When we look at the powerful governments of the world and at other business and educational organizations that have great influence, and then consider our local churches, or even our denominational headquarters, the church may seem to us to be weak and ineffective. When we recognize the rapid growth of evil that is seen daily in our society, we may wonder if the church has power to make any changes at all.
On the other hand, in some countries the officially recognized church has great influence on the conduct of national affairs. This was certainly true of the influence of the Roman Catholic Church in former times in some southern European and Latin American countries (and is still true today to some extent). It was true of the Church of England in previous centuries, and of the church founded by the pilgrims in the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1620. Situations like these where the church appears to have great influence cause us to ask whether Scripture places any limitations on the church’s power.
We may define the power of the church as follows: The power of the church is its God-given authority to carry on spiritual warfare, proclaim the gospel, and exercise church discipline.
Although these three areas overlap and could be treated in any order, since the category of “spiritual warfare” is the broader category it will be treated first. This perspective on the church’s power also reminds us that the power of the church, unlike the worldly influence exercised by human armies and governments, directly affects the spiritual realm.
Spiritual Warfare
Paul reminds the Corinthians, “For though we live in the world we are not carrying on a worldly war, for the weapons of our warfare are not worldly but have divine power to destroy strongholds” (2 Corinthians 10:3 – 4). These weapons, used against demonic forces that hinder the spread of the gospel and the progress of the church, include such things as prayer, worship, the authority to rebuke demonic forces, the words of Scripture, faith, and righteous conduct on the part of the members of the church.
When we consider this spiritual power in a broad sense, it certainly includes the power of the gospel to break through sin and hardened opposition and awaken faith in the hearts of unbelievers. But this power also includes spiritual power that will render demonic opposition to the gospel ineffective. We see examples of this in Acts 13:8 – 11, where Paul pronounced judgment on Elymas the magician, who was opposing the preaching of the gospel, and in Acts 16:16 – 18, where Paul rebuked an evil spirit in the soothsaying girl who was annoying Paul while he proclaimed the gospel. Such spiritual power to defeat evil opposition was seen frequently in the early church, such as in the freeing of Peter from prison (Acts 12:1 – 17).
Yet Paul realizes that he can use this spiritual power not only against those outside the church who oppose the gospel, but also against those within the church who are active opponents of his apostolic ministry. He says about some arrogant troublemakers in the church, “I will come to you soon, if the Lord wills, and I will find out not the talk of these arrogant people but their power. For the kingdom of God does not consist in talk but in power” (1 Corinthians 4:19-20). Such power was not to be trifled with, for it was the same power of the Holy Spirit that had brought death to Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1 – 11) and blindness to Elymas (Acts 13:8 – 11). Paul did not wish to use this power in a judgmental capacity, but he was prepared to do so if necessary. Later he wrote again to the Corinthians that his actions when present would be as powerful as his letters when absent (2 Corinthians 10:8 – 11), and he warned those who opposed his authority and had sinned publicly and not repented, “If I come again I will not spare them—since you desire proof that Christ is speaking in me…. For we are weak in him, but in dealing with you we shall live with him by the power of God” (2 Corinthians 13:2 – 4). He then adds a final reminder of his reluctance to use this authority, telling them that he is writing before he comes “in order that when I come I may not have to be severe in my use of the authority which the Lord has given me for building up and not for tearing down” (2 Corinthians 13:10).
Now we may question whether the church today has the same degree of spiritual power that the apostles Peter or Paul did. there is a distinction between the apostles and the other early Christians even in the book of Acts. Paul did not instruct any leaders of the church at Corinth, or even Timothy or Titus, to exercise that spiritual power at Corinth against his opponents. He spoke about the power which the Lord “has given me” (2 Corinthians 13:10), not about the power which the Lord had given to the church or to Christians generally.
On the other hand, Paul did direct the Corinthian church to exercise church discipline in a case of incest in the church at Corinth, and to do it “when you are assembled, and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus” (1 Corinthians 5:4). The descriptions of spiritual warfare in Ephesians 6:10 – 18 and 2 Corinthians 10:3 – 4 seem applicable to Christians generally, and few today would deny that the church has authority to pray against and to speak with authority against demonic opposition to the work of the gospel. There would seem to be at least some significant degree of spiritual power against evil opposition that God is willing to grant to the church in every age (including the present one). Perhaps it is impossible to define more specifically the degree of spiritual power God will grant to the church in times of conflict against evil, but we do not need to know the details in advance: our calling is simply to be faithful to Scripture in praying and in exercising church discipline, and then to leave the rest in God’s hands, knowing that he will grant sufficient power to accomplish his purposes through the church.
The Keys of the Kingdom
The phrase “the keys of the kingdom” occurs only once in the Bible, in Matthew 16:19, where Jesus is speaking to Peter: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you shall bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven and whatever you shall loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven”. What is the meaning of these “keys of the kingdom of heaven”?
Elsewhere in the New Testament, a key always implies authority to open a door and give entrance to a place or realm. Jesus says, “Woe to you lawyers! for you have taken away the key of knowledge; you did not enter yourselves, and you hindered those who were entering” (Luke 11:52). Jesus says in Revelation 1:18, “I have the keys of Death and Hades,” implying that he has the authority to grant entrance and exit from those realms.
The “keys of the kingdom of heaven” therefore represent at least the authority to preach the gospel of Christ and to open the door of the kingdom of heaven and allow people to enter. Peter first used this authority by preaching the gospel at Pentecost (Acts 2:14-42). The other apostles also were given this authority in a primary sense. And all believers have this “key” in a secondary sense, for they can all share the gospel with others, and thereby open the kingdom of heaven to those who will enter it.
But is there any other authority, in addition to this, that Jesus implies by the phrase “the keys of the kingdom of heaven”? There are two factors suggesting that the authority of the keys here also includes the authority to exercise discipline within the church: (1) The plural “keys” suggests authority over more than one door. More than simply entrance into the kingdom is implied; some authority within the kingdom is also suggested. (2) Jesus completes the promise about the keys with a statement about “binding” and “loosing,” which closely parallels another saying of his in Matthew 18, in which “binding” and “loosing” mean placing under church discipline and releasing from church discipline:
If he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax-gatherer. Truly I say to you, whatever you shall bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven. (Matthew 18:17-18)
But if “binding” and “loosing” clearly refer to church discipline in Matthew 18, then it seems likely that they would also refer to church discipline in Matthew 16, where Jesus’ words are very similar.
This understanding of binding and loosing in terms of church discipline also fits the context of Matthew 16:19, for, on this understanding, after promising to build his church (v. 18), Jesus promises to give not only the authority to open the door of entrance into the kingdom, but also some administrative authority to regulate the conduct of people once they are inside. Therefore, it seems that “the keys of the kingdom of heaven” which Jesus promised to Peter in Matthew 16:19 included both (1) ability to admit people to the kingdom through preaching the gospel, and (2) authority to exercise church discipline for those who do enter.
In Matthew 16:16-19, Jesus does not indicate whether the authority of the keys will later be given to others besides Peter. The authority to preach the gospel is given to others at a later time, and in Matthew 18:18 Jesus does state explicitly that the authority to exercise church discipline is given to the church generally whenever it meets and corporately carries out such discipline. Both aspects of the authority of the keys, though first given to Peter, were soon expanded to include the authority given to the church as a whole. In preaching the gospel and in exercising discipline the church now exercises the authority of the keys of the kingdom.
What persons or actions are subject to the kind of church discipline implied by the authority of the keys? In both Matthew 16:19 and 18:18, the term “whatever” is neuter in Greek, and seems to indicate that Jesus is speaking not specifically to persons (“whoever,” for which a masculine plural would be ordinarily expected), but rather more generally to situations and relationships that come up within the church. This would not exclude the authority to exercise discipline over individuals, but the phrase is broader than that, and includes specific actions that are subject to discipline as well.
Church Discipline:
The Purpose of Church Discipline
Restoration and Reconciliation of the Believer Who Is Going Astray: Sin hinders fellowship among believers and with God. In order for reconciliation to occur, the sin must be dealt with. Therefore, the primary purpose of church discipline is to pursue the twofold goal of restoration (of the offender to right behavior) and reconciliation (between believers, and with God). Just as wise parents discipline their children (Proverb 13:24: “He who loves [his son] is diligent to discipline him”), and just as God our Father disciplines those whom he loves (Hebrews 12:6; Revelation 3:19), so the church in its discipline is acting in love to bring back a brother or sister who has gone astray, reestablishing that person in right fellowship and rescuing him or her from destructive patterns of life. In Matthew 18:15, the hope is that discipline will stop at the first step, when someone goes alone: “If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.” The phrase “you have gained your brother” implies that those carrying out discipline should keep the goal of personal reconciliation among Christians always in mind. Paul reminds us that we are to “restore” the sinning brother or sister “in a spirit of gentleness” (Galatians 6:1), and James encourages us to “bring back a sinner from the error of his way” (James 5:20).
In fact, if church members were actively involved in giving private words of gentle admonition and in praying for one another when the first clear evidence of sinful conduct is seen, very little formal church discipline would have to be carried out, because the process would begin and end with a conversation between two people that never becomes known to anyone else.
Even when the final step of “excommunication” (that is, putting someone out of the fellowship or “communion” of the church) is taken, it is still with the hope that repentance will result. Paul delivered Hymenaeus and Alexander to Satan “that they may learn not to blaspheme” (1 Timothy 1:20), and the man living in incest at Corinth was to be delivered to Satan “that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus” (1 Corinthians 5:5).
If Christians who must take steps of church discipline will continue to remember this first purpose, the reconciliation of believers who are going astray with each other and with God, and their restoration to right patterns of life, then it will be much easier to continue to act in genuine love for the parties involved, and feelings of anger or desires for revenge on the part of those who have been hurt, which often lie near the surface, will much more easily be avoided.
To Keep the Sin from Spreading to Others: Although the primary goal of church discipline is restoration and reconciliation for the erring believer, in this present age reconciliation and restoration will not always come about. But whether restoration comes about or not, the church is told to carry out discipline because two other purposes are served as well.
One other purpose is that the sin will be kept from spreading to others. The author of Hebrews tells Christians to see to it that “no ‘root of bitterness’ spring up and cause trouble, and by it the many become defiled” (Hebrews 12:15). This means that if conflict between persons is not resolved quickly, the effects may spread to many others, something that sadly seems to be true in many cases of church division. Paul also says, ‘A little leaven leavens the whole lump,” and tells the Corinthians to put out of the church a man living in incest (1 Corinthians 5:2, 6-7), lest his sin affect the whole church. If that man were not disciplined, the effects of the sin would spread to many others who were aware of it and saw that the church paid little attention to it. This would cause many to think that perhaps that sin was not as bad as they had thought, and others might be tempted to commit similar or related kinds of sin. If discipline against one specific offense is not carried out, then it will be much more difficult for the church to carry out discipline if a similar kind of sin is committed by someone else in the future.
Paul also told Timothy that elders who persist in sin are to be rebuked in the presence of all, “so that the rest may stand in fear” (1 Timothy 5:20); that is, so that many others would realize that the sin will not be tolerated but will receive discipline both from the church and from God himself. In fact, Paul rebuked Peter publicly, in order that others would not follow Peter’s bad example of separating himself and eating only with Jewish believers (Galatians 2:11).
To Protect the Purity of the Church and the Honor of Christ: A third purpose of church discipline is that the purity of the church is to be protected, so that Christ will not be dishonored. Of course, no believer in this age has a completely pure heart, and we all have remaining sin in our lives. But when a church member continues to sin in a way that is outwardly evident to others, especially to unbelievers,” this clearly brings dishonor to Christ. It is similar to the situation of Jews who disobeyed God’s law and led unbelievers to scoff and blaspheme God’s name (Romans 2:24: “The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you”).
This is why Paul is shocked that the Corinthians have not disciplined the man who continued in willful sin that was publicly known in the church (1 Corinthians 5:1-2: “And you are arrogant! Ought you not rather to mourn?”). He is also greatly distressed to know that “brother goes to law against brother, and that before unbelievers” (1 Corinthians 6:6). Rather than allowing such moral blemishes on the character of the church, Peter encourages believers to “be zealous to be found by [Christ] without spot or blemish, and at peace” (2 Peter 3:14). And our Lord Jesus wants to present to himself a church “without spot or wrinkle … holy and without blemish” (Ephesians 5:27), for he is the head of the church, and its character reflects on his reputation. Even angels and demons look at the church and behold the wisdom of God expressed in it (Ephesians 3:10); therefore (Ephesians 4:1) Paul encourages Christians to be “eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Ephesians 4:3).
This is a very serious matter. Since the Lord Jesus is jealous for his own honor, if the church does not exercise proper discipline, he will do it himself, as he did at Corinth, where the Lord’s discipline resulted in sickness and death (1 Corinthians 11:27 – 34), and as he warned he would do both at Pergamum (Revelation 2:14-15) and at Thyatira (Revelation 2:20). In these last two cases, the Lord was displeased with the whole church for tolerating outward disobedience and not exercising discipline: “But I have this against you, that you tolerate the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and beguiling my servants to practice immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols” (Revelation 2:20).
How Should Church Discipline Be Carried Out?
Knowledge of the Sin Should Be Kept to the Smallest Group Possible: This seems to be the purpose in Matthew 18:15 – 17 behind the gradual progression from a private meeting, to a meeting with two or three others, to telling the entire church. The fewer people who know about some sin, the better, because repentance is easier, fewer people are led astray, and less harm is done to the reputation of the person, the reputation of the church, and the reputation of Christ.
Disciplinary Measures Should Increase in Strength Until There Is a Solution: Once again in Matthew 18 Jesus teaches us that we cannot stop simply with a private conversation if that has not brought satisfactory results. He requires that the wronged person first go alone, and then take one or two others (Matthew 18:15 – 16). If a Christian thinks that he or she has wronged someone else (or even if that other person thinks that he or she has been wronged), Jesus requires that the person who has done the wrong (or is thought to have done the wrong) go to the person who considers himself the victim of wrongdoing (Matthew 5:23). This means that whether we have been wronged or others think they have been wronged, it is always our responsibility to take the initiative and go to the other person. Jesus does not allow us to wait for the other person to come to us.
After a private meeting and a small group meeting, Jesus does not specify that the elders or officers of the church are next to be consulted as a group, but certainly this intermediate step seems to be appropriate, because Jesus may simply be summarizing the process without necessarily mentioning every possible step in it. In fact, there are several examples of small group admonition in the New Testament which are carried out by elders or other church officers (see 1 Thessalonians 5:12; 2 Timothy 4:2; Titus 1:13; 2:15; 3:10; James 5:19 – 20). The principle of keeping the knowledge of sin to the smallest group possible would certainly encourage this intermediate step as well.
Finally, if the situation cannot be resolved Jesus says to “tell it to the church” (Matthew 18:17). In this case the church would be assembled to hear the facts of the case and to come to a decision. Since Jesus allows for the possibility that the person “refuses to listen even to the church” (v. 17), the church may have to meet once to decide what to say to the offender, and then meet again to exclude that person from the fellowship of the church.
When Jesus gives these directions about church discipline, he reminds the church that his own presence and his own power are behind the decisions made by the church: “Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them” (Matthew 18:19 – 20). Jesus promises to be present in church gatherings generally, but specifically here with respect to the church being gathered for discipline of an offending member. And Paul similarly tells the Corinthians to discipline the erring member when they are assembled “with the power of our Lord Jesus” (1 Corinthians 5:4). This is not an activity to be taken lightly, but is carried out in the presence of the Lord, the spiritual component of it actually being carried out by the Lord himself.
If this ever must be done, the whole church will then know that the erring person is no longer considered a member of the church, and that person would not be allowed to take Communion, since partaking in the Lord’s Supper is a sign of partaking in the unity of the church (1 Corinthians 10:17: “Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread”).
There are other passages in the New Testament that speak of avoiding fellowship with the excommunicated person. Paul tells the Corinthians, “I wrote to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or robber, not even to eat with such a one” (1 Corinthians 5:11). He tells the Thessalonians, “Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us” (2 Thessalonians 3:6). He says, “If any one refuses to obey what we say in this letter, note that man, and have nothing to do with him, that he may be ashamed. Do not look on him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother” (2 Thessalonians 3:14 – 15). Second John 10 – 11 also prohibits greeting or welcoming into the house anyone who is promoting false teaching. These instructions are apparently given to prevent the church from giving to others the impression that it approves of the disobedience of the erring person.
Discipline of Church Leaders: In one passage Paul gives special directives concerning the discipline of church elders:
Never admit any charge against an elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses. As for those who persist in sin, rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest may stand in fear. In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of the elect angels I charge you to keep these rules without favor, doing nothing from partiality. (1 Timothy 5:19-21)
Paul here gives a special caution to protect elders from individual attacks: action regarding wrongdoing in this case should require the evidence of two or three witnesses. “Those who persist in sin” are to be rebuked “in the presence of all.” This is because the bad example of wrongful conduct by elders will very likely have a widespread negative effect on others who see their lives. Then Paul reminds Timothy to do “nothing from partiality” in this situation, a very helpful warning, since Timothy was probably a close friend to many of the elders in the church at Ephesus.
Paul’s command to rebuke a sinning elder publicly means that some statement of the nature of the offense must be made to the church (“rebuke them in the presence of all,” v. 20). On the other hand, not every detail of the sin has to be disclosed to the church. A helpful guideline is that the church should be told enough that (1) they will understand how serious the offense was, (2) they will be able to understand and support the discipline process, and (3) they will not subsequently feel the sin was minimized or covered up if more details somehow leak out later.
Such a public disclosure of the sin of a leader will signal to the congregation that the leaders of the church will not hide such matters from them in the future. This will increase the confidence of the church in the integrity of the leadership board. It will also allow the sinning leader to begin the gradual process of rebuilding relationships and trust with the congregation, because he will not have to deal with people who have a hundred different speculations about what his sin was, but with people who know the specific sin, and can see the genuine repentance and change regarding that area of sin in his life.
What about the serious sins of people who are not church leaders? Scripture gives no command to disclose publicly the sins of people who are ordinary members but not recognized leaders in the church. Leaders, however, are treated differently because their lives are to be “above reproach” (1 Timothy 3:2), and their lives should be examples for other Christians to imitate (see 1 Timothy 4:12).
Other Aspects of Church Discipline: Once discipline has occurred, as soon as there is repentance at any stage of the process, the Christians who have known about the discipline should welcome the repentant person back quickly into the fellowship of the church. Paul says, “You should rather turn to forgive and comfort him, or he may be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow…. I beg you to reaffirm your love for him” (2 Corinthians 2:7 – 8). Once again, our purpose in church discipline should never be to punish out of a desire for vengeance, but always to restore and heal.
The attitude with which discipline is carried out at any stage is also very important. It must be done with gentleness and humility, and with a genuine appreciation for our own weakness and with a fear that we might fall into similar sins. “If a man is overtaken in any trespass, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Look to yourself lest you too be tempted” (Galatians 6:1).
It is unwise to set any timetable in advance, telling people how long the discipline process is expected to last. This is because it is impossible for us to predict how long it will be until the Holy Spirit brings about deep, genuine repentance and a change in the condition of the person’s heart that led to the sin in the first place.
Finally, we should notice that immediately following the passage on church discipline in Matthew 18:15 – 20, Jesus strongly teaches the need for personal forgiveness of those who sin against us (Matt. 18:21 – 35). We are to forgive those who harm us “seventy times seven” (v. 22), and Jesus tells us that our heavenly Father will punish us severely if we do not forgive our brother from the heart (v. 35). We should see the passage on church discipline and this passage as complementary, not contradictory. As individuals, we must always forgive in our hearts and not bear grudges. Yet we can certainly forgive someone in our hearts and still seek church discipline for the good of the person who is committing a sin, for the good of the church, for the honor of Christ, and because God’s Word commands it.