How Much Do We Tolerate Till We Disfellowship? David Lipscomb Responds
In response to a question about whether a congregation should disfellowship another believer for voting, David Lipscomb offered this advice about any act of withdrawal of fellowship (Gospel Advocate, 1875, 399):
Our brother asks the question how far may a man go in sin, without being withdrawn from. We are not much of a believer in capital punishment either in church or state. We are never willing to give a man up finally, until we believe he has committed the sin unto death. So long as a man really desires to do right, to serve the Lord, to obey his commands, we cannot withdraw from him. We are willing to accept him as a brother, no matter how ignorant, he may be, or how far short of the perfect standard his life may fall from this ignorance. We do not mean either to intimate that we are willing to compromise or to hold in abeyance one single truth of God’s holy writ, from any motive of policy or expediency. We will maintain the truth, press the truth upon him, compromise not one word or iota of that truth, yet forbear with the ignorance, the weakness of our brother who is anxious but not yet able to see the truth. I feel sure, if I am faithful and he willing to learn the truth, he will come to the full measure of my knowledge. Why should I not, when I fall so far short of perfect knowledge myself? How do I know that the line beyond which ignorance damns, is behind me, not before him? If I have no forbearance with his ignorance, how can I expect God to forbear with mine?
What is needed is patient instruction and discipline in the church, instead of withdrawal from the weak. Final withdrawal is the end of discipline. I have no doubt it is much too often hastily resorted to without previous instruction and discipline…So long then as man exhibits a teachable disposition, is wiling to hear, to learn and obey the truth of God, I care not how far off he may be, how ignorant he is, I am willing to recognize him as a brother. No matter how wise or how near the truth or how moral a man may be, if he sets up a standard of his own or another and is not willing to learn of God, take his law and obey him, then I can withdraw from him.
January 4th, 2012 at 10:05 am
Wow, that’s one of the more intelligent comments I’ve ever read.
January 4th, 2012 at 10:08 am
Lipscomb really spoke to the heart of Paul’s admonition in Romans 14. While I may disagree with his political pacifism, I do believe he had this topic well balanced.
I would disagree with his pacifism because God has — in times past — utilized great characters within immoral and corrupt governments to do good for His glory and people (i.e., Joseph, Daniel, Nehemiah, et. al.).
January 4th, 2012 at 10:22 am
Very interesting articles from Lipscomb. The whole idea of “withdrawal of fellowship”, at least from my perspective, seems more like attempts at controlling people. The idea that a congregation, or individual Christian would even consider withdrawal of fellowship over an individuals choice (do I vote or not vote) is incredible to me! One thing I rarely see mentioned by Lipscomb or any of the “voices from the past” is the fact that in 1 Corinthians you have a congregation filled with all kinds of problems (taking each other to court, still engaged in pagan temple activities, some not even believing in the resurrection, etc.) yet the only person the apostle Paul tells them to withdraw fellowship from is the man who “has his father’s wife” (1 Cor. 5:1). Given the way many in our lifetime think, nearly the whole congregation should have been “disfellowshipped.”
I realize there are other text/issues wherein the apostle tells them to “watch” or “mark” people who cause “divisions”, (Romans 16:17), but it is not as simple as some would have us believe.
Very good stuff you have been bringing to our attention! Thanks John!
January 4th, 2012 at 6:57 pm
Agree, John Mark, the articles from Lipscomb have been very helpful – especially this one. “Why should I not, when I fall so far short of perfect knowledge myself? How do I know that the line beyond which ignorance damns, is behind me, not before him? If I have no forbearance with his ignorance, how can I expect God to forbear with mine?”
@Tom: I share your observation re the situation of 1 Corinthians, too.
A parallel note, if a little outside of Lipscomb’s purview: as we know, the 1 Corinthian church situation was full of serious immaturity, problems and problem people. Paul likewise never challenges the validity of their spiritual gifts and experience of the Spirit. He never says, “Your behaviour betrays you, your spiritual gifts are a sham, people with your problems can’t possibly gifted with prophecy (!), healing, miracles, discernment (!), etc.” – though I might be very seriously inclined to say it. Among other matters, he does correct them re how they use their gifts (an odd concept). But otherwise, in fact, Paul seems to go out of his way to affirm that they’ve got the real thing (1 Cor 1.4-9; 12 – 14, etc.), in the midst of all the correction of matters which to us seem rather blatant and obvious.
All that to say, it’s interesting to consider what God is willing to work with on the “inside.”
January 4th, 2012 at 11:44 am
Good insight for then and now. I esp appreciate his spirit exhibited in this statement: “How do I know that the line beyond which ignorance damns, is behind me, not before him? If I have no forbearance with his ignorance, how can I expect God to forbear with mine?”
WB