One of the more difficult questions that face many Christians is what to do when one's own family members walk disorderly as Christians, and the saints must withdraw from them. Do family members have exactly the same responsibility as other church members? Are mothers and fathers expected to withdraw from their own children? And what about husbands and wives?
Perhaps the best approach is to examine the biblical teaching on both discipline and family obligations and see if we can arrive at an understanding of both.
First, all church discipline is not withdrawal of fellowship. In Galatians 6: 1, we are told that if a brother is "overtaken" in a fault, the spiritually minded are to "restore" him. Similarly, personal sins between brethren are to be handled initially one-on-one, in an effort to "gain the brother" (Matthew 18:15).
But there is another sinful Christian who demands sterner action. The church, after admonishing him to repent, is to "reject" the heretic (one who is self-willed or rebellious) (Titus 3: 10).
We are told "not to keep company with" and "not even to eat with" those Christians who are immoral, covetous, drunkards, revilers, extortionists, or idolaters. The Apostle Paul said that the church is to judge these persons and "put them away" (1 Corinthians 5:9-13).
In broader terms, Paul gave the same commandment in 2 Thessalonians 3:6: "But we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw from EVERY brother who walks disorderly and not according to the tradition which he received from us." The Greek word translated "disorderly" means "to step out of rank." It is a military term that describes insubordination to authority, and thus, is broad in scope. The scripture also tells us to "mark" and "avoid" those who cause division, because they do not serve the Lord (Romans 16: 17-18).
This is the basic teaching of scripture about "who" is to be disciplined.
But, to answer our question about family responsibility in this matter, we need also to look at "why" we are to withdraw from Christians who sin and don't repent. There are four basic reasons.
- To maintain the purity of the church (Ephesians 5:27). Maintaining fellowship with brethren who live in sin brings impurity, shame, and reproach on the Lord's church.
- To keep the way of truth from being blasphemed by others. Continued fellowship with unrepentant sinners tells the world that the church is not different from the rest of the world.
- To save the soul of the person being disciplined. Public loss of fellowship may "turn him back" and "save a soul from death" (James 5: 19-20). Paul put it even more directly in 1 Corinthians 5:5. He said, "deliver such a one (the sexually immoral) to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus." In other words, let the erring Christian know that he is back in Satan's realm and will reap destruction unless he repents. The church makes a clear statement of the sinner's position, so there can be no doubt.
- In 1 Timothy 5:20, regarding the discipline of sinning elders, Paul told the preacher Timothy to "rebuke them before all that the rest also might fear." All church discipline has this same effect. It is preventative in nature. When one child in a family is severely disciplined for lying or sassing, other children get the warning.
Now, with these issues covered, we are ready to address the question of whether we ought to participate in church discipline when it involves our own families.
If we are members of the Lord's church, He gave these commands to us. Jesus warned that being his disciple would often put family members at odds. He said, "He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me" (Matthew 10:34-37; Luke 14:26).
If we (family members of erring Christians) wish to maintain the purity of the church, keep the gospel from being blasphemed, save the souls of our erring loved ones, and keep other loved ones from making the same mistake, we'll want to participate in this discipline. Won't we?
Church discipline, even when it involves withdrawal, does not call for a cessation of all contact with an erring brother or sister. It formally declares a break in fellowship, because of sin, and it requires a severe limitation in social fellowship, including not eating with the sinning Christian.
But we are allowed, in fact instructed, not to treat such a person as an "enemy," but to admonish, or continue to warn, him as a brother (2 Thessalonians 3: 15).
Even the Matthew 18:17 instruction to treat the unrepentant one as a "heathen and a tax collector" does not imply cessation of all contact. But it does clearly indicate we are not to have close and intimate social contact except, perhaps, for the purpose of teaching or correcting. Jesus inflamed the Jews because he ate with sinners and publicans, but he did so to teach them, not to exhibit social approval of their sins.
Finally, we must ask if there are any exceptions. The answer, I believe, is a limited "yes."
There are some circumstances where Christians have dual obligations. For instance, if one's 15-year-old son is a Christian, and an unrepentant fornicator, the parent is still obligated to provide for him, teach him, and train him (Ephesians 6:4 1 Timothy 5:8). Complete social withdrawal would not permit the performance of these other scriptural duties.
Similar situations exist where a Christian woman's once-faithful husband abandons the Lord. She is still bound to be his wife, to love him, etc. If she withdraws from him, as does the rest of the congregation, she also becomes guilty of sin (Romans 7:1,2; 1 Corinthians 7:1-16). And, if our aging parents forsake the Lord, we are still responsible, as a part of the "honor" due them, to care for them.
But as Christians seeking to do what is right, we should not abdicate our spiritual responsibility toward grown sons and daughters; brothers and sisters; mothers and fathers; nephews and nieces; cousins; and in-laws because of a few exceptions.
My good brother has tackled a difficult subject that many brethren do not wish to discuss or study. I appreciate, and concur with, brother Blackaby's comments. Let me add some food for thought. While it is true that we cannot pit one of God's commands against another, we can reconcile all things when we consider everything the Bible says about any subject--this one included. Brethren have difficulty with this subject because it is an emotional one. We often worry too much about the "feelings" of the member who is walking disorderly. We ought to worry more about his spiritual condition and where he will spend eternity. Remember, this can also affect our spiritual relationship with God. Honestly speaking, I would rather miss time with them here than for us both to spend eternity separated from God. To me, it seems like an easy choice. Dear reader, don't forget the value of your soul! (KMG)