differs fundamentally from crimes, however aggravated in themselves, which are committed under the influence of some sudden temptation. The latter may, and as we shall see in the progress of this article, do require a different course of treatment from the former. Now if we suppose, as all christians will admit, that the inspired direction of the apostle in the case before us is of any authority at all in respect to the church at the present time, it will follow, as a necessary consequence, that whenever a case occurs bearing the same fundamental characteristics that this one does, the same course of procedure laid down for this one case, will also bind the church in the case supposed. To deny this is to assume that inspired directions for specific cases are not law for us in cases precisely similar. This would render entirely nugatory a vast majority of the precepts of the Bible; for they are given in this precise form. Inspiration affirms what is demanded in a specific case, leaving us to apply the - principle thus revealed to all similar cases.

What, then, is the principle or law of discipline revealed in the inspired direction of the apostle in this one specific