President Biden “is not in communion with the Catholic faith” and “any priest who now provides Communion to the president participates in his hypocrisy.” That was the claim made by retired Archbishop Charles Chaput last Saturday at a Catholic symposium. In his remarks before other Catholic leaders, Chaput also accused the president of “apostasy on the abortion issue.”
“Mr. Biden’s apostasy on the abortion issue is only the most repugnant example,” said Chaput. “He’s not alone. But in a sane world, his unique public leadership would make—or should make—public consequences unavoidable.”
Chaput was referring to how President Biden not only supports abortion but endorses legislation that would legalize abortion from conception to birth. Biden, who self-identifies as Catholic, has continued to hold this position despite the Catholic Church’s teaching that abortion is a grave evil and that human life is sacred from the moment of conception.
The president’s support for abortion isn’t surprising considering he’s the head of a political party that opposes any and all restrictions on abortion. What is shocking, though, is that there’s a prominent Catholic leader—albeit a retired one—who has the courage to publicly say an elected official is out of communion with his church.
Many of us pro-life Christians will cheer Chaput’s courage. But his condemnation of a member of his own tradition raises an uncomfortable question for us evangelicals: Do we love our politicians enough to bring them under church discipline?
Command to Discipline
Too often, church discipline has been treated by evangelicals as optional. It isn’t. It’s commanded by our Lord. Indeed, the first time Jesus mentions the church in the Gospel of Matthew, he says it will be given the keys of the kingdom of heaven and tells the church, “Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Matt. 16:18–20). Two chapters later, we find Jesus’s second mention of the church and the context for our authority to bind and loosen:
If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. (Matt. 18:15–18)
This process has become known as church discipline because it involves correction within the context of the church. Yet of the four steps—private correction, small group clarification, church admonition, and church exclusion—only the last two involve the entire church body. This means church discipline isn’t just for pastors and church leaders but a way all members of the church show love for one another. “When the Bible talks about church discipline, it involves the spiritual care of people,” says Geoff Chang. “It’s the process by which members of a church guard one another from the deceitfulness of sin and uphold the truth of the gospel.”
We can certainly err by attempting to discipline in a way that tramples Christian conscience or isn’t motivated by love.* But if we truly love our fellow church members, we’ll offer them biblical rebuke and correction. “By abstaining from discipline,” says Jonathan Leeman, “we claim that we love better than God loves.”
Would Jesus Approve This Message?
But how would this apply to politicians in our churches? Consider this example.
Church discipline isn’t just for pastors and church leaders but a way all members of the church show love for one another.
Imagine you’re a member of a medium-sized PCA church, and a prominent member of your congregation, Joan Smith, is running for Congress. You align with Smith’s politics and agenda and tacitly support her campaign.
But then you watch an attack ad she aired on TV that contains slanderous accusations against her opponent and indisputable falsehoods about his record. This clear violation of the ninth commandment is followed by the obligatory tagline “I’m Joan Smith and I approve this message.” How would you respond?
Let’s assume you mention your concerns to Smith and tell her the ad brings dishonor to the name of Jesus. You explain how the ad violates the Westminster Standards and that God hates when politicians lie. You’re therefore shocked when Smith’s reply is that you’re being naive and that “politics ain’t beanbag.” Besides, while it might be wrong to lie, she admits, by getting elected she’ll be able to do considerable good—and prevent an evil candidate from taking office.
Disheartened, you share your concerns with the elders of your church. One of them agrees Smith’s ad is scandalous but says we must consider that control of Congress may hinge on her getting elected. He advises you to drop the issue since this is the “most important election of our lifetime.” What would you do then? Would you continue to seek discipline for Smith? Would you also seek to correct the pastor?
No Fear in Love
This example is admittedly far-fetched, but it raises the question of why we wouldn’t even consider private correction or small group clarification, much less church admonition and church exclusion for a politician who has sinned.
If your church is unwilling to discipline members who engage in public, unrepentented sin, you should find a more faithful church. As David Platt said in a recent sermon on church discipline, “We need a church that will love us enough to lead us away from sin and toward Jesus.” If we’re unwilling to lead our fellow church members away from sin—including away from the “respectable sin” of political lying—then we’re showing by our actions we don’t truly love them.
The more likely answer for our reluctance is that we suffer from what the Bible calls “fear of man” (Prov. 29:25). Fear of man occurs, notes Edward T. Welch, when we see people as “bigger” (that is, more powerful and significant) than God, and out of the fear that creates in us, we give other people the power and right to tell us what to feel, think, and do.
The more likely answer for our reluctance is that we suffer from what the Bible calls ‘fear of man.’
Your local church may not have any U.S. senators or congressional representatives (though you could have school board members or city council members). But you likely have church members who belong to a similar group where certain sins are overlooked as “part of the job.” They may also hold positions of social influence (such as a football coach) or economic power (the owner of a local factory) that make you hesitant to correct or rebuke them for fear of how others will respond.
But if God has made you aware of a fellow church member’s unrepentant sin, then he’s given you the responsibility to confront and discipline him. We ignore God’s command to correct (Luke 17:3–4) at our own peril. Because we fear God more than man we should prefer to discipline another rather than be disciplined by God for our disobedience.
Fearing God more than man, though, doesn’t mean the process will be easy. We’ll still find biblical accountability and discipline to be uncomfortable, if not painful. Yet the consequences of unrepentant sin are even more severe. We should keep our eyes on the cross to remind ourselves of the high price Jesus had to pay to redeem us. Then, when we clearly feel the repugnance of sin and how it affects our world, we can better recognize why refusing to discipline our fellow disciples is nothing less than hateful.
*We should also avoid replacing our political judgments with the will of God and respect the Christian liberty surrounding particular votes of pieces of legislation. For example, abortion is a sin and a politician should oppose abortion. If they do not, they should be liable to discipline. Yet one politician might opt for an incrementalist approach with his legislation and another might have an abolitionist approach with his legislation. We would not have grounds for discipline simply because we disagree with their legislative application of the principle that abortion is wrong.
The Gospel Coalition