In our 21st century technologically sophisticated churches, we seem to be quite content to go through the motions of professing Evangelicalism. We have gimmicks to get people to come to our church (sometimes overtly seducing them from other congregations), whether podcasts, glittering provocative billboards, blogs, snazzy websites, and archived sermons, or famous figures leading financial seminars, relationship classes, and a host of causes or “ministries”. The worship leader sings with great enthusiasm and the people, for the most part, follow with hands raised, clapping, with shouts of “Hallelujah”. The pastor preaches with fervency, handkerchief in hand, as the congregation follows with a hearty “Amen” or “Praise the Lord”. Everyone seems to be amiable during the time of friendship, greeting one another in the name of the Lord with smiles, asking, “How are you, brother?” or at least a friendly “hello”. We go to church, dressing comfortably, and sing up-beat songs, hear motivational sermons to do the Biblical thing, and then return to a working world, passing a sign on the perimeter fence, “YOU ARE NOW ENTERING THE MISSION FIELD”. Everything seems “hunky-dory”. We have our own culture it seems, at least for a day.
We seem to have many of the outward components that make for a healthy church, and yet are we any more healthy than the world? How can it be that George Barna polls evangelicals in America and finds the same rate of divorce and abortion? Aren’t the sanctity of human life and the importance of the traditional family cornerstones of the modern Evangelical conservative Church? While there are many failings to be found in the current American church (many of them in my own heart) and many topics to be addressed, the purpose of this post is to focus on the important and often neglected subject of community.
Over the years, I have read about the Acts chapter 2 church experience and pined, along with, I’m sure, countless others, for days of glory, such as theirs. As a people, we often look back to what they did as the first “church” and try to recreate their actions and, hopefully, their results. I think, we figure, if we can imitate what they did, maybe we could repeat their power and impact, not considering their unique situation and role that they had in church history. (This is not to say that we can’t have a similar experience, just that they were uniquely situated as the first gathered body of witnesses to our Lord’s resurrection.) Though we can learn a lot from the first church, copying their example as a formula will not guarantee similar results. Let take a look though at what they did.
Acts 2:42
And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers. 43 Then fear came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles. 44 Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common, 45 and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need. 46 So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart, 47 praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church[h] daily those who were being saved.
Acts 4:32
Now the multitude of those who believed were of one heart and one soul; neither did anyone say that any of the things he possessed was his own, but they had all things in common. 33 And with great power the apostles gave witness to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And great grace was upon them all. 34 Nor was there anyone among them who lacked; for all who were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the proceeds of the things that were sold, 35 and laid them at the apostles’ feet; and they distributed to each as anyone had need.
What a community they had! The first thing we learn is that they “they continued steadfastly in the apostles doctrine”. In other words, doctrinal integrity was important to them. This was not just an academic exercise, or an early version of “Bible trivial pursuit”. This was an attempt to found all that they were doing upon the Word of God, His revelation, both in terms of Old Testament Scriptures and the teaching being declared and taught by the apostles (no New Testament yet). It would take the death of the last apostle to finally complete the entire canon (though writers other than apostles were so inspired and included in the canon) and another thousand years plus to determine what would comprise the books of the Bible. Secondly came, (and I’m going to lump them together because they all come under the same category) “fellowship… the breaking of bread, and…prayers”. Since community is the target of this post, may we examine this a little more closely? As I have been enjoying Genesis 1 and 2, I have noticed something interesting. After God created, He worked with the substance of His creation. He “divided”, “separated”, “planted”, and “made”, to mention just a few aspects of His creativity. In other words, He separated the matter into different types. Community implies, two groups of people, a people “in” the group and a people “outside” of that group. People are to come into the group called “the Church”, though some leave the group (we’ll talk more about that later), and a clear and definite line needs to exist between the “part of” and the “separate from”, at least in regard to outward behavior, something that can be quite hard to read. Now the text says that those within invested time, meals, money and prayer in each other. This is what distinguished them from those on the outside. In other words, God pricked their own “hearts to the quick” (I love the term, “cut to the quick”; if you ever made a mistake trimming your dogs nails, you have a good working illustration of what that means) so that their hearts were changed. They wanted to no longer to live for themselves but for Him and for each other. They encountered His sacrificial love, and, therefore, were willing to sacrifice for one another. Brothers, look at us as the representatives of Christ’s body in America. Are we so busy “living life” that we have no time to share with one another? Are we so invested in a home or car payment that we have no money to give to the “least among us”? And we are so proud, that we don’t have the humility to invite a brother or sister into our homes, to share a meal or pray with them, let alone disciple or be discipled.
While this community of believers was growing exponentially, according to God’s will, their lives, both in word and deed, expressed the gospel, and they impacted their sphere of influence (friends/family, work, neighborhood, or market place). Their lives were changing with their convictions and they were outrageous to make it known. Remember, Jesus said, “they shall know you are my disciples by your love for one another”. Do we have this kind of love, God’s love for our brothers and sisters? As we read in the passages listed above, they truly were committed to each other and were willing to be poured for one another. (This does not mean that they were always smiling, happy, and trial free. They loved each other within the context of their lives (discrimination, hardship, illness, financial woe, and persecution included), however imperfectly, with sinful hearts, and yet, willing to sacrifice much. I have to ask, does this characterize our churches? Does this characterize me? Am I willing to sacrifice the comforts of life? Am I willing to not only call Him Lord but obey Him as Lord? Am I willing to pick up my cross, deny myself and follow Him? This was their community. It was growing as people were drawn to Christ. They had problems like ethnic strife (Jew and Gentile), neglect of the poor and needy (widows), and moralism among professing believers (Judaizers who desired a synthesis between Judaism and Christianity in the name of preserving their culture and heritage) even within the true community, so all was not a bed of roses. They still had to depend on Christ to protect them from the daily struggle against sin, selfishness, and self-righteousness, remembering that the power of the Gospel, the message that first drew them to Him, would be the only message that would transform them. Now, who is truly a part of the community of believers and who is not is not an easy thing to discern. Sometimes, we even have it backwards. The outwardly immature may be the believer while the outwardly mature may just be putting on a good show.
The believers addressed sin in their midst through a mechanism Jesus put in place that we’ll look at shortly. Though we can only see the visible church and not the true invisible one, we must be vigilant to protect the community from the errors of false doctrine, the corruption of licentiousness and legalism, and the clamor of contention and strife, while offering grace to the fallen and maintaining forgiveness and love for the brethren. How to do this is often a fine line.
Before we look at the next Scripture, let’s be reminded that Jesus taught us that there are “wheat” and “tares” in God’s field. He also reminded us that it is not our responsibility to separate them. The angels at the end of the age would do that. Instead, He gave us a means of maintaining purity and peace within the covenant community. Let’s now look at another passage before we get to another point of discussion I’d like to examine.
1 But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession. 2 And he kept back part of the proceeds, his wife also being aware of it, and brought a certain part and laid it at the apostles’ feet. 3 But Peter said, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back part of the price of the land for yourself? 4 While it remained, was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own control? Why have you conceived this thing in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God.”
5 Then Ananias, hearing these words, fell down and breathed his last. So great fear came upon all those who heard these things. 6 And the young men arose and wrapped him up, carried him out, and buried him.
7 Now it was about three hours later when his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. 8 And Peter answered her, “Tell me whether you sold the land for so much?”
She said, “Yes, for so much.”
9 Then Peter said to her, “How is it that you have agreed together to test the Spirit of the Lord? Look, the feet of those who have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out.” 10 Then immediately she fell down at his feet and breathed her last. And the young men came in and found her dead, and carrying her out, buried her by her husband. 11 So great fear came upon all the church and upon all who heard these things. 12 And through the hands of the apostles many signs and wonders were done among the people. And they were all with one accord in Solomon’s Porch. 13 Yet none of the rest dared join them, but the people esteemed them highly. 14 And believers were increasingly added to the Lord, multitudes of both men and women, 15 so that they brought the sick out into the streets and laid them on beds and couches, that at least the shadow of Peter passing by might fall on some of them. 16 Also a multitude gathered from the surrounding cities to Jerusalem, bringing sick people and those who were tormented by unclean spirits, and they were all healed.”
Now the problem in this passage within the community was not that Ananias and Sapphira weren’t willing to give up their property. I once asked my capitalist CEO brother how he described this passage. After I finished reading it to him, he mentioned one word, “communism”. Now, if those who had means were forced to give for the good of all (like the direction our current tax system seems to be moving), we would have a form of socialism. The difference between that observation and the text was motive. These men and women of means gave because they wanted to, not because they had to. Ananias and his wife had no heart of generosity and sense of sacrifice for others, but only one of self-promotion and pride. They desired to be perceived as self-sacrificing without actually sacrificing. As we read in the passage, the Spirit of God dealt with their sin immediately and severely. Here were two people who professed “membership” in the covenant community but denied it in their actions and, therefore, faced severe consequence. This, I argue, is an important part of maintaining the purity and peace of the community. The word we use today is “church discipline”. This not only encouraged godliness and preservation in the community but also ended up encouraging conversion outside the community. But where is this practiced today in the church?
How do we deal with sin in the church? What should be our attitude? Is there pardon and forgiveness to be found or just condemnation for not keeping to the standards? Is there a point when the unrepentant should be removed from the group for the good and witness of the group, and the glory of His name? The above passage in Acts 5 certainly exposes not only motive but also a corresponding reaction. The departure from the expected standard was taken as a serious aberration in behavior that resulted not only in the compromise of the standard and witness of the group, but also a “blaspheming of the name of Christ”. Let’s now take a look at Matthew 18.
Matthew 18:15 “Moreover if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he will not hear, take with you one or two more, that ‘by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.’[b] 17 And if he refuses to hear them, tell it to the church. But if he refuses even to hear the church, let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector.
We are given three steps to deal with sin, 1) if you are sinned against, go tell the person, 2) if he will not repent, bring someone with you, and 3) if he won’t repent still, tell it to the church that he may be “put out” or treated like an unbeliever. Notice though, that the ultimate aim is to “gain your brother”. We read, 2 Thessalonians 3: 14, “And if anyone does not obey our word in this epistle, note that person and do not keep company with him, that he may be ashamed. 15 Yet do not count him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother.” The other huge assumption is that we are a correctable and repentant society. As sinners, imputed the righteousness of Christ, we of all people should be correctable. However, this is often not the case. These are three steps that Christ has given us to help keep the “community” healthy and the line of demarcation clear between those within and those without. If we fail to follow the guidelines, we compromise the integrity of the Body, being either too tolerant of sin, or too harsh towards the sinner. Let’s look at each one a little closer. Step 1 assumes that we will be both loving and courageous enough to speak out. It assumes that we will be on guard for the purity of the group and that we will care enough to approach a brother in the right spirit. One can be defensive and react out of anger or one can ignore (or “forgive”) the wrong, and miss our responsibility as to what we are called to do (“restore and “gain” our brother). Step 2 requires that we take one or two others, not only to be witness to the confrontation or rebuke but also to help encourage the one offended in boldness and the one offending in repentance. This assumes also that those accompanying the offended come with a heart that offers healing, seeking not just repentance but also restoration to the community. Lastly, if the offender does not repent, the ultimate step should not be avoided.
A few warnings before I discuss this last extreme and important step to possible and hopeful restoration. During the middle ages, the popes exercised and wielded terrific power and authority, justifiably (at least in His mind) for one main reason, he had the “keys of the kingdom”. Based on a twisted understanding of Mt. 16:18, “And I will give you (Peter) the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven”, the pope’s claim to divine authority was unquestioned. Claiming this authority, the pontiff was able to make kings bow before him by threatening excommunication of emperors and their subjects. In such a climate of superstition and Biblical illiteracy, the masses were terrified. Not realizing the Biblically granted priesthood of the believer, excommunication to a medieval subject meant denial of access to the sacraments by the “mother church”, especially communion, which was the medieval lifeline to Christ. No communion, no forgiveness, no salvation. What a horrible fate would await those cut off from the “church”. This point is well described in the 1964 movie, Becket, featuring Peter O’Toole as Henry II and Richard Burton as Thomas a Beckett. This film describes the king’s friendship with and admiration of Thomas Becket, the appointment of his friend to the position of archbishop of Canterbury, and the betrayal of that friendship by Becket’s conviction that he had a duty before God not to be a pawn of the king, a conviction he acquires towards the movie’s climax. The highlight of the film is when Becket and the clergy excommunicate Lord Gilbert, one of the king’s men. Take a look the video attachment at:
While vivid and powerful, it does overstep the ultimate Biblical premise that repentance is the desired end. And yet, it is a powerful example of the seriousness of “putting out”, dis-fellowshiping, or excommunication.
A healthy third step requires a few things to be very seriously pondered. First, the entire congregation is to be informed so that appropriate action can be taken towards the offender. (I might say this last application may seem controversial but I do believe Biblical.) One may ask, why inform the congregation? The text says that “, let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector”. How may I ask can this be implemented unless the congregation or body of believers is informed, not necessarily of the sin, but of his departure from community? How would we be able to treat one as a tax collector and heathen (outsider), if one were, say, an unrepentant adulterer, if we were not aware of his ecclesiastical conviction? Let’s examine a few Scriptural mandates before bringing forward this supreme and yet “last ditch effort” to bring repentance and restoration to the Body.
2 John 1 Whoever transgresses[d] and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. 10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him; 11 for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds.
I Corinthians 5
1 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and such sexual immorality as is not even named[a] among the Gentiles—that a man has his father’s wife! 2 And you are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he who has done this deed might be taken away from among you. 3 For I indeed, as absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged (as though I were present) him who has so done this deed. 4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, along with my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, 5 deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.[b]I wrote to you in my epistle not to keep company with sexually immoral people. 10 Yet I certainly did not mean with the sexually immoral people of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11 But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner—not even to eat with such a person. 12 For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? 13 But those who are outside God judges. Therefore “put away from yourselves the evil person.”
And yet, to exemplify the desired result, we read,
II Corinthians 5
5 But if anyone has caused grief, he has not grieved me, but all of you to some extent—not to be too severe. 6 This punishment which was inflicted by the majority is sufficient for such a man, 7 so that, on the contrary, you ought rather to forgive and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one be swallowed up with too much sorrow. 8 Therefore I urge you to reaffirm your love to him. 9 For to this end I also wrote, that I might put you to the test, whether you are obedient in all things. 10 Now whom you forgive anything, I also forgive. For if indeed I have forgiven anything, I have forgiven that one[a] for your sakes in the presence of Christ, 11 lest Satan should take advantage of us; for we are not ignorant of his devices.
Here we find clear steps to be taken in order to safeguard purity, holiness, sound doctrine, and application of Christ’s teachings among professing believers, and yet steps to promote treatment and healing in the Body when there is serious spiritual illness or injury.
In summary, I cannot emphasize enough the spirit in which these most important procedures should be followed. Let me leave you with the heart of these steps that I believe can be found in three parables found in the Gospel of Luke, chapter 15. These parables outline what Tim Keller articulates in his Prodigal God, God’s lavish love for his wasteful and straying children. In these parables, we read of the diligence of pursuit by the one seeking something or someone. In the first parable of the lost coin, we read of the woman whose diligence in searching for an important commodity proved the value of her lost coin. In the parable of the lost sheep, we learn of the shepherd whose insistent love leads him to abandon the found ones in order to rescue the straying and erring one. Finally, in the last of three parables, the tension between the faithfulness of one and the wastefulness of the other is beautifully demonstrated in the story of a heartbroken but nonetheless unquenchably faithful father who pursues his own at great expense. May we carry such a love for our brethren, “the excellent ones in whom is all our delight”.
