Fourteenth Sunday after Pentecost
Shelagh Balfour

MATTHEW 18:15-20

Church discipline is not a concept one often hears discussed among Anglicans. Discipline is a word that can make us a bit twitchy because it now carries a heavy assumption of punishment. Unfortunately, that assumption has coloured the understanding of the gospel we have just heard. Even so, there are Christian traditions that regard it as one of the defining principles of community life, and not because they are rigid or rule oriented. Which makes it worth unpacking a bit this morning. In doing that unpacking, I am relying primarily on the work of John Howard Yoder, Mennonite theologian and ethicist.

A few years ago, when St. Peter’s was studying a book called Difficult Conversations, one of our first steps was to spend time with today’s Gospel reading. The book itself is about ways to approach those conversations we would really rather not have at all. The kinds that require us to confront someone we believe is causing a problem. Today’s Gospel reading describes such a situation and tell us the way the church is called to respond.

As I noted, this teaching from Matthew has been regarded as punitive – kind of like progressive discipline for churches. For some it was more about “rules and regulations” than “love and forgiveness”. In addition, it was believed that when Jesus said a person should be treated as a Gentile and a tax collector he meant they should be treated as an “irreclaimable outsider”. Exiled from the community. All of which seemed contrary to Jesus’ character as expressed in the gospels

The context of this reading suggests otherwise. Chapter 18 in Matthew is an extended discussion between Jesus and his disciples. It begins talking about who will enter the kingdom of heaven, and ends with a parable about forgiveness. Today’s reading sits right in the middle. Immediately before it, Jesus told his disciples the story of the shepherd leaving his 99 sheep to go out and rescue one that was lost. He said explicitly that this was about the lengths to which our Father in heaven would go to rescue someone who had gone astray. Which doesn’t fit with the notion of the one who strays being an “irreclaimable outsider”.

Immediately after today’s reading, Peter asked Jesus “So, if another member of the church sins against me, how often should I forgive?” We know the familiar answer, “seventy time seven”, which is to say “as many times as it takes”. So, if we read the text in its context, we see that it is not contrary to Jesus’ overall teaching. It should be read through a lens of love and forgiveness. And according to John Yoder, this is what the process of church discipline does. Reconciliation and restoration of fellowship is the only worthy motive for engaging this process

Before we look at the text, we ought to talk about what is meant by sin in the context of this reading. The word sin also carries a lot of baggage and we may all have different ideas of what it means. What I am talking about in this context is words or actions which cause harm to an individual in the church or to the church community as a whole. As the body of Christ, we are responsible for and to one another. Paul tells us in the first letter to the Corinthians. If one member [of the body] suffers, all suffer together with it; if one member is honoured, all rejoice together with it. Sin impairs the unity of the body.

And a word about forgiveness. Peter’s question is a clue to us that forgiveness is understood to be the response to an offence. It’s a given that he would forgive the person, he’s just not sure how many times. The parable that follows his question is a reminder that we forgive because we are forgiven. That is to say, when you or I react to the sins of another, we do so with humility and concern for the other, understanding that we also are sinners in need of forgiveness.

So, to the text. Jesus said: “If another member of the church sins, go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone.” There are a couple of reasons for this approach, both arising out of concern for the one believed to be at fault. The first is confidentiality. If the issue can be resolved between the two of you, then that person’s behaviour doesn’t need to be spread about to others. No one else ought to know. The second reason is that, prior to talking to the other person you don’t have all the facts. You have your own perceptions of what happened, but you don’t have theirs. So your first step is not one of accusing, but of listening. The book Difficult Conversations calls this a learning conversation, listening to understand each other’s point of view. This conversation itself will often lead to reconciliation.

If it doesn’t though, the text says, bring a couple of people to bear witness. John Yoder likens this to bringing in wise council, someone who can help facilitate the conversation, offer perspectives neither of you may have thought of. If that also doesn’t lead to resolution, the perspective of those people will help guide the next step, bringing the situation to the church. This step sounds a bit daunting to me because I tend to get a picture of the offending person standing in front of the whole church body and being judged. But that’s a holdover of punitive thinking and is not the way it would unfold. How it does unfold will depend on the church and the situation. Keep in mind, the goal of the process is reconciliation and restoration of fellowship.

The critical thing in this step is the statement about treating a person as a Gentile and a tax collector. A couple of things can guide our understanding here. The story of the lost sheep told just before this teaching and how Jesus actually treated Gentiles and tax collectors during his ministry. Jesus welcomed them and ate with them. His behaviour was scandalous to the established church authorities precisely because he associated with Gentiles and tax collectors.

Having gone through this process to try to resolve a situation and restore community, it may be that the church and the person do find they need to part company. But, rather than casting someone out as an irreclaimable outsider, scripture makes clear that the church is called to continue to seek reconciliation, to regain the one who was lost to them. That person’s wellbeing and salvation continue to be the concern of the body.

What this gospel portion is, then, is a loving formula for healthy community. The wellbeing of each member of the church and the body as a whole, is the responsibility of everyone in that community. Our goal in confronting destructive behaviour when it happens is reconciliation and restoration of fellowship. We are called to do this, not because it’s the rule and we have to follow it. We do it because this is what Jesus has done for us. We do it because God seeks us when we stray and forgives us when we repent and return. There is never a time when God considers us irreclaimable outsiders. With this mighty love and forgiveness always available to us, we are empowered by the Holy Spirit to provide the same for one another. Amen.