# Church Discipline For Non-Members?



## thistle93 (Jun 28, 2017)

Hi! Do you think there is a Biblical basis for practicing formal church discipline on those who are not members of the church? This would be for those who claim to be Christians but are merely attendees and have made no real commitment to the local body. The way I see it is there is a need to admonish them as a brother and sister in Christ but think matter of formal church discipline is reserved for church members who have come into covenant with local body and have agreed to be under the authority of leadership. Obviously, my main desire is to be faithful to Scripture but also disciplining non-members does not only seem impractical but also could bring the church into possibly getting entangled in legal issues. THOUGHTS?

One last thing. When church discipline is practiced and the final step is reached where the person is to be put out of the church, what does this mean? Does it mean the person is to be asked to leave and no longer allowed to attend the church? I do not believe this is the case. Rather I would see it that person is to be removed from membership of the church, treated as a unbeliever who needs the Gospel and is not allowed to participate in Lord's Supper. THOUGHTS?


For His Glory-
Matthew


----------



## Jack K (Jun 28, 2017)

For sure, you admonish them as necessary. This is a caring thing to do, and many people will listen to correction from a pastor even if they aren't fully cooperating by becoming members. Part of pastoring is bearing with the failings of others and trying to help them spiritually even amid serious lapses. A pastor should have some concern for everyone, not just those who are officially part of his flock, and not only in ideal situations.


----------



## RamistThomist (Jun 28, 2017)

Keep them from the Table. But that really only works if you have Table regularly.


----------



## Dachaser (Jun 28, 2017)

thistle93 said:


> Hi! Do you think there is a Biblical basis for practicing formal church discipline on those who are not members of the church? This would be for those who claim to be Christians but are merely attendees and have made no real commitment to the local body. The way I see it is there is a need to admonish them as a brother and sister in Christ but think matter of formal church discipline is reserved for church members who have come into covenant with local body and have agreed to be under the authority of leadership. Obviously, my main desire is to be faithful to Scripture but also disciplining non-members does not only seem impractical but also could bring the church into possibly getting entangled in legal issues. THOUGHTS?
> 
> One last thing. When church discipline is practiced and the final step is reached where the person is to be put out of the church, what does this mean? Does it mean the person is to be asked to leave and no longer allowed to attend the church? I do not believe this is the case. Rather I would see it that person is to be removed from membership of the church, treated as a unbeliever who needs the Gospel and is not allowed to participate in Lord's Supper. THOUGHTS?
> 
> ...


When does the church start to discipline those in the church in known sin then? Such as living together unwed, but just recently saved and still attending for example


----------



## Herald (Jun 28, 2017)

Dachaser said:


> When does the church start to discipline those in the church in known sin then? Such as living together unwed, but just recently saved and still attending for example



Church discipline begins when one Christian lovingly confronts another Christian. It's easy to fast forward to the point when the elders get involved, but the process begins in its infantile stages. In fact, it's possible that
an offending brother, or the one approaching him, may not even recognize it as church discipline. It's one brother's love for another brother being displayed via correction and admonition. Would it be that all sin can be dealt with at the brother-to-brother level. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Reactions: Amen 2


----------



## reaganmarsh (Jun 28, 2017)

Herald said:


> Church discipline begins when one Christian lovingly confronts another Christian. It's easy to fast forward to the point when the elders get involved, but the process begins in its infantile stages. In fact, it's possible that
> an offending brother, or the one approaching him, may not even recognize it as church discipline. It's one brother's love for another brother being displayed via correction and admonition. Would it be that all sin can be dealt with at the brother-to-brother level.



Amen and amen. Well said.

Reactions: Amen 1


----------



## yeutter (Jun 29, 2017)

Christian admonition is one element of Church discipline. Telling those who profess Christ that the have a responsibility to join a Church is one of the first steps in Christian admonition.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## tangleword (Jun 30, 2017)

For the second question on how to treat those who have gone to the last step of discipline, I have found Jeff Durham's "Concerning Scandal" to be helpful:

_What further duty is required of private professors towards heretics_
_that are cut off_
If it is asked ‘What duty further is called for from private persons towards
a person cut off?’ Answer. I suppose these things are called for:
1. Abstinence from unnecessary civil fellowship, as, not to frequent their
company, to visit them, to dine or sup with them, or to have them dining
or supping with us, or to use such familiarity in such things, as [ordinarily
is] with others, or possibly has been with them. So it is [in] _1 Cor._
_5_, and it is no less the people’s duty to carry so, that it may be a mean for
their edification, than proportionally it is the minister’s duty to instruct,
pass sentence, etc.
2. There would be an abstinence from Christian fellowship, that is, we
would not pray with them, read or confer of spiritual purposes (purposely
at least), nor do any such thing that belongs to Christian communion: that
is, to _reject him _in that sense from Christian fellowship, and to _account him_
_as an heathen man or publican. _In this respect, we cannot walk with an excommunicate
man, as we may walk with other Christians. And in the first
respect, we cannot walk with them, as we may walk with other heathens,
that, it may be, are guilty of as gross sins upon the matter. For the Word of
the Lord, puts this difference expressly between them and these who are
simply heathens (_1 Cor. 5_).
3. Yet even then prayer may be made for them. For excommunication is
no evidence that a person has sinned the sin against the Holy Ghost, or that
their sin is a sin unto death. And their necessities, if they are in want, may
and should be supplied, because they are men, and it is natural to supply
such. They may be helped also against unjust violence, or from any personal
hazard, if they fall in it. And as occasion offers, folks may give a weighty serious
word of admonition unto them, and such like. Because by such means,
the end of the sentence and its weight are furthered, and not weakened.
4. These that are in natural relations, ought to walk in the duties of them,
as husbands and wives, parents and children, masters and servants, magistrates
and subjects, etc., for what nature binds, the church does not loose.
5. Men may follow civil business, as paying or exacting payment of debts,
buying or selling, and may walk in such things as are requisite for humane
fellowship and society; because, though church censures are to humble and
shame men, by bearing in on them their sinfulness, yet it is not to undo
them, and simply to take away a being from them.
6. Yet all these things would be done with them in such a manner, as (1),
the persons may show their indignation at their way, even when they express
tenderness to their persons. (2) It would be done in a different manner
from what [ordinarily is] with others not under such a sentence, that
so they may bear out their respect to the sentence, even when they show
respect to them. Therefore, there would not be such frequency in meddling
with such persons, nor would it be with familiarity or many words, and
long discourses to other purposes, nor with laughing, and with such cheerfulness,
intimacy or complacency, as is used with others. But, in a word, the
business would be done, and other things abstained from. (3) When what is
necessary is past, except it is on necessity, folks would not eat or drink with
them at the time of doing their business, or after the closing of the same;
because that does not necessarily belong to them as men, and by so doing,
the due distance would not be kept. And this is the great practical [point],
so to carry to them as the weight of the sentence is not lessened, nor they
prejudged of what otherways is necessary to their being, but that so every
opportunity may be taken, whereby their edification may be advanced.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Dachaser (Jun 30, 2017)

Herald said:


> Church discipline begins when one Christian lovingly confronts another Christian. It's easy to fast forward to the point when the elders get involved, but the process begins in its infantile stages. In fact, it's possible that
> an offending brother, or the one approaching him, may not even recognize it as church discipline. It's one brother's love for another brother being displayed via correction and admonition. Would it be that all sin can be dealt with at the brother-to-brother level.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


You have a very good point here, as Jesus did tell us that the elders and pastor and the Body itself as like the last resort, and that we should in love rebuke and confront the sin issue early on.


----------

