Polity Matters
A podcast on the foundations of Presbyterian Church government. Hosted by Scott Edburg, Jared Nelson, and Ben Ratliff.
Polity Matters
75. Pure Hypothetical (BCO 30)
Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.
In this episode of Polity Matters, hosts Ben Ratliff, Jared Nelson, and Scott Edberg welcome Dr. Guy Waters of Reformed Theological Seminary to discuss Chapter 30 of the PCA Book of Church Order (BCO), which deals with church censures. They explore the biblical, theological, and practical aspects of church discipline, the different types of censures available to church courts, and how they should be wisely applied in the life of the church.
Books by Dr. Waters:
Facing the Last Enemy: Death and the Christian
The Sabbath as Rest and Hope for the People of God
Well-Ordered, Living Well: A Field Guide to Presbyterian Church Government
For the Mouth of the Lord Has Spoken: The Doctrine of Scripture
Official Website: politymatters.org
Support the Show: Buy Me a Coffee
Twitter/X: @PolityMatters
Facebook: Polity Matters Page
Introductions
SPEAKER_02Well, hello and welcome to Polity Matters. My name is Ben Ratliff, and I'm joined as always by Jared Nelson and Scott Edberg, and we are glad to be with you today to discuss BCO Chapter 30, which is on church censures. And we're especially glad to have a guest with us today, Dr. Guy Waters of Reformed Seminary in Jackson. I'm sure there's many titles I should ascribe to you, but I will let you introduce yourself, uh Dr. Waters, and tell the listeners about who you are and what you do.
SPEAKER_00Sure, thank you. Thank you all for having me. I am a servant at Reform Theological Seminary, Jackson Campus, professor of New Testament, academic dean uh here. And so I've been at RTS. This is my 18th year. I taught at Bellhaven, then college, now university for five years previously. So we've we've been in Jackson for a while. I'm a teaching elder in the PCA and member of this Presbyter, the Presbytery of the Mississippi Valley, and uh I am um a parliamentarian of Presbytery, which means I dispense advice that no one is compelled to take in a month. And uh today I am outnumbered three to one, this this August company.
SPEAKER_01Oh boy.
SPEAKER_02We I I I still have fond memories. I took you first a couple of classes at Bellhaven that I then took took with you at RTS as well. Uh I don't think I had to buy any new books for one of those classes, but anyway. It was a good time. Now my brother speaks fondly of sitting under your teaching at RTS. Scott, you had Dr. Waters, didn't you?
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I did. I did.
SPEAKER_02All right, well that's riveting, riveting discussion there.
SPEAKER_03Um Yeah, I I never had Guy Waters at a Dallas Theological Seminary, so um I I don't really have a whole lot to add to that other than I I have enjoyed your your books and have uh forced some of my ruling elders to read them.
SPEAKER_01So I remember mistaking your polity course, Dr. Waters, and I didn't I didn't own the Book of Church Order, and you had us take these quizzes that were really short, and uh there were multiple choice online, and so the Book of Church Order I got was the 1973 version for the PCA from the library, and it was entirely unhelpful.
SPEAKER_00Yes, it's in a three-ring binder for a reason.
SPEAKER_03And of course, we are all looking forward to your uh your follow-up on Bannerman that you're gonna update that and uh release that in the next few weeks, is that right?
SPEAKER_00Or well, you keep looking forward to it, and I'll keep looking for it.
SPEAKER_01I hear you're self-publishing it at this point.
SPEAKER_00I I think if one wants to do something that exceeds the girth of Bannerman, it's gonna have to be printed in his basement. Probably aren't many out there wanting to invest that capital.
SPEAKER_03You can sell it out of your trunk at GA. That's right.
Intro to BCO 30
SPEAKER_02Oh man. Well, our listeners will remember from BCO 273 the ends of church discipline are the rebuke of offenses, the removal of scandal, the vindication of the honor of Christ, the promotion of the purity and general edification of the church, and the spiritual good of offenders themselves. And then a couple sections later, 275 goes on to lay out the disciplinary principles set forth in Scripture, which are primarily drawn from Matthew 18 and Galatians 1. Uh BCO 30 begins to get into uh definitions of church censures. Dr. Waters, I'm wondering if you can help us, before we get into the details, understand church censures more broadly. So what is a censure and where do we see them in the overall uh process of church discipline?
SPEAKER_00Right. So, you know, a s a censure, in as we come into Book of Church Order, Chapter 30, is something that's inflicted by a church court. So it's it's by definition formal. It's an expression of the jurisdictional power of the church. It's different than the informal reproofs that a Christian may give another Christian, or that a single elder may give a Christian, or even that a that a session meeting with someone may informally uh, hey, cut that out, stop doing it. I mean, all of those are certainly with within the parameter of the life and experience of the church, but that that's not what Book of Church Order, Chapter 30, is talking about. And and a censure is going to follow on either a trial or a confession, uh a case without process. So there has been a finding of guilt. Either a person is self-confessed, he's he's come forward, I'm guilty, and and the court agrees, or a person has gone through a trial, he's been found guilty, and and then a censure is going to be the fitting response to that finding of guilt. And we'll we'll talk more about the particulars, but we're we really are dealing with something that's that's specific, that's particular, and I I think we can easily go sideways in the church if we don't keep that in mind.
BCO 30-1
SPEAKER_02Let's get into the first section though. Let me read it and then we'll we'll try to parse through many of these things. So BCO 30-1, the censures which may be inflicted by church courts are admonition, suspension from the sacraments, excommunication, suspension from office, and deposition from office. The censures of admonition or definite suspension from office shall be administered to an accused who, upon conviction, satisfies the court as to his repentance and makes such restitution as is appropriate. Such censure concludes the judicial process. The censures of indefinite suspension or excommunication shall be administered to an accused who, upon conviction, remains impenitent. So some of this sounds familiar from what we just discussed, but uh I I I wanted to ask everybody the question, and Dr. Waters, you may have insight here. This section lays out every censure available to a court in these circumstances. What's the purpose of the paragraph given that the ones following define each censure in more detail? You know, I we see the book do this sometimes where it'll explain uh shortly everything, and then it'll have sections following that get into more details on each item. Um how is 31 functioning here for us?
SPEAKER_00Well, I I think to begin, you know, this is a constitutional document, and so we're governed by our Constitution. And in specifying five censures, that means that this is the palette that's available to any church court. So that that's a protection for individual members and officers that a church court just can't reach into its grab bag of tricks, pull out whatever it wants by way of censure, and apply it to a person. You know, these it's these five and these five only. And then I think the remainder of 30-1 says, look, there's there's a logic to this, they fall into two broad categories. Uh one set of censures is applicable when the court is satisfied that a person is uh repentant, and another set of censures is applicable when the court is not yet satisfied that this person is repentant. And that that could mean either they appear to him to be impenitent, or it could mean we don't yet see the evidence of repentance. We're not declaring you impenitent, but we've yet to see evidence of repentance. And so these censures would apply in that situation. So 31 gives is an umbrella, 30-1 is an umbrella, limiting the censures that are available to a church court, but also helping us to see the logic that that unites these five censures and and on under what circumstances they would or would not be uh suitable.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, it it's interesting the the language there of when this stops. Um there's the such censure uh concludes the judicial process. Uh probably should be noted if there's an appeal, then that's that's uh not quite the case yet, but once that has uh finally been uh decided. But as we go through this, I think there are some that are more definite, and that's the end of the matter, such as uh admonition, versus something that's like a suspension where you're looking for something else. Is that right?
SPEAKER_00Um Yes. That and I think that sentence that you read, such censure concludes the judicial process for the censures of admonition, definite suspension from office, that's important because conclusion of process is going to be critical and not just for the individual, but but for the well-being of the church. That this this, whatever has given occasion to this matter that's before the session or the presbytery, we're not gonna keep ripping open wounds indefinitely, interminably. Uh that these censures, when appropriate, do bring closure and conclusion. And so the matter, so far as the church courts are concerned, is done.
SPEAKER_01So when is the conclusion of judicial process? Is it at the point of repentance or the conclusion of the verdict of the censure being inflicted?
SPEAKER_00Yeah, I I would take 30-1 to say when when that censure is pronounced, it concludes judicial process. Now, obviously, definite suspension from office, if a if a Presbytery suspends a minister for 12 months, then there's a sense in which process has been concluded upon pronouncement, but that censure has to take effect. And so in that in a broader, perhaps less technical sense, the the conclusion comes at the termination of that 12 months. But yeah, I think the the intention of 30-1 is that when that censure is pronounced, um that that's the the capstone event of this judicial process.
SPEAKER_03So in a sense, after you're admonished, um we maybe getting a little bit into that in the next section, but um if there's nothing else that's pending, you are now in good standing again, uh which may be relevant for you know if there's that overture that wants to uh say that you have certain uh rights that you don't have while you're in process or something like that. But after that point, actually you're in good standing again, that's behind you.
SPEAKER_00That's right. So admonition brings the matter to an end, you're not underprocessed, and you you remain in good standing from that point forward.
SPEAKER_02I forget where I read it uh in one of our commentaries, one of the men who have written on these matters. They pointed out that the church can only remove what it has already granted. Um and so that's a limit to our our censuring. So I suppose we could look at it as ta the table and membership uh proper I guess office uh office bearers as well. Um we can't we can't do anything that's not within our power to grant in the first place. You can't strip somebody of a I don't know, you know, civil right or some kind of thing. I don't know what churches might try to do that would be outside of their jurisdiction. But uh that's right.
SPEAKER_00And I I know Morton Smith has said that in print. I think Ramsey has said that in print. But it's a critical principle that as as you uttered it well, the church can only take away what the church has first granted. And what these censures do is they rehearse what it is the church can bestow on someone, and that would be membership, uh admission to ceiling ordinances, and then office. And the church has the right to grant those, the church has the right, um, constitutionally, of course, to deprive someone of them, but you you can't go and find someone, you you can't lock them up in the church basement for six months or you know, what whatever the the imagination of a body of men could come up with. Uh so in that sense, chapter 30 is uh a critical preservation of our freedoms as Christians in the church.
SPEAKER_02I've had the call before, a man has has asked me, you know, d what do you think if we told so and so that they they need to move out of the house they're living in so that they can get out of this situation that's causing them to sin? And I just said, How are you gonna impose that? I I don't I don't know how a church session is gonna tell somebody that they have to move. Um I mean we don't have that power. Um there it is I I'll I say that only to to demonstrate that it sometimes men will try to go outside the bounds of what we're allowed to do. Um and it can seem pragmatic, I suppose, to try to do those things, but it it's it's not what we're given.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, and I I think just without getting into any of the specifics, keeping a critical distinction before us, we we may, as pastors, as elders, give advice and counsel, but that's a distinct thing from a a formal command to to break is censurable. And I think that line can get very easily crossed. We we may have opinions and judgments, and they may be well grounded, but we have to be careful when we try to enforce them against someone who's disregarded them or has not followed them, as though they have committed some offense in a in a BCO 29 sense. And I think we we need to make sure we do everything in our power to stay on the right side of that line.
BCO 30-2
SPEAKER_02Well, let's get into some of these details on these censures listed. So 30-2 reads Admonition is the formal reproof of an offender by a church court, warning him of his guilt and danger, and exhorting him to be more circumspect and watchful in the future. Uh maybe the first question to ask is uh uh in all of these is going to be to distinguish when when the particular censure is appropriate uh versus other circumstances. Uh when when is admonition an appropriate censure to inflict?
SPEAKER_00Well, that that's ultimately left to the discretion of the court. Uh you knew that was coming, didn't you? Um and and clearly they have to be satisfied that there is repentance and that restitution as appropriate has been made. Those are the conditions of 30-1. Um I I know of an instance, and this took place a long time ago, um, so I I think it's safe safe to mention it. It was a small church, and uh young woman became pregnant out of wedlock, and the matter became really a topic of conversation in the church. So the session began meeting with this young woman, she expressed repentance, they were satisfied that she was repentant, they administered the censure of admonition 30-2. I don't know all the details of of how they got there, but they they did admonish her formally. And then the session turned to the congregation and said, Okay, as a session, we have dealt with this matter, she's declared her repentance, we're not going to dredge this up anymore. And the congregation really rallied around the session and began to to serve this young woman in in this time of need. So that I think is is an illustration of how admonition can can serve not just the individual, because that's a it's a very formal, solemn thing to to receive an admonition like this, but can also serve the broader congregation. The matter was concluded judicially, and now the church could move forward and begin doing the sorts of things the church ought to be doing.
SPEAKER_03I I guess I have a follow-up question to this in my own mind, which is um this is a a formal censure, and so sometimes we can get confused in thinking about admonition that's informal. Like I told them not to do that, but it's not coming from the session. So this would be an an actual act of the session together, not just we privately have told them this. Uh, but if it comes to the level of a censure of a session, does that need to be public or can there be a private formal admonition?
SPEAKER_00So there there is later um in chapter 36, I believe it is, a provision for the infliction of church censures. And um you know, on on the one hand, looking at admonition, the the provision that would govern that is 36-3, and admonition may be private, it may be public. There's a running principle that you you don't expand the sphere of knowledge of the matter typically beyond where it already is. So if um you don't want to broadcast to the whole congregation something that's just known to a couple of people. And w I think we also recognize we're we're in a legal climate where public dissemination of information like this can carry certain risks. And so sessions have to take that into consideration, presbyteries have to take that into consideration as they decide how and if to go about uh broadcasting accenture.
BCO 30-3
SPEAKER_00That's good.
SPEAKER_02Let's let's go into thirty thirty-three. Um here I'll read it and then we'll work through. So this is gonna this is gonna deal with suspension, which is gonna have a couple uh uh at least three distinct aspects to it here. Suspension from sacraments is the temporary exclusion from those ordinances and is def indefinite as to its duration. There is no definite suspension from the sacraments. Suspension from office is the exclusion of a church officer from his office. This may be definite or indefinite as to its duration. With respect to church officers, suspension from sacraments shall always be accompanied by suspension from office. But suspension from office is not always necessarily accompanied with suspension from sacraments. Definite suspension from office is administered when the credit of religion, the honor of Christ, and the good of the delinquent demand it, even though the delinquent has given satisfaction to the court. Indefinite suspension is administered to the impenitent offender until he exhibits signs of repentance, or until by his conduct the necessity of the greatest censure be made manifest. In the case of indefinite suspension from office uh imposed due to scandalous conduct, the procedure outlined in BCO thirty-four eight shall be followed. So, as I read it, we have three different types of suspension here suspension from the sacraments, uh, from the office definitely, and from office indefinitely. So let's let's talk first about suspension from sacraments, and then we'll work our way into suspension from office, realizing that there's some uh some inner mixing going on here in a couple places. Um why when would suspension from sacraments be appropriate? Realizing and I so appreciated your answer earlier, Dr. Waters, that it really is up to the court uh in their own discretion. But when when would we imagine this would be appropriate uh in the life of a of an individual found guilty of an offense?
SPEAKER_00Yeah. So I mean a little bit of history may help. You know, these censures are in in a certain grade or rank of of severity, with with admonition being at the bottom, excommunication obviously being at the top, and historically and and in our book of church order, suspension from the sacraments is one below excommunication. And and so the the name this in scholastic theology, Dutch Reformed Church for suspension from the sacraments was excommunicatio minor, lesser excommunication, because it was a a a step one removed from excommunication. A taste or hint of what excommunication would bear if you're being barred from the sacraments. So it's a big deal, obviously, to suspend someone from the Lord's Supper. It may only be done according to 30-1 and 30-3 when the court is not satisfied as to a person's repentance. It is indefinite, which makes sense. If you're not satisfied that this person is repentant, you're not going to put a limit. The limit will be when this person satisfies us as to his repentance, or we have to elevate the censure. And the goal of it for this person is to impress on them a sense of their sin, the gravity of their offense, so that they would be brought to repentance. That's the pastoral goal behind the censure for for this particular person.
SPEAKER_03So I don't know if that'd be six months you can't come to the table or something like that. And then now it just says there is no definite suspension from the sacraments. Now, is this because the the point of a suspension is to lead to repentance, not as kind of a punishment of like this was bad enough that six months in the corner? I don't know. Um is that the reason for that, or why why do you take it, do you take it as a good thing that there's no definite suspension from the sacrament, or is that an overreaction to something?
SPEAKER_00You know, I I'd I'd want to study the history more on that, but uh, you know, I think really whether there is or is not a definite suspension from the sacraments is going to resolve into what is the purpose of this censure? And I think a definite suspension from the sacraments could very well carry the sense that you just described, Jared. Okay, bad boy, can't come to the table for six months, uh, no dessert until you reform or get better. And I'm not saying that's the intention, but that is certainly the way it could be conveyed, that's certainly the way it could be applied. But in any case, that's just not an option open in in the Book of Church Order. And that's that's really woven genetically into the structure of BCO 30. You'd have to rewrite much of this chapter to accommodate uh definite suspension from the sacraments.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, I take it as um if you're a just in a practical matter, if you're a a session and you're suspending somebody from the sacrament, it's indefinite, and you can say we're going to revisit this again in two or three months, but you just don't say it's a definite for two or three months. You say it's indefinite, you revisit it, and then uh you may lift it then or it may not have resolved itself by then. So practically is that kind of what it looks like?
SPEAKER_00Yeah, and I I think there's uh there's a duty that falls on the court to pursue this person because the reason they're suspending him from the sacraments is they don't see evidence of repentance. So I I think they ought to bear the burden of uh meeting with this person, counseling this person, uh pressing him for repentance, looking for signs of repentance. Uh I don't think you you build a wall and then say, well, you know, climb the wall whenever you're ready, we'll be on the other side. There is a certain reciprocal obligation uh here.
SPEAKER_03Okay, I do have one more question. Um if if you've read Ramsey, and I just want to get your take on this because I'd never thought about this before, um, that suspension from the sealing ordinances is both the supper and baptism. So Ramsey says their children should not be brought forward for baptism if they are in an indefinite suspension from the sacraments. Is that is that your understanding of that, or is that uh a little bit of an over-application of that?
SPEAKER_00Um You know, I I'm I'm following the train of logic. Uh I think getting there from our BCO uh might be a bit of a difficulty, a bit of a stretch. Uh because conventionally we we take suspension from the sacraments to mean the Lord's Supper, but 30-3, it is the temporary exclusion from those ordinances. And I understand exactly Ramsey's reasoning. Um I think if someone were inclined to go that direction in the PCA, send up an amendment to next year's General Assembly and and see what the church does with it.
SPEAKER_02I've known of individuals who were under suspension from sacraments and they had a baby in the in they they had a son in the midst of that. And they they chose not to go forward because their understanding of the censure was that they weren't permitted to bring their children for baptism. I don't know if they ever had a discussion with uh the session about it, but they their understanding from just reading 33 was uh that they were not permitted to bring them, and so they didn't ask and pursue it. Right. So it is uh admittedly confusing. I had that same question written down, Jared. I'm glad you asked it. So well, let's let's talk too about suspension from office. Um obviously the connection in 30-3 is that these are suspensions um that they that they precede excommunication. What's significant about suspension from office? Um and and it sounds like an obvious question, but it's one we need to ask. Yeah.
SPEAKER_00Sure. Well, I mean suspension from office is uh obviously uh significant because not every church member, most church members will not be officers. So it's just as it's a big deal when a person is admitted into office, it's a big deal when a person is suspended from office or is is removed from office. But at the same time, suspension from office doesn't of itself touch the privileges of membership. So the the church would would have to say, we suspend you from office and we suspend you from sacraments, but just suspending someone from office doesn't bar them from coming to the Lord's Supper. It it just has to do with the uh exercise of the functions of their ministry. And you know, that's another important point. When someone is suspended from office, they are still an officer, they're just barred from exercising the functions of an officer. And you know, the court it has the power to depose them, in which case they they would be stripped of church office at that point. But suspension simply means you you can't undertake the work of an officer of the church.
SPEAKER_01Would deposition in that sense need additional process?
SPEAKER_00That is in addition to uh an act of suspension? I I would would think so. It's a distinct censure.
SPEAKER_02So the censure of suspension from office ends the judicial process, and in order to move to deposition, you would need another another indictment and judicial process to get to deposition.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, so so obviously definite suspension concludes whenever the court has has set the time, 12 months, 18 months, whatever. In definite suspension, so the end of 30-3, which you read a moment ago, Ben, indefinite suspension really can end in one of two ways. The repentance of the offender, in which case the suspension is lifted, or until by his conduct, the necessity of the greatest censure be made manifest. And um excuse me, I'm I'm reading the wrong provision. Um indefinite suspension from office imposed due to scandalous conduct, procedure in 34-8 shall be followed. I wasn't reading the wrong provision. So that's the other inflection point that the the church may determine we need to advance to another century at that point, and that that could be deposition.
unknownOkay, okay.
SPEAKER_01What let's say, hypothetically here speaking, pure hypothetical, Dr. Waters. What if they're they don't hit either of those rails, either of those sides of the road? They don't like they don't repent. But they're really not they're I mean they're obedient, they they like submit generally to the censure, they don't do anything worse, so they don't necessarily exhibit like a sign that would lead to a greater censure, they just are kind of lukewarm in the middle. What do you do in that hypothetical situation?
SPEAKER_00Well, uh you you can probably hit the play button on this. It it will be up to the the church court to whom this man is known to make that determination because really they they know the man, they know his character, they know his history, they they know his temperament, they know the circumstances, and they they have to judge because again, going back to the goals of church discipline, the the good of the offender, the well-being of the church, the glory of Christ. So they've got to pursue a course of action that that's gonna best satisfy all three. And and you're you're right, Scott. I mean, often we just don't have, we rarely have clear black and white, okay, this is is the set censure we we need to impose in this situation. I mean, sometimes it's that way. But but often there can be an element of uncertainty, there can be a shade of gray in the matter, and um, you know, that's part of the reason why discipline is not entrusted to one man, it's entrusted to elders meeting together in courts.
SPEAKER_03Yeah. I guess with how subjective it can be, um, that there's part of me that wants to lean towards a judgment of charity. I I think of that when fencing the table. Sometimes you don't know for certain, and you're telling them that they need to refrain if there's something that's that's wrong between them and another person, um, and some of that's left to their judgment. I've done my part to warn, uh, but it seems like there's certain parts where if you know they're being obedient to your instructions, they say they're repentant, but you just have this nagging suspicion that they're not, but you you can't put your finger on it. Sometimes it's you know, well, um we've done our part, we warned them. Hopefully, this is bearing fruit, and um you're just gonna have to kind of trust that uh the process has worked on them and that you can't read their hearts and uh give a judgment of charity. But that's just me.
SPEAKER_00And I think, Jared, your your comments raise a broader point about discipline in the church. You know, church discipline is radically different from um justice administered in the state, you know, which is penal and retributive. Church discipline, that's not its goal. And church discipline is designed to prepare everyone in the church for the great judgment of the last day when we'll appear before the judge and searcher of hearts, uh Jesus Christ. So we we need to scrub any thought that we're doing anything ultimate here. Everything is uh provisional and anticipatory. I'm not trying to detract from from the gravity of what we're doing. We of course take seriously what we're doing, but but we are fallible, all of us, and we we uh uh conduct ourselves according to these principles as well as we know, recognizing that we're not rendering final judgment in this matter.
SPEAKER_02We have ruling elders that listen to us work through the BCO. Dr. Waters, can you help us think through, even just briefly, why definite versus indefinite might be appropriate in certain points? I don't know if there's examples you can provide or just general thoughts, but th I would think that those would be difficult to make a determination on.
SPEAKER_00Well, constitutionally, the the line between definite and indefinite suspension from office is repentance. And so that's really the question the court has to wrestle with. Uh okay, this matter has come to light, and this officer is is caught up in it. You know, is is he is he forthcoming? Has he made confession? Is he contrite? Is he made restitution? Is he properly submissive to the court? Does he show contrition? Has he uh approached any offended parties appropriately to pursue repentance? Is he uh compliant with uh the workings of of the church in dealing with the matter? I mean, I think all of those, they're they're both tangible and intangible, but collectively they contribute to a judgment of whether this person is evidencing repentance or not. And again, remember, indefinite suspension needn't be we declare you impenitent. It may be, brother, you you may be penitent, but we're gonna need some more time to see this. And that brother's attitude and disposition in the interim is gonna tell you volumes, I would think.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, it seems like you would need a definite suspension from the office and not from the sacraments, because uh definite suspension from the sacraments seems punitive, but a suspension of the officer seems more protective of the sheep, right? There's this has been a major thing, and we want to make sure that the sheep are guarded from this for a while, and so you need a cooling off period. Um it seems it seems like that's the the effect of the definite suspension from office is there's some sort of protection in there for the sheep for um for that case.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, and and I I love the language of of 30-3. It's administered when the credit of religion, the honor of Christ, the good of the delinquent demanded, and of course that would include the welfare of the church, even though the delinquent has given satisfaction to the court. And that is that becomes a testimony on the part of the church to the high esteem with which we hold church office and the high standards to which we hold church officers.
BCO 30-4
SPEAKER_02Well, let's go on to 30-4, and which reads Excommunication is the excision of an office offender from the communion of the church. The censure is to be inflicted only on account of gross crime or heresy, and when the offender shows himself incorrigible and contumacious. The design of this censure is to operate on the offender as a means of reclaiming him, to deliver the church from the scandal of his offense, and to inspire all with fear by the example of his discipline. So excommunication is obviously the most severe censure that uh is available to a court of the church. Maybe a good place to go. This this can seem, uh especially to a watching world, uh, intense, um uh counterproductive, maybe an argument that folks would make against it. We see this at play in scripture. Uh, what's the scriptural uh foundation of of the center of excommunication?
unknownRight.
SPEAKER_00So you you see it in a couple of places, Matthew 18, where the the culmination of a process of confrontation which is met by resistance in penitence is let him, after you tell it to the church, let him be to you a gentile or tax collector, which are not terms of reproach, but they're labels indicating status. That is, in the old covenant period, which that's where we are when Jesus is speaking those words, a gentile or a tax collector is someone who is outside the covenant community. So it is it is a declaration that this person is removed from the fellowship of God's people, as a Gentile or in his own way a tax collector would have been. And then in 1 Corinthians 5, you you see an instance of this in the church in Corinth, where Paul is commending the church to deliver such a one over to Satan, which is to say he's to be put out of the bounds of the people of God. The goal is restorative, uh he he is to be put out so that his soul may be saved on the day of judgment. So it it's not punitive, it's restorative, but the person does have to be put out of the fellowship of the church.
SPEAKER_02Come on, Jared. I saw you unclick your microphone, dude. Come on.
SPEAKER_03I just want to be talking all the time. But uh I I thought uh John Calvin um in the Institutes, it's book four, chapter 12, section 10, uh has an interesting uh comparison here in that he says that excommunication is not anathema. And I I thought the comparison was interesting that he says we should rarely, if never, uh use anathema because we're basically saying that they're they're um they're already condemned, basically. Like there's there's no hope. But um excommunication, rather, you you still are trying to regain them. You still are trying to, I mean, if you think about uh they're to be treated like a uh the tax collector or sinner, um what did Jesus do with them? He invited them in. He didn't act like they were already in, but he invited them in. And so obviously your conduct's uh going to change on that. So I thought that was an interesting point, which also leads to um maybe a question that we have on this. It seems like Calvin says, yes, you should treat the person differently. You don't have the same friendly interaction with them that you did before, but he seems to say you don't fully ostracize them because you're to still try to bring them back. You're s he says um we ought to exert all the means in our power to promote the reformation. And um also has an interesting line that he says, unless this tenderness be observed by the individual members as well as by the church collectively, our discipline will be in danger of speedily degenerating into cruelty. Um I thought it was an interesting line, and if uh you ever had that question that's come up before about okay, if somebody's uh uh excommunicated, does that mean they're ostracized, and how does a relationship change with them?
SPEAKER_00Yeah, and I think you know, we on the one hand, you know, there's excommunication, say, in the context of the Roman Catholic Church, where to be cut off from the church is to be cut off from salvation. And that's why excommunication is practiced so rarely within the Roman Catholic Church. And without diminishing the gravity of excommunication and what it communicates, uh we as the church don't make the kind of pronouncement that Rome would make in excommunication. There is inbuilt a provisionality to it. But but we are informing the person in no uncertain terms. We we believe your soul is is imperiled. And unless you repent, we we don't entertain hopes uh of your your salvation. On the other hand, um we we don't practice shunning either. You know, we you're excommunicated, so you're you're just out. And if you run a store, I'm not gonna shop at your store. If I see you on the street, I'm gonna cross the to the other side. If I'm at you at the ball, sitting next to you at the ball game, I'm I'm gonna go find another place in the bleachers. We we don't practice that. Clearly, our relationship has changed so far as Christian fellowship is concerned, but the everyday civil, familial as appropriate um interactions, if the excommunicated person is my brother-in-law, for instance, which my brother-in-law is not excommunicated, want to be clear for you, um, you know, that doesn't change. I still go to Thanksgiving dinner, I still do the things that that I usually do, but the character of my interactions will necessarily change. And and everything is going to be ordered, not to what, showing how displeased I am with this person, but a something has changed, and B, uh I really want you to repent and and return to the way things were.
SPEAKER_01What are some of the responsibilities of the session after it declares this the excommunication upon a member? How should they look forward in the future as they relate to this person?
SPEAKER_00Well, I think the the session, you know, is obviously has to find uh an appropriate way to inform the congregation because the the censure is no good if if it's secret. I mean the church has to know something has happened. Uh I think the session needs to recognize that excommunicating a person is not washing your hands of this person, but it begins a new stage of pastoral care. And so that that puts a responsibility on them, in my judgment, to appropri pursue that person appropriately. And they have to use their wisdom and discretion as as to the best way to do that. But that person is still someone for whom they they need to exercise pastoral care and and to do that proactively.
SPEAKER_01In that sense, I'm kind of curious, w are they so they're the court of original jurisdiction on the issue. And so they maintain that censure in their own house. How does their relationship on the roles change in the midst of excommunication? Because if they tried to join another PCA church, I'm sure if they joined the Baptist Church down the road, don't matter. But how how does that relationship uh come into play? Are they on the roles with that censure imposed? Are they erased from the roles? What is that how does that look on the administrative side of things?
SPEAKER_00Well, you know, and let let's let's think about a situation where an excommunicated person repents and is restored to fellowship. We don't baptize that person. So that excommunication is not a complete severance from the Church of Jesus Christ. Otherwise, you would baptize them. So I I think that the church would want to communicate, say to a sister court, okay, this person um was excommunicated uh from the church, give the details, communicate that, and go forward from there. I I don't think they could simply say this person is a member, period, or this person is not a member, period. You you have to excommunication is just more nuanced, obviously. And so you have to go into those details. Um and you know, we should do that if if the person is wanting to join any other church, uh we we ought to find some way uh as appropriate to to communicate this person's status with the other church, just so they they understand.
SPEAKER_01So would you transfer their like that case over to them, like the jurisdiction of that case, and let them remove it in that sense? If they're like moved away or something like that?
SPEAKER_00Yeah, well, there there are provisions when a person uh moves away is at a distance where uh matters like this can can be transferred from one court to another. Um and and that that can be an option depending on the circumstances. You good, Scott?
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I've gotten all my questions out.
BCO 30-5
SPEAKER_02Well, here let's move on to 35, 30-5 as we conclude the chapter. Deposition is the degradation of an officer from his office and may not be accompanied, oh, excuse me, may or may not be accompanied with the infliction of other censure. Almost went super anti-constitution there, sorry. Uh deposition is unique because it applies only to officers. Um we've already talked about suspension from office. I wonder, Dr. Waters, you especially, maybe the other guys have thoughts on this. What what raises to the level of deposition that from from suspension?
SPEAKER_00Well, uh get ready, hit the play button again. I asked you on purpose, yeah. That's going to be left to the discretion of the court. But clearly, I mean the court has to be persuaded that that there's just no viable path forward in church office for this person. It is, it's not of itself a declaration that a person is not a Christian, but that in their judgment, this person ought no longer serve in church office. And that could be because of scandal, it could be for a host of reasons. Um but again, remember uh ordination is not a sacrament as it is in the Roman Catholic Church. So we're we're not making any declaration about a person's salvation or a person's salvation tied to the ministry of that person. But it is a serious, a grave statement that we don't think this person ought to be an officer of the church any longer.
SPEAKER_03So somebody who has been deposed, though, say ten years later, they feel called uh office, they they could conceivably come back to office as a ruling elder deacon uh teaching elder. Is that true?
SPEAKER_00Yeah, oh yeah, there's there's no constitutional bar uh to re-entry to church office after deposition. And I mean, obviously uh a court entertaining uh putting a person into office, putting a man into office would would have to go in eyes wide open, but uh 30-5 is is not a barred from life provision. You are removed from office, but it doesn't of itself bar reentry.
SPEAKER_01In that same office, so if I were a teaching elder and I were um deposed If you were a teaching elder. I guess I am a teaching elder. Uh if I were deposed uh uh from it as a teaching elder from Ileana and like Northern California wants to and I go under care in Northern California, uh wouldn't the off the place of original jurisdiction have to remove that censure before going there? Um, or would that just be a process anew?
SPEAKER_00Um, you know that's that's a good question. So um if if you're removed from office, um that that's going to be different from suspension from office, either definite or indefinite. So we're we're not getting into matters of having to make a specific declaration of repentance or impenitence and so on. Um there's a a parallel provision under very different circumstances when a person may demit the ministry. Um deposition is the church saying, Leave office to a man. Demission is a man saying to the church, please remove me from office. But if if a demitted man may re-enter office, I I wouldn't see deposition being a bar back into office necessarily. I I think um any court entertaining that would would have to do so with great caution.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, and and do it under um the provisions of 34.8, uh, which talks about uh what to do in those circumstances. Uh I think 377 has something to say about it too, but 34 um eight is probably what Scott is thinking of of um the original uh court kind of has to be satisfied uh before somebody would come back.
Closing Remarks
SPEAKER_02Well, we have I told y'all we might talk about some practical things. We've we've dealt at length with some of the things related to repentance and what sessions and presbyteries should look for, so I don't think we'll dwell on that again. But I did want to ask Dr. Waters as we finish up, is there anything lingering in your mind or anything in particular you would leave pastors um with, uh elders with as a takeaway about discipline, at least as far as the censures that we've talked about today? I mean, you you teach men training for ministry, and then you also have served on the SJC, so you're kind of at both ends of the spectrum. What stands out to you that we should kind of take away?
SPEAKER_00Well, I I think two things. Um, you know, one, remember, discipline is is never the unilateral act of one man in the church. It's a vocession. And there is a line between advice and counsel and formal discipline. And I think th those two areas practically can trip guys up. Um, there is a place for advice and counsel, but that's different from formal discipline, and formal discipline is something that has to be undertaken by a church court. It's not something that's ever left to a single officer. So I think knowing that going in is is going to put parameters around the way we handle crises and situations as they come up in in the church.
SPEAKER_02Well, as a particular court of the church in its unique discretion would say, this podcast is over. Thank you for joining us. Be sure to come back next time when Steve Tipton returns to discuss with us the parties in cases of process from BCO 31. Uh Dr. Waters, a huge thanks to you for coming on and joining us. We really appreciate the the wisdom and the knowledge that you bring. And we're praying, praying for Bannerman Volume 2. It really should be twice as big, though, if you're going to do it. I think double the size.
SPEAKER_01Twice as large.
SPEAKER_02Well, grateful for your your time and your work, brothers. Thank you. Listeners, if you're interested in learning more about anything that we've mentioned, check out the show notes. You know where to go. You can find those in your podcast player or at Politymatters.org. If you've enjoyed the show, consider following us on Twitter or Facebook at Polity Matters, and be sure that you're subscribed in your podcast app of choice. If you have questions or comments, you can reach out to us on social media or at Politymattersfeedback at gmail.com, and there's links below where you can go support our work and keep things moving from week to week. Thanks again for spending time with us. Until next time, say goodbye, gentlemen. Y'all take care.
People on this episode
Podcasts we love
Check out these other fine podcasts recommended by us, not an algorithm.
Especially the Preaching
Ben Ratliff
The Westminster Standard
Ryan Biese
Larger For Life
Blue Ridge Institute for Theological Education
