Church Discipline

I recently read an article about a Dallas appeals case that made me really think about the role of the church in the "discipline" of its members. How should a church respond (if at all) if one of its members is arrested for DWI? For murder? For shoplifting? How should the church respond (if at all) to infidelity or divorce amongst its members? Where does a church's "right" to confront sin end and an individual's right to privacy begin? Some churches take a "hands-off" approach while others, like Watermark Church in North Dallas, become actively involved. Some of you may know the story, but for those who don't, I will summarize:

All members of Watermark Church are made to sign a document (a loosely based contract I would guess though I was not able to find the document online) stating that they will (and this is a direct quote) "submit themselves to the care and correction of the Board of Elders." The church has adopted what they call the Matthew 18 process based upon the pretty well-known passage found in Matthew 18:

"If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. ... If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you. ... If he refuses to listen to them, tell the church."

You should be able to tell by now that this will likely get nasty.

Husband and Wife sign on the dotted line and join Watermark Church. Wife finds out that Husband is cheating and seeing another woman who is not a church member of Watermark (but is an employee at another Dallas church). The Wife and some friends confronted Husband. Husband admitted to the affair and said he would stop. The End? Not quite.

Husband did not stop seeing the other woman. Wife finds out and goes to the church to inform them of the situation in accordance with Matthew 18 and the church guidelines. The church has a regularly scheduled evening church meeting where the wife asks the congregation for prayer for her marriage. The pastor informs the church that Husband and Wife are having marital problems, but does not divulge the specific issue. Sounds ok so far, right? Hang on for one more paragraph.

Church then sends letters to 14 of Husband and Wife's friends calling a meeting to discuss the infidelity. The letter specifically details the "charges" for lack of a better word. 7 of the 14 are church members -- the other 7 are not. Husband did not show up at the meeting, which apparently did not make the church very happy.

Chruch sends letter to Husband stating that it is going to send a letter to the woman he was seeing, letters to the 14 friends stating that Husband refused to attend any meeting, and letters to the Christian organization that Husband was a board member of.

Pastor then calls woman directly and tells her to tell her boss, the pastor of another church, or else the church would call the pastor directly "even as we would want and expect others to contact us if one of our employees or members was engaging in activities damaging to the reputation of Christ."

The Husband and woman sued asking the courts to block the church from contacting anyone else, especially the woman's employer.

The church itself, aside from this whole issue, looks like a great place to attend (www.watermark.org). It appears that they have a growing thriving church with a bunch of activities and programs, including a program for kids with disabilities. The church website has their version of the story, their response, and their Matthew 18 process. Their website is light years ahead of most churchs (you can download their sermons to your iPod, for example).

Keeping the whole church/state lawsuit junk out of the discussion, what do you think about this? Did the church go too far? Did they do the right thing? Should they have done something different? Discuss.

Happy Father's Day

In recognition of Father's Day, who is your favorite TV dad? As you can see from the picture, I would have to vote for Cliff Huxtable (followed closely by Phillip Drummond from Diff'rent Strokes).

Your turn.