MennoNet.com

What types of discipline does your church practice on members? Obviously depends on what a member is being disciplined for. I've witnessed everything from a stern talking to, being held back from communion/lovefeast, refusing the holy kiss, and membership withdrawn entirely. Don't personally know of anyone that was "shunned" or put in "the ban."

I do know of a situation where someone was "put in discipline" and was not able to participate in certain functions like Sunday school devotions and such. Also remember a man who was a known sexual deviant getting assigned seating at church.

Perhaps as a side topic, at what point are public confessions required? Are they useful?

We have had several cases where public confession was required or offered. I think that sometimes too much detail is given. Other times the 'confession' didn't quite strike me as totally genuine, because of excused being offered as well, or statements like "I think every man here is also dealing with this same failure." One case really stands out to me, where there has been a total change made. Hidden sin will poison many unrelated areas of life, and when it's honestly confessed, with no excuses, a real change can take place. But again, I don't need to or want to hear all of the details.

But as to measures taken, a person who has a position in the congregation will of necessity step out of that office.

A question of my own: How do you deal differently with a situation where a person is caught, sometimes by authorities, as opposed to someone who confesses because they have reason to believe that they will be exposed, or even someone who confesses "out of the blue", when no one suspects? I don't know if I'm making this question clear or not. How can you tell if someone is sincere, or just cutting their losses?

I suppose a related question would take this a bit off-topic - the whole emphasis on "accountability partners". A few months ago someone made the statement in our congregation that "You cannot beat the sin of ____ without an accountability partner with whom you meet regularly." I cringe, because every Christian has the Holy Spirit within their life, and Jesus is also here with each of us. Am I more concerned about what a fellow Christian thinks than I am of what Jesus thinks? Is He not the ultimate "accountability partner"? I am all for brotherhood, and mutual prayer and sharing, but I do not thing that when Paul said "Urge one another on to good works" he was talking about interrogation. I think a lot of the "Accountability Partner" deal concentrates too much on the negative, focusing on the sin to be avoided, instead of encouraging the good works of righteousness to be done. (There, I said it.)

Neto wrote: ↑Wed Sep 15, 2021 8:21 am
A question of my own: How do you deal differently with a situation where a person is caught, sometimes by authorities, as opposed to someone who confesses because they have reason to believe that they will be exposed, or even someone who confesses "out of the blue", when no one suspects? I don't know if I'm making this question clear or not. How can you tell if someone is sincere, or just cutting their losses?

I totally understand your question. First thoughts would be the example of an addict, be it drugs, alcohol, porn or gambling: if they are caught, most times they just get sneakier and more low profile with their addiction.

I never was big on public confessions. More on that later.

Neto wrote: ↑Wed Sep 15, 2021 8:21 am
A question of my own: How do you deal differently with a situation where a person is caught, sometimes by authorities, as opposed to someone who confesses because they have reason to believe that they will be exposed, or even someone who confesses "out of the blue", when no one suspects? I don't know if I'm making this question clear or not. How can you tell if someone is sincere, or just cutting their losses?

I know someone that this is happening to right now-- there was infidelity a few years back, but there has since been conviction and redemption. At the time, leadership was not very involved in the ordeal. Now, leadership would like a public confession, which was given, and then it was judged insincere. I am confused by the entire process, because let's say the accused party did in fact put forth an "insincere confession".... their lifestyle is completely changed, their spouse sees them walking renewed in Christ, and the two are totally reconciled. I am a third party observed, not intimately involved in the situation, but it seems so silly to me to say it was not a sincere confession and the individual needs to be put on repentance when their entire being has been changed.... aren't we supposed to judge them by their works??

And to respond to your question further, in the same vein, I would postulate that even if someone is just "cutting their losses," if they have made a confession and their behavior reflects a newness within them, leave it to God to judge their heart. Even if it doesn't seem "fair" that it's not a "true" confession, how can we really judge that beyond what we see in their behavior?

I know in my lifetime, I have made confessions when my heart wasn't really in it but I knew it was wrong... as I worked on changing my related behaviors and asked God to change my heart, eventually, the conviction will come.

That's my two cents, YMMV

steve-in-kville wrote: ↑Wed Sep 15, 2021 8:58 am

Neto wrote: ↑Wed Sep 15, 2021 8:21 am
A question of my own: How do you deal differently with a situation where a person is caught, sometimes by authorities, as opposed to someone who confesses because they have reason to believe that they will be exposed, or even someone who confesses "out of the blue", when no one suspects? I don't know if I'm making this question clear or not. How can you tell if someone is sincere, or just cutting their losses?

I totally understand your question. First thoughts would be the example of an addict, be it drugs, alcohol, porn or gambling: if they are caught, most times they just get sneakier and more low profile with their addiction.

I never was big on public confessions. More on that later.

I would argue that we need to be wise in helping our brothers & sisters out, and understanding the "difference" in sins. Pathological behaviors that are rooted in biological processes should be, in my opinion, regarded differently that episodic sins. I.e. someone in fornication vs someone addicted to pornography or drug use are two rather different things.... which actually touches on another response I was about to make....

If a person wants to make a confession, have at it. Forcing one doesn't do anyone any good. That is my opinion. To that end, I have been in services where the congregation had opportunity to give testimony and it was a mess. Basically it was a "humble brag" contest on who could admit to the most shortcomings in their lives.

Neto wrote: ↑Wed Sep 15, 2021 8:21 am
I suppose a related question would take this a bit off-topic - the whole emphasis on "accountability partners". A few months ago someone made the statement in our congregation that "You cannot beat the sin of ____ without an accountability partner with whom you meet regularly." I cringe, because every Christian has the Holy Spirit within their life, and Jesus is also here with each of us. Am I more concerned about what a fellow Christian thinks than I am of what Jesus thinks? Is He not the ultimate "accountability partner"? I am all for brotherhood, and mutual prayer and sharing, but I do not thing that when Paul said "Urge one another on to good works" he was talking about interrogation. I think a lot of the "Accountability Partner" deal concentrates too much on the negative, focusing on the sin to be avoided, instead of encouraging the good works of righteousness to be done. (There, I said it.)

I'm stepping on the toes of something I just posted in this thread, but I think "accountability partners" are valid, nay, necessary, in some situations. Neto, I am not sure your demographic background, but there is a significant generational difference in the susceptibility to some dangerous facets of technology. This comes from worldly research, so it's not just bible-thumping-porn-sends-you-to-hell people spouting the information (not that the latter is wrong...)

To use pornography as an example, it was a lot easier for one generation to avoid smut because they simply didn't get the print articles with pornographic images in them. Or if they did, it's not like there was an unlimited amount of women pictured. Meanwhile, in today's day of the internet, users are faced with millions of images that are simply a click away. It makes a huge difference, turning a compulsive behavior that would self-regulate in the 1970's into an addictive behavior that is crippling in the 2020's. There has even been evidence that older generations simply don't get as addicted to pornography compared to younger generations because of this difference.

I'm not excusing the sin either way, and I think the "easy" solution is to cut off the hand that offends you-- but try to tell someone that they need to get rid of the internet and not have a smart phone. Many of them will have a litany of excuses why they simply cannot-- work, school, etc. In that situation, you need an accountability partner. An internet filter is not enough, because an addict will always find a way. It is the nature of the disease.

This obviously is not a water-tight or all-encompassing argument, I tried to piece this together while feeding my toddler, so excuse me if some pieces & parts don't add up right....

steve-in-kville wrote: ↑Wed Sep 15, 2021 9:57 am If a person wants to make a confession, have at it. Forcing one doesn't do anyone any good. That is my opinion. To that end, I have been in services where the congregation had opportunity to give testimony and it was a mess. Basically it was a "humble brag" contest on who could admit to the most shortcomings in their lives.

I absolutely agree with you; I often wonder if I am doing more harm than good when I force my older kids to apologize to one another after some sort of squabble.

Humble-bragging on shortcomings.... what an interesting display of pride... unfortunately Paul, the chief of all sinners, has them beat on that one... they've canonized his confessions....

steve-in-kville wrote: ↑Wed Sep 15, 2021 9:57 am If a person wants to make a confession, have at it. Forcing one doesn't do anyone any good. That is my opinion.
....

There was one case like this in the MB congregation where I grew up, while I was still in HS. A girl (JR High, as I recall) "got in trouble", and was required to confess. Considering her age at the time, in some ways she did not have any choice but to comply. I do not know what the best course would have been. Public confession was required because it would soon become "public knowledge". What happened was that she did it, but was later bitter about it, and so were some of the other girls.

Some years before that a "stunning" public confession was made by a brother in the congregation, at a quarterly business meeting. He had been nominated to serve as an elder. As I recall now, he tried to say no, but that just brought objections from a number of members who felt he was well qualified. This man & his wife had come into the congregation "from the outside" some years before, and they were a solid Christian couple. (By "outside", I mean totally non-Mennonite.) He then said that he could not serve because he had been married and divorced years before, as a young man, and thus did not meet the requirements. As far as I know no one at all (except his wife, I suppose) knew about this. Nothing more was said at that time, but many years later (perhaps 15) he was nominated again, and accepted. (The make up of the congregation had changed over that period of years, and this situation was no longer viewed in the same light.)

Laurell wrote: ↑Wed Sep 15, 2021 9:46 am

Neto wrote: ↑Wed Sep 15, 2021 8:21 am
A question of my own: How do you deal differently with a situation where a person is caught, sometimes by authorities, as opposed to someone who confesses because they have reason to believe that they will be exposed, or even someone who confesses "out of the blue", when no one suspects? I don't know if I'm making this question clear or not. How can you tell if someone is sincere, or just cutting their losses?

I know someone that this is happening to right now-- there was infidelity a few years back, but there has since been conviction and redemption. At the time, leadership was not very involved in the ordeal. Now, leadership would like a public confession, which was given, and then it was judged insincere. I am confused by the entire process, because let's say the accused party did in fact put forth an "insincere confession".... their lifestyle is completely changed, their spouse sees them walking renewed in Christ, and the two are totally reconciled. I am a third party observed, not intimately involved in the situation, but it seems so silly to me to say it was not a sincere confession and the individual needs to be put on repentance when their entire being has been changed.... aren't we supposed to judge them by their works??

And to respond to your question further, in the same vein, I would postulate that even if someone is just "cutting their losses," if they have made a confession and their behavior reflects a newness within them, leave it to God to judge their heart. Even if it doesn't seem "fair" that it's not a "true" confession, how can we really judge that beyond what we see in their behavior?

I know in my lifetime, I have made confessions when my heart wasn't really in it but I knew it was wrong... as I worked on changing my related behaviors and asked God to change my heart, eventually, the conviction will come.

That's my two cents, YMMV

Sounds over the top to me, too.

What I was referring to as a seemingly insincere confession is one where excuses are made. Like what I mentioned - "Every man fails in this same way." Or another I heard about (that I cannot say more about because it is too much information) where other excuses were made for infidelity. I'm not saying that the change in him is not real - I rather suspect that it is, but I don't think he was ready to make confession when he did. I sincerely hope, for the sake of all involved, that he has since fully owned his responsibility in the sin.

I am not without sin. I have not publicly confessed ever one of my sins. But I'm also not sure that is beneficial, perhaps especially for those who would be forced to hear it. I think my position on this might be affected by another thing I feel strongly about - that "asking forgiveness" is generally not for the benefit of the offended one, but for the benefit of the offender. What I mean is that we want to be forgiven, so that we can feel better about ourselves. I think it is self-centered, and would point out that the Scripture does not tell us to "ask forgiveness", it tells us to confess. (It does of course also tell us how we should respond when someone confesses to us or asks forgiveness, but that is from the other angle.)