“6 Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? 7 Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed.” (1 Cor. 5:6-7, NASB, 1995)
Church discipline is a vital mark of the church. Without biblical church discipline, Christ’s bride runs the risk of being less pure (Matt. 13:24-30; 1 Cor. 5:6-7; 13:12; Rev. 2-3),[1] and her members lose the benefit of her Family (Rom. 12:10-13; Heb. 10:24-25; 1 John 4:7) reclaiming and gaining them when they battle sin (1 Cor. 5:1-13; 1 Tim. 5:20; Jude 23).[2] It is not an understatement that a church not practicing proper church discipline is a church in violation of following her King’s command (Matt. 7:6; Matt. 18:15-17). Jay Adams discusses the Corinthians’ lack of church discipline because they boasted in their abundant “grace giving” to the offender and points out, “In some ways it seems what Paul says to the church was more severe than what he said about the incestuous son. His strong reprimand of the church for failing to exercise discipline and for having a lax attitude toward sin in their midst ought to be a trenchant warning to many churches today.”[3] To this end, the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) includes in its Book of Church Order (BCO) an entire section on how its churches should proceed with biblical church discipline.[4] This essay discusses the value of the PCA’s ecclesiastical system of biblical church discipline for the nouthetic counselor caring for her church members. The paper addresses two topics: 1) the biblical foundation of presbyterian ecclesiology and 2) the practical theology of soul care discipline within the presbyterian government.
The Biblical Foundation of Presbyterian Ecclesiology
The procedure of biblical church discipline in the PCA is rooted in its ecclesiology, the theological doctrine relating to the church, and its form of government, which is “presbyterian.” Presbyterian is distinct from the other church government forms of congregational (i.e., Baptist, Pentecostal, and most independent/community) and Episcopal (i.e., Roman Catholic, Episcopal, Methodist). Presbyterian ecclesiology recognizes Christ as her King, her presbuteroi as His magistrates, and is more ancient than the New Testament. Those who stand upon the foundation of biblical theology apprehend that God’s covenantal ordering of His people is through the rule and leadership of presbyters. For example, Exodus 18 provides Yahweh’s structure for the church and the nation through presbyter/presbyterian leadership.
However, one needs not stop with Exodus 18. A brief walk-through of God’s Word provides other evidence. David W. Hall gives a concise Old Testament overview when he states:
The Septuagint, written long before partisan contests over ecclesiology, exhibits numerous instances of presbuteroi before the Temple and prior to the NT. Presbyters predate the Exodus (Ex. 3:16, 4:29), and are already operative at Mt. Sinai (Ex. 19:7) when the Law was given. They were involved in communal correction (Lev. 4:15) and protected the purity of worship (Num. 16:25). Although the priesthood is developed as a distinct order alongside of the presbyters, Elders are present to inaugurate the priesthood (Lev. 9:1). Presbyters participated in key aspects of Joshua’s ministry (Josh. 24:1) and were well-established into the period of the Judges (Judg. 8:14). Elders continued a leadership function late into the OT period (Ruth 4:2; Prov. 31:23; Ezra 8:11). See also Num. 11:26, Exo. 4:30, Deut. 19:12, among other verses, for OT usage of presbuteroi, which is customarily a plurality.[5]
The New Testament presents presbuteroi as a continuation of a biblical office and government. Jesus confronts presbuteroi in passages such as Matthew 15:2 and 23 for not upholding their office as they should. However, He does not rebuke the office and system, only those holding the office for not living their duty as God prescribes. Finally, most reformed teachers and commentators understand Jesus’s teaching on church discipline in Matthew 18:15-18 entails the office of Elders.[6]
The Book of Acts demonstrates presbyterian ecclesiology by declaring presbuteroi the successors to the Apostles in performing the duties by setting them apart through the laying on of hands (Acts 6:6, 14:23) for prayer and ministering the Word (Acts 6:2). Acts fifteen provides a detailed example of this work as the presbuteroi and Apostles are the Jerusalem synod’s decision-makers.
Paul provides the qualifications of presbuteroi (and the functional synonym of bishop-overseer) in First Timothy 3 and Titus 1 (E.g., Acts 20:17, 28). And the New Testament teaches God’s employment of presbuteroi for nurturing church members (Acts 14:23; 15; 1 Cor. 5; 1 Tim 3:2; 4:14; 5:17; 5:22; 2 Tim. 4:5). Finally, the office will not be replaced by any other office until Christ’s second coming (Rev. 4:10).
Therefore, one must recognize that Jesus Christ’s church is governed by her King and His magistrates (presbuteroi). As the great Scottish preacher John Brown explains: “A Christian Church is a very free society. But they mistake the notion who consider it a democracy. It is a monarchy, administered by inferior magistrates, chosen by their fellow subjects, who are to execute the King’s law.” Presbyterian ecclesiology is biblical ecclesiology.
[1] The Westminster Confession of Faith 25.4-5. https://www.opc.org/wcf.html#Chapter_25. Accessed on October 12, 2022.
[2] Ibid., 30.3. https://www.opc.org/wcf.html#Chapter_30. Accessed on October 12, 2022.
[3] Jay Adams, Handbook of Church Discipline: A Right and Privilege of Every Church Member (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1974), 68.
[4] “Part II: The Rules of Discipline,” The Book of Church Order, chapters 27-46. https://issuu.com/roundtreeagency/docs/website_bco_2022_full_book_-_with_bookmarks/96. Accessed on October 12, 2022.
[5] David W. Hall, “The Case for Presbyterianism: Biblical, Doctrinal, and Practical,” A Manual for Officer Training (Powder Springs, GA: The Covenant Foundation, 2004), 142, fn. 22.
[6] It is beyond the bailiwick of this paper to discuss all the reformers who hold this view. Suffice it to say one may research these past theologians on the subject: John Calvin, Martin Luther, John Knox, Daniel Cawdrey, Wilhelmus À Brakel; and modern theologians and biblical counselors: Jay Adams, Howard Eyrich, Heath Lambert, David Powlison, Paul David Tripp, Rick Phillips, and Mark Dever.
Andrews PCA 