Jesus describes private correction in terms of what can be recovered when a brother listens. Paul orders the Corinthians to remove a man whose serious immorality they had tolerated, and he later urges the congregation to forgive and comfort a man for whom the punishment already imposed was sufficient. Each instruction addresses a different condition (Matthew 18:15–17; 1 Corinthians 5:1–13; 2 Corinthians 2:5–11). A wrong that can be corrected between two people calls for discretion. Established serious sin in which a professing believer persists can require action by the congregation. When a disciplined person repents, the congregation has work to do in receiving him. Faithful discipline depends on recognizing which responsibility applies and carrying it out for the good of the person and the congregation.

Private Correction and the Recovery of a Brother

Jesus’ instruction follows His account of a shepherd who searches for a straying sheep and rejoices when he finds it (Matthew 18:12–14). He then says, “If your brother sins, go reprove him between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother” (Matthew 18:15, UASV). The privacy of the first conversation serves the recovery Jesus has in view. The person addressing the wrong can explain what he knows, give his brother an opportunity to respond, and hear details he may have missed. If a man has knowingly passed on a false account about another believer, a private conversation gives him an opportunity to acknowledge the falsehood and correct it with the people who heard it. The brother who approaches him seeks a change in conduct and the repair of their relationship while keeping the discussion within the circle of those who need to know. Where threats or abuse are reported, a person can seek help and protection without first meeting the alleged offender alone.

The obligation to address sin also requires discernment about what has occurred. A difference in judgment about when to hold a meeting or how to divide a task may require a conversation, but it gives no grounds by itself for accusing another person of sin. A man who suspects that a brother broke a promise can begin by finding out what was actually promised and whether the brother understood the agreement in the same way. Proverbs 18:13 warns against answering before hearing, and that principle applies to the person who initiates correction as much as to anyone who later examines the matter. If the facts establish a wrong, he can name it plainly and explain why it needs to be put right. Galatians 6:1 directs those who seek to restore someone overtaken in wrongdoing to act with gentleness and to watch themselves, which gives the person offering correction a standard for his own conduct.

When the Matter Must Go Beyond Two People

If the brother refuses to listen, Jesus directs the person to take one or two others so that every word may be established by two or three witnesses (Matthew 18:16). The wording draws on Deuteronomy 19:15, where a charge requires more than a single witness to establish it. Those brought into the conversation serve a purpose by attending to the facts and hearing what is actually said. They can help identify what the parties agree happened, what remains disputed, and how the brother responds to correction. Bringing people along merely because they are friends of the person raising the concern would undermine that purpose. Their involvement gives the brother another opportunity to listen and gives the congregation firmer grounds for understanding the matter if it must later be brought before it.

Jesus directs that the matter be told to the congregation if the brother refuses to listen to those who came with the first person (Matthew 18:17). The congregation then has a responsibility to address what has been established and give the brother an opportunity to heed its correction. If he refuses even then, Jesus says he is to be regarded as a Gentile and a tax collector. In the progression of the passage, the man began as a brother being urged to listen and ends as someone who is no longer to be treated as a brother in fellowship. That change follows his refusal to hear the congregation itself. The passage gives no grounds for treating an unresolved allegation as established or for treating a brother as outside the congregation merely because he disputed the first account of what happened.

Serious Sin Already Known to the Congregation

The situation in Corinth had already become a congregational matter by the time Paul wrote. A man had his father’s wife, and Paul rebuked the congregation because it had responded with arrogance where it should have mourned (1 Corinthians 5:1–2). The wording describes a continuing relationship, and Paul speaks as one who has already reached a judgment concerning the man who did it (1 Corinthians 5:3). The congregation’s own response is part of what he corrects. Its members had allowed the man to remain among them while the relationship continued. Paul therefore directs action when they are assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus (1 Corinthians 5:4–5). The difference between this case and the opening step in Matthew 18:15 lies in the condition already before the church, since the misconduct in Corinth was known, serious, and continuing.

Paul describes the action as handing the man over to Satan and gives it a purpose directed toward salvation in the day of the Lord (1 Corinthians 5:5). The concrete action required of the congregation is stated at the end of the chapter, where Paul orders it to remove the wicked man from among them (1 Corinthians 5:13). Removing him would end the fellowship the congregation had been extending while his conduct contradicted his profession. The reference to the day of the Lord gives the action an aim beyond the congregation’s immediate discomfort or reputation. The man needed to face the gravity of the course he was taking while there was opportunity to turn from it. A congregation that acts on the passage therefore has reason to make clear what conduct has led to the action and what a genuine turning from it would involve.

Paul also tells the Corinthians that a little leaven leavens the whole lump (1 Corinthians 5:6–8). The image explains why they had to consider what their tolerance was teaching other believers. If a person could continue in a relationship Paul identifies as immoral while retaining his standing in the congregation, others could reasonably conclude that the same standard would be relaxed for them. The problem would reach people who had no direct involvement in the original conduct. Paul’s order to remove the man protects the congregation from giving that lesson by its own practice. It also makes the Corinthians accountable for the kind of fellowship they maintain, because the sincerity and truth Paul requires must govern their response to wrongdoing among them.

The Scope of Separation From Fellowship

Paul distinguishes people inside the congregation from those outside it (1 Corinthians 5:9–13). He explains that his earlier instruction about association did not require the Corinthians to withdraw from ordinary dealings with immoral people in the world. His direction concerns a person called a brother who persists in conduct such as sexual immorality, greed, idolatry, reviling, drunkenness, or extortion. Paul includes the instruction to refrain even from eating with such a person, giving the withdrawal of ordinary fellowship a concrete form (1 Corinthians 5:11). A congregation therefore cannot carry out the action in name while continuing to extend the same expressions of Christian fellowship as before. Paul leaves the judgment of outsiders to God and charges the congregation to judge the conduct of those who claim the standing of fellow believers.

Because removal has real consequences, a congregation must distinguish established serious wrongdoing from rumor, a difference of preference, or a fault that has been acknowledged and corrected. A report that a man took money dishonestly requires examination of what was entrusted to him, what he did with it, and what reliable witnesses or records can establish. If the facts confirm extortion and the man persists in defending or continuing his conduct, the congregation has a matter of the kind Paul identifies. If the facts establish a different wrong from the one alleged, any correction should address the wrong that can actually be shown. The same attention to evidence matters when the people involved are prominent or when the allegation is already widely discussed. The congregation acts faithfully when the facts and the applicable instruction, rather than the pressure of public opinion, determine what it does.

When Punishment Has Accomplished Its Work

Paul later addresses a man who had caused sorrow to the Corinthians and had received punishment from the majority (2 Corinthians 2:5–6). The man may be the offender of 1 Corinthians 5, but Paul gives neither his name nor the nature of his offense in this passage. His instructions are clear in either case. He declares the punishment sufficient and urges the congregation to forgive and comfort the man so that he is not overwhelmed by excessive sorrow (2 Corinthians 2:6–7). The people who had taken part in the correction now had to recognize when its purpose had been served. Continuing to treat the man as though no change had occurred would have frustrated the very recovery for which discipline had been undertaken.

Paul’s distinction elsewhere between godly sorrow and the sorrow of the world helps explain what a congregation looks for when a person seeks restoration (2 Corinthians 7:9–11). Godly sorrow produces repentance, and Paul identifies concrete responses in the Corinthians themselves when they took his correction seriously. A person can be distressed about losing his standing while continuing to justify the conduct that led to his removal. Repentance becomes evident when he acknowledges the wrong as wrong, ceases it, and takes steps to repair the harm he caused where he can. A man who took money dishonestly can give a truthful account of his conduct, return what he took as he is able, and accept oversight of any arrangements for repayment. These actions help the congregation understand what has changed and give substance to the request that he be received again.

Forgiving, Comforting, and Confirming Love

Paul says, “Therefore I urge you to confirm your love for him” (2 Corinthians 2:8, UASV). The man needed more than a private decision among those who had handled the case. He needed to be able to recognize the congregation’s forgiveness and receive its comfort. Where the congregation knew of the discipline, it can also be made aware that the person has been received so that members know how to respond to him. They can greet him as a brother, include him in ordinary fellowship, and encourage him in the conduct he has undertaken to change. Such actions give the congregation a way to confirm its love without repeatedly bringing the details of his wrong before people who have no need to hear them.

Restoration to fellowship and eligibility for a position of trust involve distinct judgments. A man who has repented can be received as a brother while the congregation applies the qualifications for oversight to any question of appointment (1 Timothy 3:2–7). The same distinction can matter when someone who misused money wants to handle congregational funds again. He can be welcomed and encouraged in faithful conduct while responsibility for money remains with people whose reliability in that work has been demonstrated (2 Corinthians 8:20–21). Members who were harmed may also need time to see whether commitments to repair the damage are being kept. The congregation can confirm its love for the repentant brother and continue to care for those affected by what he did.

Paul says that he forgives in the presence of Christ and connects the congregation’s response with denying Satan an advantage (2 Corinthians 2:10–11). The man’s excessive sorrow was a danger Paul explicitly wanted the church to avert. When a brother has turned from his wrongdoing, a member who once took part in correcting him can now help him regain a settled place among believers. That may mean sitting with him at a gathering, speaking to him without referring to the old offense, or helping him keep a commitment he made as part of putting things right. The response gives practical effect to Paul’s command to comfort the man whose punishment was sufficient. It also gives the repentant brother reason to see that those who once urged him to change are prepared to help him continue faithfully.

You May Also Enjoy

The Church’s Collective Role in Advancing the Gospel

About the Author

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS