We have been united as follows concerning the ban. The ban shall be employed with all those who have given themselves over to the Lord, to walk after [Him] in His commandments; those who have been baptized into the one body of Christ, and let themselves be called brothers or sisters, and still somehow slip and fall into error and sin, being inadvertently overtaken. The same [shall] be warned twice privately and the third time be publicly admonished before the entire congregation according to the command of Christ. But this shall be done according to the ordering of the Spirit of God before the breaking of bread so that we may all in one spirit and in one love break and eat from one bread and drink from one cup.
We probably know “the ban” better by the term excommunication. The first point that needs to be made in understanding this article is that non-believers are not involved. The ban was specifically established for “those who have given themselves over to the Lord.” The expectations, standards, and accountability for those within the community of disciples are higher than for those who have not given themselves over to the rule of the Lord. This ban can never be administered by the sword, i.e. torture and execution.
Next, notice the timeline. After the person is “warned twice privately and the third time publicly.” This was such an important aspect of church discipline that the entire congregation was supposed to be led by the Spirit of God. This was done specifically to model the direction of Jesus:
If your brother sins, go and show him his fault when the two of you are alone. If he listens to you, you have regained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others with you, so that at the testimony of two or three witnesses every matter may be established. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. If he refuses to listen to the church, treat him like a Gentile or a tax collector. (Mat. 18:15-17)
One might think that was fairly straight forward. But, if we understand Jesus as anything but hypocritical, then we need to take seriously what he meant by treating the sinful brother or sister “like a Gentile or a tax collector.” Though they were the ones looked down upon in the community, was it not Jesus himself who was ridiculed and challenged for gathering, dialoguing, and eating with the Gentiles and tax collectors? Wasn’t one of his precious twelve a former tax collector?
The ban is not a casting out of an individual from the community, a complete shunning of the sinful, unrepentant party. The ban is a recognition of a severed relationship between a brother or sister and the rest of the community, and an understanding that there needs to be a reconciliation. A community of disciples, coming together and showing that person the love they would show any outsider, taking every step possible to bring about a restoration, is what Church Discipline should look like. Through the guidance of the Holy Spirit and our elders, churches can and should trust in the discipline set up by Jesus himself.
