As with your natural family, there will be quarrels in the church family; we will offend each other as we exercise ourselves in church life. The one thing that I have observed in all my years is how poorly offenses are handled in churches, even in doctrinally sound churches. I’ve always had these thoughts, and I want to share them… bear with me.
For the offended…
“Now if your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have gained your brother.But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that on the testimony of two or three witnesses every matter may be confirmed. And if he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, he is to be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.” Matthew 18:15-17
It has been my experience that people often do not share their anger or disagreement, or grievance with the one who hurt them, but go ahead to tell anyone else. I suppose because most of us are non-confrontational. In any case, eventually, the offender hears a twisted version of the event and is too consumed with being the “talk of the town” to consider the offence they may have either deliberately or inadvertently caused.
Sin is never to be treated casually or covered up. So, rather than let things fester and cause greater harm to our relationships with each other or even a rift in the house of God, listen to Leviticus 19:17: ““ ‘Do not hate a fellow Israelite in your heart. Rebuke your neighbor frankly so you will not share in their guilt. “ ‘Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord.” (Emphasis mine)
The word of God admonishes us to tell the offending party and seek resolution- if it is something that requires a conversation. We can always unilaterally forgive certain offences, especially if they are caused by personality differences as opposed to actual sin.
Is there a place for public rebuke?
Perhaps!
This question comes up a lot in light of Matthew 18, and Jesus’ command to seek private resolution.
There is an interesting story in Galatians 2:11-14?“But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.For prior to the coming of some men from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to withdraw and separate himself, fearing those from the circumcision.The rest of the Jews joined him in hypocrisy, with the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in the presence of all, “If you, being a Jew, live like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how is it that you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?”
Was Paul wrong to have publicly rebuked Peter for his action? If we are only to use Matthew 18:15-17 to resolve conflicts and handle sins in the community, shouldn’t Paul have called a respected Apostle like Peter aside to point out his wrong? Even though this was told by Paul, we do not get a sense that he viewed his own action, even under the supervision of the Holy Spirit, as he wrote the story, as sinful. In any rate, verse 13 tells us why a private rebuke would not have been the best course; “The rest of the Jews joined him in hypocrisy, with the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy.”
Peter’s sin affected the community of believers and had led others to sin too. It was not a personal disagreement between them- Paul was fighting for God’s glory. Rebuking Peter publicly meant he had at once rebuked everyone who had joined Peter in his sin. So, yes, there might be cases, even if rarely, that a public rebuke is more biblical than a private conversation, and I hope Paul’s story will guide us if that time ever comes.
For the offender…
Like I said at the beginning, we will hurt and offend each other if we are sharing our lives as people of God. What I disagree with is the way we excuse ungodly character in the church by always telling the offended party that God is using the offences caused and sins against him to refine him, thereby excusing the offender. The offender is hardly ever encouraged to repent or make restitution, so he goes away with no sense of the harm he has caused his brother or any thought of repentance from his sinful conduct.
In addition, nowhere in scripture are we encouraged to offend people that God might use it to work on their sanctification, and I am shocked that it’ll even cross our minds! Instead we are: warned not to offend (Luke 17:1), told to seek reconciliation with the one you have offended (Matt 5:22-23), urged to love and to use your spiritual gifts to build up one another and given a description of what that love and service looks like in the church (Rom 13:8-10, I Cor 12:7, Eph 4:11-13, Rom 12:6-22).
I know, it’s not common in Church for us to be told to seek reconciliation (or restitution for that matter)- the onus has always been on the person we offend to forgive us “seventy times seventy times”. But the offender needs to obey the Bible as much as the offended does; repent with deep sorrow for causing another to stumble and seek reconciliation (and if the matter necessitates it, restitution).
Again, the LORD God Almighty does not need us to sin against a brother in order that He may sanctify His child. Who even started saying that? Can He use your evil for the good of others? Absolutely yes. But should we go on “offending” so that good may come? May it never be! Let we, who have died to “offending another believer”, not go on offending other believers.
Bear in Mind…
Let these words remind us that there is a certain way we are supposed to be; like the one who has called us out of darkness into His wonderful light- “Therefore I, the prisoner of the Lord, urge you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called. Ephesians 4:1
