If another believer sins against you, go privately and point out the offense. If the other person listens and confesses it, you have won that person back. But if you are unsuccessful, take one or two others with you and go back again, so that everything you say may be confirmed by two or three witnesses. If the person still refuses to listen, take your case to the church. Then if he or she won’t accept the church’s decision, treat that person as a pagan or a corrupt tax collector.
The first step—handling the matter privately—is critical to ensuring justice and reconciliation. However, when this step is skipped, significant injustices can occur.
Misuse of Disciplinary Process
Some may exploit the Matthew 18 framework not as a pathway to reconciliation, but as a calculated mechanism for removing individuals from a community. By intentionally bypassing private conversation, accusers can manipulate church disciplinary procedures to achieve exclusion rather than restoration.
Presumption of Guilt
Skipping the private discussion assumes the accused is guilty before they are given a chance to understand or respond to the accusation. Confronting someone in front of witnesses places them in a defensive position, undermining biblical principles of fairness. Justice requires listening to both sides impartially before reaching any conclusion.
Lack of Transparency
Asking someone to defend themselves without first presenting the accusation creates confusion and imbalance. The accused is left to guess what they might have done wrong, which can lead to unnecessary frustration or distrust. This approach violates the spirit of open and honest communication that encourages reconciliation.
Witnesses Become Partial Observers
The role of witnesses in Matthew 18:16 is to confirm facts, not to ambush or judge prematurely. When they are brought in before the accused has been approached privately, witnesses may unconsciously assume guilt and side with the accuser, creating a biased environment.
Violates Biblical Justice and Due Process
The Bible consistently emphasizes impartiality and the importance of hearing all sides of a matter, as reflected in passages like Deuteronomy 1:17, which instructs, "Do not show partiality in judging; hear both small and great alike," and Proverbs 18:17, which observes, "The first to plead his case seems right, until another comes and examines him." Skipping private resolution denies the accused a fair and honest opportunity for defense, violating these foundational principles of biblical justice.
Discourages Repentance and Reconciliation
The primary goal of Matthew 18:15-17 is to restore relationships and promote peace. When the process is manipulated as a removal strategy, it fundamentally subverts this intention. Confronting someone prematurely can humiliate them and make them less likely to acknowledge any potential wrongdoing.
To prevent such manipulations and preserve the integrity of conflict resolution, we must:
- Recognize Potential Motivations: Be aware that disciplinary processes can be misused for exclusionary purposes.
- Insist on Private Conversation: Address the issue directly and privately with the person involved.
- Protect Procedural Integrity: Ensure each step of Matthew 18 is followed with genuine intent toward restoration.
