I heard of a situation in which someone who had been accused of falling into a grievous sin was told by someone at the church they were attending, “What are you doing here? Don’t you know that you’re not welcomed here?” Apart from the fact that the person who said that had no authority to do so, the church that this individual attended then proceeded to tell this individual that they were not welcomed to come to any small groups, Sunday school or evening worship. This was an example of abuse of the authority that Christ invested in the office of elder.
Recently, I was watching a show in which a young apprentice to a very powerful man had made several very serious mistakes that had affected his boss’ business. When the young man appeared before his boss he said, “Am I not allowed to make a mistake?” To which his boss replied, “You’re allowed one mistake and you’ve already made it.” This, I fear, is the mentality of many in the church today.
There a functional self-righteousness that has snuck its way into the church–a self-righteousness that manifests itself in how we treat those in our fellowships who fall into sin. This self-righteousness is not on account of churches faithfully practicing church discipline in accord with our Lord’s teaching (Matt. 18:15-20); neither is it necessarily on account of some particular teaching in our pulpits. Rather, it is a functional self-righteousness that resonates with our sinful natures.
It is seen in Simon Peter’s question to Jesus, “Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? Up to seven times” (Matt. 18:21)? Peter wanted to put a limit on how often he should have to forgive and receive a brother who had sinned against him. I would suggest that many of us are even less gracious than Simon Peter on his least gracious day. If we were honest with ourselves we would probably have asked Jesus, “Lord, should I forgive my brother this one time?” The way in which this unfolds can be imperceptibly subtle, and the reasons quite complex.
When someone in our churches commits a societally unacceptable sin–and the church(es) that know about it treat the individual who has committed this sin as one who has a leprous disease that will affect the reputation of their fellowship–they may unconsciously end up displaying a sinful self-righteousness. Surely, we would all agree that there is sin that causes scandal and that harms the name and cause of Christ in the world.
We would also acknowledge that some sin is of such a kind as merits greater caution with regard to how we protect the members of our churches. We would also agree that Jesus has appointed church discipline for the purity of His church. However, when the Apostle Paul dealt with the only case of church discipline recorded in the New Testament, he dealt with a socially unacceptable sin committed by a member of the church in Corinth.
When the man who committed this sin repented, the apostle Paul gave a most serious warning to the congregation when he said, “You ought rather to forgive and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one be swallowed up with too much sorrow. Therefore I urge you to reaffirm your love to him…Now whom you forgive anything, I also forgive. For if indeed I have forgiven anything, I have forgiven that one for your sakes in the presence of Christ, lest Satan should take advantage of us; for we are not ignorant of his devices.”
Satan loves to implant an unforgiving and self-righteous attitude among believers with regard to a repentant sinner who longs to be in fellowship with God’s people again. This is also intimated in the warning Paul gives the Galatians about restoring a brother or sister in a spirit of gentleness least we also be tempted (Gal. 6:1).
The reasons why Christians act this way are often multi-layered and complex. In the first place, among those who rightly reject a “Best Life Now” mentality there are many who embrace a “Best Face Now” mentality with regard to fellowship in the church. There is something deeply engrained in us that tells us that we need to appear as if we –and those we publicly associate with–have it all together.
It is a functional and societal Wesleyan perfectionism. This attitude tends to manifest itself when someone in the body falls into a particular sin. The way in which it happens can often be extremely subtle, nevertheless, it can be spiritually deadly to a fellowship. Jonathan Edwards saw the danger of this incipient self-righteousness among those whom he pastored in North Hampton. He wrote:
I think, according to what observations I have made—as I have had [more] opportunity of very extensive observation than any other person in the town—that is has been a pretty prevailing error in the town, that persons are not sufficiently sensible of the danger of self-righteousness after conversion. They seem to be sensible that persons are in danger of it before they are converted, but they think that when a man is converted, he is brought off wholly from his own righteousness, just as if there was no danger of any workings of self-righteousness afterwards.1
Such self-righteousness may come under the auspice of being concerned about “protecting the body,” when, in fact, it is merely a maneuver to protect your own reputation or the reputation of a particular church. It is often more of a “saving face” tactic than a zeal for God’s glory and Gospel tactic.
Subscribe to Free “Top 10 Stories” Email
Get the top 10 stories from The Aquila Report in your inbox every Tuesday morning.

