Keep Quiet About Sin and Wickedness in the Church?

Okay, about this keeping quiet about sins or wicked things in church...

Ephesians 5:11 says, "And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them." I like the meme that's been floating through Facebook that quotes this verse. And it has had me thinking, which I do on rare occasions.

After experiencing the Christian versions of non-disclosure laws, it's time to speak up and expose the nonsense. These assumed non-disclosure laws basically state that if you have been sinned against in any way, you must forgive and you must never bring it up or talk about it to anyone – ever. Never ever! There is a rationale for this but not a very good one. There is not even a justifiable one based on the Bible. though some make a case for it using the Ninth Commandment.

Now, the unwritten Christian version of this non-disclosure law warns that if you do bring up someone’s sin against you, even if their sin(s) was egregious, abusive, and serious, then you have also committed sin. Your sin is now assumed to be as bad as what your perpetrator or offender committed. The counselor, elder, or pastor supposedly has the right to question or even believe that you are as much at fault in the conflict. The implication is somehow, you deserved what you got because of your probable sinful behaviors. After all, everyone is a sinner, right?

If you bring it up, talk about it, mention it to anyone – including another counselor or pastor - you are now in default and have placed yourself on the same level of sin as the one who did those awful, wicked things to you. Further, to say anything about what happened or who sinned against you proves you are angry and have a bitter heart. Those two things are supposedly worse than whatever the perpetrator did to you. What’s more, you are evidently committing slander or gossip and so you could be held in contempt of the church leaders’ orders for silence.

The penalty often threatened for contumacy, insubordination, or whatever other militaristic terms they use, is church discipline, excommunication, or even going so far as to support the perpetrator should he decide to sue you for slander. Lawsuits in these cases are ostensibly justified, even though Christians ought not to sue each other in civil courts.

This is not far-fetched. In the past few years, I have heard very similar accounts from over one-hundred people. They are believable because this is what happened to me a number of times. In my case as a pastor, it was to keep me quiet for the “peace and purity” of the church so as not to upset people in the church or “cause waves” or division. After all, a good Christian and a great pastor would take the beatings like Jesus and remain passively quiet. Suffering is a commendable, rewardable gift and we are not supposed to do anything about it. Suffering in silence is the crown jewel of a good Christian.

This law, so easily assumed in fundamentalist and Biblicist circles has been very effective in keeping the injured party quiet. Now, after continuing to listen to yet another story tonight, this irrational view resting on a few passages in the Bible with the implicit meaning of those verses yanked out of them is very wrong. And it contradicts other verses and contexts. 

Look, I’ve dedicated fifty years studying the Bible, seven years of it earning a Masters of Divinity and a Doctorate in Ministry with plenty of Bible, theology, ministry, and counseling courses. And like many good pastors, I had a very large library. I am not a scholar but I am no flaming idiot either. 

Justification for this spurious non-disclosure law comes from the Ninth Commandment, Matthew 7, Matthew 16, Matthew 18, and a handful of forgiveness verses. I was schooled in it, read numerous books on it by Jay Adams, Ken Sande, and several others, and attended seminars and conferences regarding it. So, I know the arguments and spoke the language. At one time, I agreed with the practice and the kind of counsel seen in too many Nouthetic-style biblical counseling scenarios.

Admittedly, the whole system of the three-step, four-step, or seven-step process for forgiveness and reconciliation seemed contrived. It is simplistic and rather forced. It is rooted in rules and methods. Yet, like a good boy, for a while, I taught it even while it grated against better judgment and wisdom. 

This idea that within the Church, a professing Christian can do you harm, I mean severe harm through lies, gossip, slander, theft, verbal beatings, physical beatings, or sexual molestation and rape can be easily remediated by having the offended and the offender come together for a kiss and make-up session or two is nonsense.

If the offended party goes to the elders of the church and the elders or pastor have been trained in Nouthetic-counseling, the offended will be questioned: Is what you are telling me the truth or is this a misunderstanding? Are you gossiping or slandering this person by telling us this? If so, shut up. Do you have viable proof with two or more witnesses? If not, case dismissed.

If this really happened, what sin did you commit to cause the wrongdoer to do what you allege? Based on Matthew 7, you need to examine your own sins first before making allegations. Have you taken the first step and talked with the other person to work things out in the proper two, three, or seven-step method? If not, why not? The sad and horrendous tales from so very many people and from my own experiences, know this happens. It is wicked and should never happen.

What’s even worse, is how this occurs most often with women who are in malevolent marriages where the husband (and yes, I know husbands who were in very similar marriages) abuses the wife. Okay, I know abuse is a loaded term often dismissed as unbiblical or mythical by many biblical counselors, pastors, and elders.

However, like it or not, it is a legitimate term for sinful offenses such as oppression, controlling (lording it over), verbal assault or maligning, violating, reviling, physical battery, and sexual cruelty. What is inconceivable is the apparent belief that what a husband does to his wife falls in its own "sphere sovereignty" domain, so it’s really a matter of the prerogatives of the lord of the house and his kingdom home (something I’ve heard from a few Christian patriarchs). It is not a matter of the other two sovereignty spheres of the Church and state. In other words, the silent cultural practice in too many Christian circles is “what happens in the home, stays in the home.” 

Don’t believe me? Take the example of a neighbor witnessing a man physically brutalizing a woman on the front lawn. The police come, ask questions and if it is a case of an assault against another neighbor, it is likely charges will be pressed and the guy arrested. The nice Christian neighbor who called the police believes he did the right thing and celebrates that bad man’s arrest. 

Now, let’s hear this a bit differently. The neighbor witnesses a man physically brutalizing a woman on the front lawn. The police come, ask questions and discover this is a case domestic violence. It used to be in many states that unless the wife presses charges, nothing would happen except for a warning from the police and perhaps a ticket for disrupting the peace. In Colorado, if this happens the police will take one of the parties to jail and let the court figure it out.

What if this was a Christian couple and the neighbor who saw it all go down is also a Christian? Would that make a difference? Perhaps. There are occasions where the neighbor is sane and wise, who sees the assault for what it was: sinful, immoral, and illegal. There are other occasions where the Christian neighbor, steeped in the old patriarchal culture, would accept the man beating his wife as acceptable. Perhaps too bad for the woman but maybe she deserved it? It’s a family matter only, right? Maybe the wife provoked her spouse and he just lost his cool? It happens, right?

By the way, did you know that was the prevailing mentality in the United States up until the mid-1960s? And it is a common conviction among fundamentalists of all types – cult groups, orthodox Muslims, fundamentalist Hindi, and Christians.

Add to this long-standing, Christian ethos are the associate beliefs of patriarchalism, the woman’s subordination (read: subjugation) to her husband (or all men), misogyny, self-defined morality, and plenty of legalisms. Stir that all together in a home and you not only have a recipe for major dysfunction, but you also have a formula for hell. 

Now, what does all this have to do with Ephesians 5:11? Happy you asked. You see, based on the unscientific poll I’ve taken, the Christian version of the non-disclosure laws is used nearly every time a woman goes to the church authorities for help with the abuse she is experiencing. Abuse in the home by the one who vowed to “love her, comfort her, honor and keep her, in sickness and in health; and, forsaking all others keep you only unto her as long as both shall live”? The woman receives “counseling” that then turns things around to where the wife is equally at fault, obligated to go back and subordinate herself to her abusive husband in obedience to the church authority. Sometimes, if there is proof of physical battery the elders would give her permission to leave the home but not divorce. The rules are strict on this, so the wife finds herself without viable help or hope, and all too often without much time to live. 

These stories tell of the too similar script when seeking help from the church rulers: 
* The wife must also be at fault because it takes two to tango (yeah, what verse is that?) and there are always two sides to the story, she has sinned in some way and that is the root all must dig out; 
* She needs to provide evidence and/or witnesses. If she has been battered and has a doctor’s report, the husband needs to admit he did it to her. Otherwise, the story is suspect since the wife might have hurt herself as a ploy to get out of her marriage. Take note that years of research demonstrate 97% of women who claim to have been abused or raped are telling the truth.
* The husband must be equally believed. After all, why would he lie? He must be given the benefit of the doubt.
* The wife, by going to the church’s overseers, may very well have committed gossip or slander, so she needs to be warned of pending church discipline for bringing a bad report.
* The wife belongs to the husband, so she is to return to him, submit, try harder, pray better, and be the kind of wife that would earn his love. 
* She will also follow the admonitions of an approved biblical counselor and/or the pastor and elders or face discipline, even excommunication.

After all that, she is given a stern warning never to say anything to anyone about what has happened or against her husband. This is especially so if in the presence of the counselor or church overseers, the man apologized, said he was sorry and she forgave him. In that instance, the case is closed as if nothing ever happened so nothing could ever be brought up about it. If the wife does tell anyone, then she has practically committed an unpardonable sin.

Oh, by the way, the counselor, pastor, elders, or deacons are not obligated to keep the conflict in confidence. Neither are they obligated to keep the abused’s story in confidence. This is because God does not permit secrets.

This happened to me several times. For example when the pastor-counselor told the elders personal things I shared with him. And the occasion when an elder told other elders and even people outside the church things I told him.

Frankly, as many times as I have heard this from battered wives all over the world in Christian churches, it is a wonder why there are not more suicides than there are. 

Finally, this gets directly back to Ephesians 5:11. Hear some different translations:
“Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them” (ESV)
“Take no part in the worthless deeds of evil and darkness; instead, expose them” (NLT)
“…and have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of the darkness and rather even convict” (Young’s Literal Translation)

How is it this verse and other similar verses not consulted or applied? The call of every single Christian is to expose works of darkness. What does it mean to expose? In Olive Tree’s Enhanced Strong’s Bible, this is what we find:

g1651. ἐλέγχω elegchō; of uncertain affinity; to confute, admonish: — convict, convince, tell a fault, rebuke, reprove.

AV (17) - reprove 6, rebuke 5, convince 4, tell (one's) fault 1, convict 1;
to convict, refute, confute generally with a suggestion of shame of the person convicted, by conviction: to bring to the light, to expose, to find fault with, correct by word, to reprehend severely, chide, admonish, reprove, to call to account, show one his fault, demand an explanation; 
by deed: to chasten, to punish.

Oh sure, we need to keep the Ninth Commandment, Matthew 7, 16, 18, and those forgiveness verses intact. And one might argue that the context of Ephesians 5 has nothing to do with marriage or slander or gossip or the supposed offenses by the abusive husband. Yeah, one might argue that but it won’t be consistent, clear, cogent, or right.

We’ll talk about that another time.