Excommunication / Shunning / The Ban

[ohio jones]

The next generation started marrying, initially each married couple chooses to attend the least conservative church between the two of theirs. The more conservative parents are disappointed, but the strong families remain a source of stability for the younger couples, even as they attend churches that provides none of that stability.

As more young people go through this transition, it becomes increasingly attractive, and less conservative church becomes the de factor church of choice for the younger generation. As the older people scratch their heads about why everyone is leaving, they continue to fellowship with and support their children, even as they drift towards a more and more worldly existence.

I understand your concern, but let me tell the other side of the story.

The next generation started marrying; initially each married couple chooses to attend the more conservative church between the two of theirs. The more conservative parents are thrilled, but the less conservative spouse brings less conservative ideas and practices into the marriage and into the church. As more young people go through this transition, it becomes increasingly attractive, and the more conservative church becomes the de facto church of choice for the younger generation. The older people fellowship with and support their children, and together they drift towards a more and more worldly existence.

So eventually instead of a more conservative church and a less conservative church, there's a less conservative church and an even less conservative church.

Perhaps the answer is found in 1 Cor 7:8.

With all that said, I see no solution to this drift without the CMs coming back to some kind of ban or disfellowship when members leave the church for no reason but to be more worldly. It's hard for me to even say that, because it feels "wrong", and it's daunting to even consider what it would take to quantify in a church rulebook what it means to leave for a "more worldly" church, but I simply see no alternative.

Revoking membership when they are leaving anyway isn't much of a threat. It's appropriate to communicate concern about the direction they seem to be headed, but being overly dramatic about what lies at the bottom of the slippery slope can cause people to .

Allow me to quote from Marpeck (naturally): Kunstbuch, ed. Rempel 2010, p. 152-154. The context is worth reading as well.

Now the true believers are forbidden to condemn all these people [slaves to self-made freedom; hypocrites] before the right time, that is, until their fruit, which is open vice, appears. Christ says: "By their fruits (he does not say: by the blossoms or the foliage) you shall know them." ... For no one may judge the heart until the fruit appears or until the outpouring of the treasure of the heart occurs. ... Whoever therefore establishes, commands, prohibits, coerces, punishes, or judges before the time the good or evil fruit is revealed, lays claim to the authority, power, and office of the Holy Spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ and, contrary to love, goodness, and grace, runs ahead of Christ Jesus. ... Therefore, even if one is concerned about a lapse or burdened with worry and sees the leaves and blossoms of evil appearance, one ought only to warn and admonish, but not judge, before the time of the fruit....

On the other hand, if the sin and wickedness evident from the revealed fruit is revealed through wrath in the righteousness of Christ, one must be ready to judge and decide with Christ, the true judge; otherwise, he too is a thief and murderer. He runs behind Jesus Christ and not with Christ....

But everywhere the devil selectively uses his weapons against us through the dead letter. Some do not want to judge at all, and take refuge behind Mt. 7:1: "Judge not, that you be not judged. Do not condemn, so that you will not be condemned." They do not see the contrary statement, Mt. 18:15: "If your brother sins, discipline him."

[temporal1]

^^ telling it like it was, and is.

[steve-in-kville]

There was another thread recently that mentioned Mennos who are just sticking around so they can inherit the farm or family business even though they are no longer serious about the faith.

Very well could have been on of my threads.

For the record and for those that don't know, I'm an ex-transplant and tend to have different views on such subjects. I would rather see a person leave a conservative setting and go somewhere they can be useful and happy, than hang around in a setting where they are forever riding the fence and frustrating the leadership.

[Josh]

There was another thread recently that mentioned Mennos who are just sticking around so they can inherit the farm or family business even though they are no longer serious about the faith.

I think these are just rumours / falsehoods spread about certain people. Somebody told me that about another family so I decided to directly ask them (and their parents). Both told me that it was very untrue, and also quite hurtful how this person kept saying that about them.

Very well could have been on of my threads.

For the record and for those that don't know, I'm an ex-transplant and tend to have different views on such subjects. I would rather see a person leave a conservative setting and go somewhere they can be useful and happy, than hang around in a setting where they are forever riding the fence and frustrating the leadership.

I would agree - but does that mean we need to be excited/overjoyed to see such people gone? I would rather see them living a victorious Christian life.

[nett]

The next generation started marrying, initially each married couple chooses to attend the least conservative church between the two of theirs. The more conservative parents are disappointed, but the strong families remain a source of stability for the younger couples, even as they attend churches that provides none of that stability.

As more young people go through this transition, it becomes increasingly attractive, and less conservative church becomes the de factor church of choice for the younger generation. As the older people scratch their heads about why everyone is leaving, they continue to fellowship with and support their children, even as they drift towards a more and more worldly existence.

I understand your concern, but let me tell the other side of the story.

The next generation started marrying; initially each married couple chooses to attend the more conservative church between the two of theirs. The more conservative parents are thrilled, but the less conservative spouse brings less conservative ideas and practices into the marriage and into the church. As more young people go through this transition, it becomes increasingly attractive, and the more conservative church becomes the de facto church of choice for the younger generation. The older people fellowship with and support their children, and together they drift towards a more and more worldly existence.

So eventually instead of a more conservative church and a less conservative church, there's a less conservative church and an even less conservative church.

Perhaps the answer is found in 1 Cor 7:8.

With all that said, I see no solution to this drift without the CMs coming back to some kind of ban or disfellowship when members leave the church for no reason but to be more worldly. It's hard for me to even say that, because it feels "wrong", and it's daunting to even consider what it would take to quantify in a church rulebook what it means to leave for a "more worldly" church, but I simply see no alternative.

Revoking membership when they are leaving anyway isn't much of a threat. It's appropriate to communicate concern about the direction they seem to be headed, but being overly dramatic about what lies at the bottom of the slippery slope can cause people to .

Allow me to quote from Marpeck (naturally): Kunstbuch, ed. Rempel 2010, p. 152-154. The context is worth reading as well.

Now the true believers are forbidden to condemn all these people [slaves to self-made freedom; hypocrites] before the right time, that is, until their fruit, which is open vice, appears. Christ says: "By their fruits (he does not say: by the blossoms or the foliage) you shall know them." ... For no one may judge the heart until the fruit appears or until the outpouring of the treasure of the heart occurs. ... Whoever therefore establishes, commands, prohibits, coerces, punishes, or judges before the time the good or evil fruit is revealed, lays claim to the authority, power, and office of the Holy Spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ and, contrary to love, goodness, and grace, runs ahead of Christ Jesus. ... Therefore, even if one is concerned about a lapse or burdened with worry and sees the leaves and blossoms of evil appearance, one ought only to warn and admonish, but not judge, before the time of the fruit....

On the other hand, if the sin and wickedness evident from the revealed fruit is revealed through wrath in the righteousness of Christ, one must be ready to judge and decide with Christ, the true judge; otherwise, he too is a thief and murderer. He runs behind Jesus Christ and not with Christ....

But everywhere the devil selectively uses his weapons against us through the dead letter. Some do not want to judge at all, and take refuge behind Mt. 7:1: "Judge not, that you be not judged. Do not condemn, so that you will not be condemned." They do not see the contrary statement, Mt. 18:15: "If your brother sins, discipline him."

Older people are resistant to changing the majority of their traditions, which I think we see my scenario happening more often.

I'm not really advising judging or condemning anyone, warning or admonishment would be appropriate, but there has to be some separation for that to be taken seriously.

If I have a friend who's starting to drink more and more, to the point that he's on the verge of becoming an alcoholic, If I warn him about the issue, but continue to let him bring beers to my house and get wasted, is he going to take me seriously??

[nett]

Regarding my second paragraph, l'll try to clarify. I have witnessed those who leave a 'conservative church' because they had to follow the teachings and requirements of that church to belong and had no personal, born again relationship with God. Since their habit is to be part of a church family, they move to a less conservative church and experience a new freedom to not have to live under certain rules and expectations but this doesn't mean they have now or ever have been born again. When not born again, they are in a new setting that appeals more to their carnal nature.

In the MB church I attended, some who came out of more conservative churches, although continuing to come to church on Sundays and get their children involved in kids programs, don't show much indication that their living is for the Lord. But I also heard testimonies and saw life changes from some that they no longer serve the Lord out of obligation but rather out of desire that God has placed in their hearts. They may not live according to rules of their past church life, yet their walk with the Lord is quite obvious as a real and meaningful relationship with God.

So, I see some that leave more conservative churches for less conservative churches that were not born again in their previous church. In the MB church I attended we had new attendees from more liberal churches that also had not experienced the new birth and some became born again whereas others had not shown signs of that change in their heart even after attending for some time.

One can be as 'unsaved' in a conservative church as one can be in a liberal church. Sometimes we can make quick judgements on who is trying to serve the Lord and who is not. We all grow spiritually in our personal relationship with God and our level of sanctification will vary by our spiritual maturity. We might be very shocked if we could see the heart of others as God does. Fruit takes time to mature but it first must be connected to the vine.

Don't know if that helps or not but glad to pursue further.

I see what you're getting at, from my perspective that accounts for a very small number of drifters in my community. I would say the vast majority are born again, and have a desire to follow God. As younger people they struggle with carnality, an increasing problem as the rules are rarely adjusted quickly enough to fend off cultural rot. The guilt and shame for their vices is suddenly relieved when this other church tells them that all the things they know they shouldn't be doing are completely fine, because salvation is purely based on where your "heart" is, and anyone who teaches otherwise is legalistic.

I think due to protestant gnostic influence, a lot of people have forgotten that young minds often don't make good decisions on their own, and to a LARGE extent need to be told what to do, and protected from things that they don't understand. I don't let my 1 y/o go up the stairs. Is that because I'm legalistic? Is his heart in the wrong place?

I wouldn't let a 16 y/o boy have access to the internet under any circumstances, is that because I'm legalistic, or because his heart is in the wrong place? Is it because he's not born again? I don't think so.

I wouldn't let my children casually use heroin, is that because I'm legalistic, or their heart is in the wrong place?

I don't let my kids eat a steady diet of candy...

I could on and on and on.

As long as children are living under their parents roof, the parents (within the laws of the land) can and should make the rules to follow. This is not being legalistic if that term is used as an opposite to live as you please. Salvation is a 'heart issue' and it is also a 'sin issue'. Some sins are spelled out more clearly in scripture (i.e. murder, adultery, idolatry, slander, lust, hatred) while others are more interpretive to where one crosses the line into sin (i.e. modesty, simple living, giving). I don't think we are perfect judges of when we are sinning and that is why we need the Holy Spirit guiding us. Freedom in Christ is not a license to sin but what you think is sinful is something I may not understand as sinful and vice versa. We each will account someday for what we have been convicted is sin and how we dealt with it.


These are not really extreme examples compared to what the mainstream culture is offering. Social media, the internet, television, movies, advertising in food, fashion and other material things, along with the "news" are all designed to be extremely addicting in their own ways, the majority of young minds are simply not able to make good decisions about what they consume when faced with these powerful influences, and they need a constant upright example from the more mature, and strict boundaries in place to allow them to develop mental and spiritual strength.

I will agree with the good example by mature Christians but it depends on what you are referring to by 'strict boundaries in place'. If we are talking of children in the home, then yes they need boundaries. Once out of the home, they need personal convictions to establish their own home boundaries. If these are boundaries established by the local church, then if it is a problem to adhere to these, they need to move elsewhere for fellowship.

I don't see how in or out of the home has anything to do with what I'm talking about. I'm talking about protecting young minds from things what will cause permanent damage and weakness.

Moving out of the house does not mean that an immature mind suddenly develops strength to resist all of the temptations I've been mentioning. That's why I'm saying the church is so important to continue to set those boundaries.

Things are made significantly worse when the older folks don't understand how bad it is for younger people who grew up under all the dark influence of these things. I've had quite a few older ministers tell me that that the internet is fine, if you choose to look at porn, it's because your heart is in the wrong place, and they simply "know what they shouldn't be looking at". That's a rotten answer, and demonstrates a lack of care for what's happening to younger people.

I would have to agree with the respond that their 'heart is in the wrong place' and add they need to seek after the enabling power of the Holy Spirit to make right choices. I have a friend who struggled with peaking in on Internet porn occasionally and the solution for him was to quit his Internet involvement altogether. Sometimes the answer is to flee from areas of temptation. He moved on to a street ministry with drug and alcohol addicts in a big city.


Sounds like your friend made the right decision, I applaud him. Unfortunately in my experience, no minister would ever suggest such a solution, because it might interfere with their own use of the internet.

What does the right choice mean to someone who has struggled with heroin addiction? Should they take oxycontin if prescribed by a doctor? If their heart's in the right place, does that mean they won't fall back into addiction?


I don't think rules is the answer to make Christians act Christ like but rather the need for the on-going filling of the Holy Spirit and living under His guidance and control. This still allows for church discipline in areas of 'in your face' sinning as was happening in the Corinthian church. They were just ignoring it and also sinning in other ways mis-treating other believers.


How much more 'in your face' can pornography get? Harry Argo has discovered that even in VERY conservative churches with rules about filters etc, the rate of pornography use among the youth is startling. Why is this not a cut-and-dry issue?

[Sudsy]

Wow, that's a blanket condemnation. Wonder if God agrees.

I would say it's an observation, not a condemnation. Do you believe God is pleased with the mainline churches in the west, do they represent his spotless bride?

I realize this question was not addressed to me but the phrase 'his spotless bride' got my attention. My question in return would be 'do you believe any local church represents his spotless bride ?' I do not.

My view is that those who Christ has received into His Kingdom are His 'spotless bride' as they have been washed in the blood of the Lamb. I believe we may be in for some big surprises someday as to who these are due to our imperfect abilities to be perfect fruit inspectors.

As others have pointed out time is involved for fruit to develop and I think it very possible to do some fruit inspecting too early on when the fruit is green / immature. Sometimes I purchase a fruit that appears spotless on the outside but when I reach the inside it reveals just how diseased/imperfect it is. I was fooled by it's outward appearance. Also there are times where fruit in it's early stages doesn't appear that it will ever mature and some special care is required to get it to maturity.

On the other hand (if I had one ), there is scripture regarding dealing with sin within the fellowship of professing believers. So, when do we excommunicate and when do we allow for spiritual growth ? Perhaps allowing mature and immature to fellowship together will result in the immature adversely affecting the mature but then was the mature really that mature. There is also the possibility that the immature will desire the abundant spiritual life of the mature and will pursue it.

What is interesting when we look at Romans 14 versus 1 Cor 5. In the former, those who live by their own personal convictions on how to serve the Lord, Paul does not say to expel from the church. And he does not suggest any set of rules to force people into conformity. In the latter, the sin that was recognized and not repented of, did involve excommunication.

So, again, where is the correct way to draw lines for fellowship in the local church ? Is it things like a refusal to drive a certain colour of car or wear a specific form of dress ? Or is it more like the sin of the man in 1 Cor 5 and other sins more specifically defined in scripture as sin such as unrepentant adultery, slander, gossip, idolatry, homosexuality and those actually listed in the scriptures. It seems to me we draw lines where we should not and don't draw lines where we should. And, of course, we all feel 'lead by the Spirit' in our ways of sanctification.

I'm just throwing these thoughts in the pot to read what others think about where excommunication is warranted and where it is not and why.

[temporal1]

nett:
Older people are resistant to changing the majority of their traditions ..

Welcome to MN. i’m enjoying reading your thoughts.

A note about this, which is not untrue, but deserves a bit of thinking.
Older people have experience, they’ve been disappointed and hurt, lied to, fooled, they’ve been burned by falling for attractive words, while ignoring the “fine print.” They understand “unintended consequences.” They value foresight. They want to prevent disasters where possible. They realize how easy it is to borrow, how hard to repay. Life lessons like that.

These are all generalizations, there are ALWAYS exceptions to generalizations.
i love and value young people. would not want to be without ANY, younger or older.

imho, our now mostly small family society does too much dividing up people by age. i grew up in a large family with a large nearby extended family. EVERYONE gathered at the kitchen tables, newborns to great grandparents. this is a rich way of life i cannot well describe to my “only child” grdaughter, who lives far away from everyone, in a neighborhood nearly devoid of children of any age.

i so hate to see today’s children and young people targeted for politics. they have no perspective, extremely limited life perspective. this is exploitation. it’s irresponsible to throw off adult problems onto the shoulders of children and young people, just because they don’t have the wisdom to refuse. it’s become crazy-popular to do this. sorry to say.

one day, when these young ones grow up and gain some perspective, they may be quite hostile about it. i hope so.
maybe they’ll do better at protecting their children from it.

[Joy]

Wow, that's a blanket condemnation. Wonder if God agrees.

I would say it's an observation, not a condemnation. Do you believe God is pleased with the mainline churches in the west, do they represent his spotless bride?

Pardon the late reply--I just returned home from prison.

A question for you. Do you believe God is pleased with any group at all that allows sexual abuse to continue in its midst, which I dare say includes most any Christian group of this age?

[Sudsy]

How much more 'in your face' can pornography get? Harry Argo has discovered that even in VERY conservative churches with rules about filters etc, the rate of pornography use among the youth is startling. Why is this not a cut-and-dry issue?

This shows that rules will not change what believers can do in their private lives. And we can preach against things like murder and adultery but Jesus said we can be guilty of these without others knowing about them. We do them in our minds.

The answer, I believe, is to first acknowledge that a believer will be tempted by three base enemies of the soul - the world, the flesh and the devil. These are the enemies of God - 1 John 2.15: "Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him". So, the world is opposed to the Father. In Galatians 5.17 regarding the flesh - "For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other". Then concerning the devil, Jesus says: "Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me" (Jn 14.30). Are these being preached and what is being preached on how to recognize and how to resist them ?

I don't believe the NT teaches that we can resist these by our own human power. So, what power do we need and how do we get this power ? Is this being preached ? No one can live the Christian life on their own will power. It can't be done.

What do we do when we slip up and give way to one of these three enemies ?

What is meant by walking in the Spirit and putting on the full armour of God ?

Perhaps some of the failings are due to the lack of teachings that point us to how we need the Holy Spirit working in our lives.