The Practice of Matt 18:15-20

and the weaponizing of it by leaders abusing power.

The Core Practice of Reconciliation

The practice of reconciliation, as presented by Jesus in Matthew 18:15-20, is pretty simple.

Jesus says “if a brother” sins against you, go and point out the fault to him when the two of you are alone.” (18:15 RSV) The mention of “brother” signals that this practice assumes a familial relationship of a sort is already established here. Over centuries of church interpretation, “brothers” in the NT has sometimes meant neighbor and other times simply a mutual member of the local church community. But for sure, “with a brother” assumes a kinship relationship of some kind. Jesus says go privately (go “alone” vs. 15) and directly to the person who has sinned against you. Don’t make a show of it. This encounter is to be interpersonal, face to face.

There’s a space here that is being opened, if both parties will submit to this practice. We are to listen and be listened to. Indeed, the first question needing to be discerned is: will both parties be willing? In the voice of the wronged: “Will the offending person listen to me?” If he or she does, a space has been created. If he or she does not, we have an indicator, a blinking red light, that indeed this space is not safe, and is not the space of Jesus’ Lordship. Jesus is being refused. But before this can even be revealed, we must go to the person. We are not to go around the person, rally a posse against the person, in order to achieve a goal within the conflict. We are not triangulate. We are to go to the person with the hope of this space opening up.

The offense presented could be a sin, or it could be simply a conflict between us as we seek to discern life together as the church. NT scholars have pointed out that the “binding and loosing” language of verse 18 recollects a Rabbinic phrase used in the Jewish world to describe discernment of multiple kinds of disagreement. And so we must read the word “sin” in verse 15 to mean more than a grievous act of sin against someone. If we disagree on something important, if we have been sinned against, we are told to go and express our grievance to the person and seek agreement.

In my time of ministry, I have learned that this practice of reconciliation requires that the meeting itself requires a preparation. The meeting should begin with prayer submitting what happens here into the presence and reign of Jesus Christ by His Spirit. There should be a reading of the text and a challenge to listen to the Spirit. The one harmed then presents what he or she sees as the sin or the conflict. A common approach sounds something like “I believe you have committed this sin against me” or “we disagree on this and I think you are wrong to _________.” These kinds of phrases are important. Then we follow up with questions like “do you agree with me (that this act is sin)?”, ”Do you see what I am seeing?” “Do you understand why I disagree with you?” There’s a mutuality here that is opened up. We then follow in acts of submission one to another under Jesus’ name. We say “I submit to you ________. What do you see here?” and other questions like that. The words and approach are so important.

If agreement or peace is not reached, Jesus instructs us to bring one or two more people into the conversation as witnesses. Again, there is a space being formed here among “us” when this practice is governed by the Lordship of Christ. We are coming together under His name, His authority. We are in essence opening up space for His rule, His authority, His Kingdom to take shape among us.

In this space we seek clarity and eventual agreement. We seek to win a friend not make an enemy. This may include repentance, forgiveness, a mutual sharing of peace, or even agreeing to disagree. We will walk together into God’s future. Because this space is determined by the good news that Jesus is Lord, and he is working for His will in this conflict. And we are determined by his forgiveness and his promise to renew all things.

We must be careful NOT to align this procedure too closely with Deut 19:15. The gathering of others to listen is not merely a legal maneuver for the community to seek the condemnation of the accused. Jesus always moved the OT law to a deepening of its fulfilled reality made possible in his ministry (it was said unto you … but I say …). And so this is truly a movement toward a fuller growing community.

If three can’t agree, bring it to the community, which for some traditions means the elder board, or an executive board, or perhaps a town hall meeting before all interested parties of the church if it indeed the matter affects the entire church. The conflict always starts small and moves to larger. It goes from the one on one, to the three, to the many. Step by step, the process moves towards the larger community shaping the community as a whole. Never is a group of people aligned against one person like a pose. Rather, via the process, the working out of the conflict shapes the church as a whole. We learn, we grow, we participate, together. The process of reconciliation becomes the source for how the Holy Spirit shall work to take the community forward and deeper for the shaping of the gospel among us.

In all these things, we shall listen to the gifted ones, hear the gospel, and tend to each other and Christ’s presence among us. We shall listen, submit in mutual submission one to another, until we shall discern together, until all can say “it seems good to the Holy Spirit and to us…” (Acts 15:28).

This is a fundamental practice of the Christian life going on here. It is the shaping of an entire community’s culture, a culture of forgiveness and discernment. It shapes a church into grace giving, truth seeking, forward looking. This fundamental practice coalesces a people for His Kingdom.

But Things Can Go Wrong

But of course things can go wrong.

I have seen it.

We’ve all seen it.

Leaders get caught in the act of abusive power. The one being abused reports the issue in some way. The leader turns to the accuser and cries foul in the name of Matt 18. They argue that their accuser should follow “the rule” of Matthew 18:15-20, just as all Christians should do.

Except that usually, in an abuse of power situation, the accuser has already experienced the abuse of power from the very leader calling on Matt 18. So the call to the abused to follow Matthew 18, and go the abusive leader alone, plays on the fear engendered by the abuser upon the abused. In this case, invoking Matt 18 works to silence the accuser. And it is fraught with danger for the one already abused, for to go and meet one on one with the abuser can be a set up for the abuser to abuse all over again.

This is what happens when, as some have called it, Matthew 18 is weaponized.

For this reason, some scholars advocate that Matt 18 only applies to those we have a family relationship with. The use of “brothers” by Jesus in this text, as already mentioned, often refers to a more intimate inter-personal quality of relationship. Matt 18 therefore should not apply to situations where there is a power differential, a hierarchy. Matt 18 should not apply to relationships of church leaders to persons under his/her authority as pastor.

I agree with these insights. All true. I have seen it happen

But I suggest it might be too quick to throw out the practice of Matt 18 as outlined above whenever hierarchy and “power over” are in place. Indeed, I suggest, that it is this very practice that, when carried out well and safely, exposes the power of the world/abuse at work in the church. And thereby disqualifies a leader from leading a church. Jesus’ Matt 18 practice of reconciliation certainly makes space to heal, restore and renew but it can also expose and unravel worldly power at work in the church. And the latter maybe necessary to the former.

Allow me to explain.

The Power of the World Exposed and the Power of God Revealed

I believe Scripture teaches that there two kinds of power at work in the world. In my book published last year (see here) I described how there is worldly power, i.e. coercive power over people and institutions, and God’s power which works among people, i.e. inter-relationally by the power of the Spirit. I argued for the importance of making this distinction, because worldly power over can only preserve people and institutions from harm, it cannot heal, restore and renew in the way God’s power can. Christians are defined by their submission to God’s power at work in, among, and between them, released in Jesus Christ, extended by the Holy Spirit. This power heals, unites, reconciles, transforms. This presence to Christ’s presence defines the church.

There will be times when Christians must make use of worldly power when people are not submitted to God and His power. But in the church, always, we are to gather and call one another to live under and in the power unleashed in the life, death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ (Eph 1:20). This is always inter-relational “with” power, never coercive or “over” power.

When Christians use worldly power in God’s name and authority to do God’s work, it eventually goes off the rails, and leads to abuse. Because worldly power is coercive. It postures oneself over people. And when you join that power with the imprimatur of God, all restraint is lifted. And it goes off the rails. We see the rampant abuse among leaders of all churches as a result of this very thing. It is therefore important that we constantly call our leaders, our life together as church to be under the power of God in Christ, and call out the use of worldly power. Jesus says starkly, Mark 10:45, “you know how the Gentiles rule, lording it over you, it shall not be so among you.”

It is this calling out of worldly power, the exposing of it for what it is, that happens when the practice of Matt 18 ends up with the leader in power refusing “to listen.” The coming together in the sacred act of reconciliation creating a space for mutual submission, is a holy moment (it is a sacrament in the Catholic church recognizing Christ’s unique manifest presence here) When the accuser comes into the presence of the accused, prays the presence of Christ here, presents humbly the accusation, if there is no mutual submission to Christ, it is repeated again with more people, and finally a discernment is made, and when the accused cannot submit, this is the sign that worldly power (coercive power and control over people) is at work, not the power of Christ. Jesus Himself is being rejected. And so, in such a case, Jesus says “let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector” (vs 17).

The use of the word “Gentile” here should be understood. It reminds of Jesus’ words in Mark 10:42, “You know how the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them.” 1 Sam 8:5, Give us a king as the other nations have.” To this kind of power, Jesus says “not so among you.”(Mark 10:43) You shall lead another way, the way of my power at work inter-relationally. And so when worldly power is revealed, we are to separate ourselves from this leader or Christian. It is clear. It is revealed. This church has come under the influence of worldy power and needs to separated from him, or her, until a time of repentance and restoration has been possible

How Do We Reclaim the Practice of Matthew 18?

I suggest then that practice of reconciliation in Matthew 18:15-20, despite its misuse, despite its weaponization, should not be thrown out from the life of the church. Especially when it comes to our leaders. We should work on reclaiming it in these most difficult and abusive times. It is a practice that can help remake the church.

With the vulnerable person among us, the one who has been spiritual abused, we should always make a way for his or her protection in presenting one’s case to an abusive leasder. At the very least, he or she should always bring a person or two with them. These persons should be present and make things safe. There is safety in communal witness. So that the meeting of the accused and the accuser does not turn into a pose against on or the other, these persons should be agreed to by both parties. They should be mutual members of the same body or institution. They should be mature Christians. There is a sense of accountability that happens when such a group are brought together to again first listen, then discern.

In my next post I want to talk more about the potential for harm in this practice. I want to explore the word “submit” and how it has been sued for abuse where it can become a powerful stance in the face of evil. I want to explore how we have often canceled the use of core practices in the church because of their abuse by worldly power (eucharist, divine healing, reconciliation, pastoral counseling, etc etc.) But in many ways we need to reclaim these practices for the church, not throw them out. Make sure to subscribe, if you’re interested, so you get alerted to the next post. It could be a few weeks. :)