The Greatest of These

Dear Bob,

You know me, and that theology matters to me. I don't like when people and institutions start thinking sloppy thoughts about God. Despite this deep interest, you might be surprised to hear me say that what rains a church is never theology, but rather a lack of discipline.

The Reformers, who found themselves in a circumstance where they had to think through such matters, argued that there are three distinguishing marks of the church. What they meant by marks of the church were the things which were necessary for an institution to rightly call itself a church. Without them, no matter how much they might waddle like a church and quack like a church they are not the church. Those three marks are the Word of God rightly preached, the sacraments rightly administered, and the discipline rightly exercised. And the greatest of these is discipline.

Seems odd that the one we hear the least about of would be the most important. But when you consider the state of the church, it all adds up. Here's why it is the important. What does, or should a church do, say, when the Word is not rightly preached? What should a church do when the sacraments are wrongly administered? Discipline. Discipline is the court of the last chance for the church. If I were to stand up in the pulpit of my church and begin to preach that Jesus is behind the comet around the bend, and that He is not God incarnate, but a superior intelligence from the planet Goofus, this would not suddenly plunge Saint Peter, far less the Associate Reformed Presbyterian denomination, into the ranks of apostacy. The proper response would be for the elders to begin the process of disciplining me. If I do not repent, I am booted out on my space travelling hindquarters. And if the session of the church found my views persuasive, still Saint Peter, and the ARP would not be apostate. Any congregant, or in fact anyone aware of my teaching, and the session's complicity in it would have a duty to report my heresy to the Tennessee and Alabama Presbytery, who would then seek to elicit repentance from me.

Now here comes the stretch. Suppose that, against all odds, I persuade the presbytery not that my views are correct, but that they are no worthy of discipline, and they refuse to defrock me, still neither Saint Peter Presbyterian Church, not theTennesee and Alabama Presbytery are apostate. Again, someone in the presbytery, or anyone aware of this problem, must report it to the General Synod of the ARP. And they must discipline me.

Now suppose that they refuse. Here's the tricky covenantal part. The highest court has refused to discipline me. Now not only is the denomination, the presbytery, and Saint Peter apostate, but every local congregation, pastor, and elder therein is apostate. They would all be a part of an institution that does not rightly exercise discipline at its highest levels, and which is therefore no longer a church.

This is precisely what has happened in the Roman Catholic religion, and in the Presbyterian Church (sic) USA. Rome has not only allowed the teaching, but unchangably codified it, that the gospel of justification by faith alone is a damnable heresy. And those Presbyterians have officially refused to discipline those who unrepentently deny the deity of Christ, His resurrection, and His atonement, and a host of other very important stuff. Of course both institutions still have people as a part of them that affirm all the right things. But we consider their confessions of faith to be less than credible for the simple reason that everyone there is practicing the grave sin of forsaking the gathering together of the saints. That is, they're not in church.

But they seem so sincere, don't they? They tell us that they are seeking to bring to life their dead denominations, that they just can't leave those poor lost people there. I appreciate the sentiment. I really do. So much so that I tell these kind folks that if being a part of an apostate church is okay for missionary reasons, why not go all the way and become Jewish, especially if the appeal is the age and unity of the so called denomination?

The irony of this line of reasoning is that it is not a fruit of selflessness, but of arrogance. You see Bob, you must leave that apostate church for the safety of your own soul. What makes you so sure that you won't one day need the grace of discipline in your own life? A church which won't discipline pastors who deny the resurrection of Christ certainly won't discipline a member who does likewise. Who knows, you might find yourself one day doing something as wicked as suing your brothers in Caesar's courts. These things could happen to you especially when you are depriving yourself of the means of grace of the Word preached. You don’t' get the Word in denominations that don't believe it. And unfenced table is just a feeding trough.

Even if you think it a godly thing to risk your own soul for the sake of the lost, (and remember the message they get from you is "If it's okay for that nice Bob to stay here, it must be okay for me") how can you justify risking Bobbi Ann's soul, and the souls of your children? Your first responsibility is to them. A church without discipline is like a bachelor with a wife: there ain't no such thing. And as Augustine said, if you do not have the church as your mother, you do not have God as your father.

Remember, the church is the ekklesia, the 'called out ones'. And we are called out from those who do not believe. Come out from among them Bob. I don't care if you come to Saint Peter. But you can't stay where you are. Only a fool is loyal to a harlot.