Excommunication - What it is and is not

Christian ethics and theology with an Anabaptist perspective

Mark all the statements you agree with.

 
Total votes: 0

RZehr
Posts: 7024
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 12:42 am
Affiliation: Cons. Mennonite

Re: Excommunication - What it is and is not

Post by RZehr »

Ernie wrote:I think there are a lot of levels of discipline that the NT refers to.
Here are some...

1. rebuking sharply
2. not socializing with
3. dis-fellowshipping
4. excommunication


Also, the OP mentioned church standards but not church doctrine. I know a man about may age who was excommunicated a few years ago from a plain church and it was called a doctrinal excommunication. His character was good. He was a gifted scholar and speaker. But he had some very unorthodox basic beliefs about God and the Bible (somewhat universalist) and because he was so influential, the church felt they needed to call it out as false teaching. I think the church did the right thing.
This is a good addition. I'd be interested in seeing this list explained more by someone. Some of these seem to have overlap, and so I'm curious what the differences are thought to be.
0 x
Hats Off
Posts: 2532
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 6:42 pm
Affiliation: Plain Menno OO

Re: Excommunication - What it is and is not

Post by Hats Off »

I would have thought that the last three are very similar. Dis-fellow-shipping and not socializing with would seem to be brought on by excommunication. We seem to have another status; that of a non-communing member. On a long term basis I would pretty much consider the terms mutually exclusive.
0 x
User avatar
Chris
Posts: 737
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2016 10:58 pm
Affiliation: Moderate / unaffil

Re: Excommunication - What it is and is not

Post by Chris »

I'm curious if it is only to be used for "sin".

Technically "ex-communication" is actually to be put "out of communion".

I'm curious what you people think about guests who are preaching heresy? Isn't there a point when enough is enough?
0 x
Wade
Posts: 2683
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 12:09 am
Affiliation: kingdom Christian

Re: Excommunication - What it is and is not

Post by Wade »

Chris wrote:I'm curious if it is only to be used for "sin".

Technically "ex-communication" is actually to be put "out of communion".

I'm curious what you people think about guests who are preaching heresy? Isn't there a point when enough is enough?
Is not heresy sin?
Galatians 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, 21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
Titus 3:9 But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain. 10 A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; 11 Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.
0 x
User avatar
Chris
Posts: 737
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2016 10:58 pm
Affiliation: Moderate / unaffil

Re: Excommunication - What it is and is not

Post by Chris »

Wade wrote:
Chris wrote:I'm curious if it is only to be used for "sin".

Technically "ex-communication" is actually to be put "out of communion".

I'm curious what you people think about guests who are preaching heresy? Isn't there a point when enough is enough?
Is not heresy sin?
Galatians 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, 21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
Titus 3:9 But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain. 10 A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; 11 Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.


Yes, it is a sin, but usually not one that is addressed easily because it can be "backed" from a "bible viewpoint". It's much more complicated than "sin-sin". It sews seeds of briers and thorns in the bride. Dangerous stuff.
0 x
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23806
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: Excommunication - What it is and is not

Post by Josh »

Cast out a divisive man after 1 or 2 warnings.

("Heresies" in KJV means divisions, not false doctrine. False teachers are addressed elsewhere.)
0 x
Wade
Posts: 2683
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 12:09 am
Affiliation: kingdom Christian

Re: Excommunication - What it is and is not

Post by Wade »

Josh wrote:Cast out a divisive man after 1 or 2 warnings.

("Heresies" in KJV means divisions, not false doctrine. False teachers are addressed elsewhere.)
Maybe your thinking of 1 Timothy 4?
0 x
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23806
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: Excommunication - What it is and is not

Post by Josh »

Wade wrote:
Josh wrote:Cast out a divisive man after 1 or 2 warnings.

("Heresies" in KJV means divisions, not false doctrine. False teachers are addressed elsewhere.)
Maybe your thinking of 1 Timothy 4?
Yes. But when KJV talks about "heresies", it's not talking about false teaching.

Yet another reason to avoid KJV for study.
0 x
RZehr
Posts: 7024
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 12:42 am
Affiliation: Cons. Mennonite

Re: Excommunication - What it is and is not

Post by RZehr »

Hats Off wrote:I would have thought that the last three are very similar. Dis-fellow-shipping and not socializing with would seem to be brought on by excommunication. We seem to have another status; that of a non-communing member. On a long term basis I would pretty much consider the terms mutually exclusive.
What does ex-communication mean other than non-communing? I know how we use it. I'm proposing that we redefine/downgrade the term "excommunication" to mean "non-communing".

I don't have a term to propose in place of "cutting off from the body of Christ".

My thinking is that there are sins unto death, and there are sins not unto death. So, for example, if someone secretly breaks a church rule, that would be considered a sin (falling short of the mark) not unto death. This may result in "excommunication", which would not mean "marking him" or cutting him off from the body, but rather it would simply mean that he is a non-communing member.

If a person commits adultery, or murder, etc., that would be a sin unto death. A new term would be needed for this scenario.

Am I making sense?
0 x
lesterb
Posts: 1160
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:41 pm
Location: Alberta
Affiliation: Western Fellowship
Contact:

Re: Excommunication - What it is and is not

Post by lesterb »

RZehr wrote:
Hats Off wrote:I would have thought that the last three are very similar. Dis-fellow-shipping and not socializing with would seem to be brought on by excommunication. We seem to have another status; that of a non-communing member. On a long term basis I would pretty much consider the terms mutually exclusive.
What does ex-communication mean other than non-communing? I know how we use it. I'm proposing that we redefine/downgrade the term "excommunication" to mean "non-communing".

I don't have a term to propose in place of "cutting off from the body of Christ".

My thinking is that there are sins unto death, and there are sins not unto death. So, for example, if someone secretly breaks a church rule, that would be considered a sin (falling short of the mark) not unto death. This may result in "excommunication", which would not mean "marking him" or cutting him off from the body, but rather it would simply mean that he is a non-communing member.

If a person commits adultery, or murder, etc., that would be a sin unto death. A new term would be needed for this scenario.

Am I making sense?
I think so. However, I would have looked at a sin unto death as being an unpardonable sin. The apostle goes on to say that we don't need to pray for the person who has committed a sin unto death. That doesn't really fit the examples that you gave. Or am I misunderstanding something?
0 x
Post Reply