Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Based on your responses, fear of looking bad to the outside world, and fear of sin spreading like a cancer through your congregation.
Quote:
What should we have done? Nothing? Something?
What you have to do first is address your (the church's) motivations. If you can acknowledge that your current motivations are fear based, then you can move beyond that. There's no one size fits all answer to every situation. You would determine with the people involved what you believe the non fear-based, loving goals would be in that unique set of circumstances.
Have you ever heard of Non-Violent Communication? The goal is to get to the core needs of everyone involved in a way that facilitates real resolution and restoration. It's no quick fix. It's not coercive. You don't demand someone stop what they're doing OR ELSE.
Quote:
"Violent" vs "Nonviolent" Communication
If "violent" means acting in ways that result in harm, then much of how we communicate — with moralistic judgments, evaluations, criticisms, demands, coercion, or labels of "right" versus "wrong" — could indeed be called violent.
Unaware of the impact, we judge, label, criticize, command, demand, threaten, blame, accuse and ridicule. Speaking and thinking in these ways often leads to inner wounds, which in turn often evolve into depression, anger or physical violence.
Sadly, many of the world's cultures teach these "violent" methods of communication as normal and useful, so many of us find our communication efforts painful and distressed, but we don't know why.
What is "Nonviolent Communication"?
The concepts and tools of Nonviolent Communication are designed to help us think, listen and speak in ways that awaken compassion and generosity within ourselves and between each other. Nonviolent Communication helps us interact in ways that leave each of us feeling more whole and connected. It ensures that our motivations for helping ourselves, and each other, are not from fear, obligation or guilt, but because helping becomes the most fulfilling activity we can imagine.
Based on your responses, fear of looking bad to the outside world, and fear of sin spreading like a cancer through your congregation.
What you have to do first is address your (the church's) motivations. If you can acknowledge that your current motivations are fear based, then you can move beyond that. There's no one size fits all answer to every situation. You would determine with the people involved what you believe the non fear-based, loving goals would be in that unique set of circumstances.
Have you ever heard of Non-Violent Communication? The goal is to get to the core needs of everyone involved in a way that facilitates real resolution and restoration. It's no quick fix. It's not coercive. You don't demand someone stop what they're doing OR ELSE.
Yes, we don't want to look like the world. Yes, we don't want sin to spread throughout the church.
Non-violent? What do you think church discipline is? Beating the crap out of someone?
Loving goals is what I already said. And what scripture says. Did you miss that?
Yes, we don't want to look like the world. Yes, we don't want sin to spread throughout the church.
Non-violent? What do you think church discipline is? Beating the crap out of someone?
Me thinks you didn't read what I actually posted. But the little violently-smacking-my-head emoticon was amusingly ironic ... I assume you meant it that way.
Quote:
Loving goals is what I already said. And what scripture says. Did you miss that?
I believe you want to be loving, but fear and lack of faith is clouding your sense of what loving is, jimmie.
Based on your responses, fear of looking bad to the outside world, and fear of sin spreading like a cancer through your congregation.
What you have to do first is address your (the church's) motivations. If you can acknowledge that your current motivations are fear based, then you can move beyond that. There's no one size fits all answer to every situation. You would determine with the people involved what you believe the non fear-based, loving goals would be in that unique set of circumstances.
Have you ever heard of Non-Violent Communication? The goal is to get to the core needs of everyone involved in a way that facilitates real resolution and restoration. It's no quick fix. It's not coercive. You don't demand someone stop what they're doing OR ELSE.
Which is essentially the second step in "church discipline" poresented. Did you miss that? You seem to be anxious to read your expectations into jimmiej's answers.
Which is essentially the second step in "church discipline" poresented. Did you miss that?
Sure did. Can you point out to me where that "second step" is discussed? In the example Jimmie gave, the 2 people involved in an affair were excommunicated. To me, that fits a "stop letting sin 'reign in your bodies' or else" mentality. It may seem that it resolves the situation to excommunicate people, to attempt to shun or shame them into changing, but I disagree that that is how real heart-level change is effected in people or how restoration is achieved.
I've given Jimmie plenty of opportunity to tell me that his church's main concerns are not about keeping up appearances or attempting to keep sin from becoming a cancer, over and above the well-being of the people involved, but he has only confirmed that those are their main concerns. (In my post to you, I shared my thoughts about both of those concerns. Did you have any response to that post, by the way?)
Quote:
You seem to be anxious to read your expectations into jimmiej's answers.
I don't believe I am, but what makes it seem that way to you, Nate?
The only thing we are fearful of is that a brother would continue in destructive behavior.
That is not what you said, (but no fear is productive, anyway). You said your concerns were that the church's reputation would be besmirched, and that sin might spread like a cancer through your congregation. I do not disbelieve that you are also concerned for someone involved in destructive behavior, but from what you have said thus far, your fear about the other 2 things outweighs your desire to truly address the core needs of the person who may be in need of help.
Quote:
Lack of faith in what/who? God? The person involved in destructive behavior?
Lack of faith in God's grace and love, I would say. You don't trust that Divine goodness and love are what effect change in a person. Instead, you resort to human "discipline" and coercion.
Quote:
Are you saying the church should do nothing?
You keep asking that, but I've already answered it. No, I'm not saying nothing should be done. The question is what are the goals, really, of the actions your church takes. Do you want people to stop indulging in sinful behavior so they (and by extension, your church) look good on the outside? Or do you want to get to the core of the matter for the sake of everyone involved? If you get past your fear, I believe you would be solely focused on the latter. And you don't do that by demanding they stop sinning or they face excommunication or by shaming them so they will feel remorseful. That's not how love operates.
Public sin in the church is to be dealt with privately, in a loving way, by church leadership. Hopefully, the person will see the error of their ways and be willing to change. If not, that person must be removed from church fellowship, until they repent, per scripture.
How does it help to tolerate public sin, in the church?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleroo
Sure did. Can you point out to me where that "second step" is discussed? In the example Jimmie gave, the 2 people involved in an affair were excommunicated. To me, that fits a "stop letting sin 'reign in your bodies' or else" mentality. It may seem that it resolves the situation to excommunicate people, to attempt to shun or shame them into changing, but I disagree that that is how real heart-level change is effected in people or how restoration is achieved.
I've given Jimmie plenty of opportunity to tell me that his church's main concerns are not about keeping up appearances or attempting to keep sin from becoming a cancer, over and above the well-being of the people involved, but he has only confirmed that those are their main concerns. (In my post to you, I shared my thoughts about both of those concerns. Did you have any response to that post, by the way?)
I don't believe I am, but what makes it seem that way to you, Nate?
I'm still confused as to how having an affair is a public sin...
Definition of public: "of or concerning the people as a whole." NOPE "done, perceived, or existing in open view." While this last one might qualify, it was stated that not everyone in the church knew about the affair so it wasn't exactly in open view.
Either way... If you throw out all the sinners, there'd be no one in the congregation!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But the little violently-smacking-my-head emoticon was amusingly ironic ... I assume you meant it that way. 
