The purpose of discipline is for restoration. Not condemnation. Discipline is to confront a person’s sin because doing so is a form of love. But the goal should be reconciliation and restoration when there is repentance.
“If anyone has caused grief, he has not so much grieved me as he has grieved all of you to some extent—not to put it too severely. The punishment inflicted on him by the majority is sufficient. Now instead, you ought to forgive and comfort him, so that he will not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. I urge you, therefore, to reaffirm your love for him. Another reason I wrote you was to see if you would stand the test and be obedient in everything. Anyone you forgive, I also forgive. And what I have forgiven—if there was anything to forgive—I have forgiven in the sight of Christ for your sake, in order that Satan might not outwit us. For we are not unaware of his schemes” (2 Cor 2:5-11).
Paul had written to them previously to discipline the sexually immoral man. Now that there has been repentance and sorrow, Paul strongly urges them to restore him. They are to forgive, comfort, and reaffirm their love for him. They are to protect his heart so that he is not overcome by excessive sorrow from his sin and shame. It is the church’s job to do that.
It might be easy to feel morally superior, to distance themselves from someone who has done immoral acts, and to emotionally shun them. But Paul says do the opposite. The repentant person is to not just be welcomed back, but to be showered with love and reaffirmed and comforted.
This leads us to deal with several issues. In the last couple of years, there have been many leaders who have had moral failings. What about them?
1. Leadership is a different place of responsibility.
If there has been leadership failings, it does not mean the person should be immediately restored back into a position of leadership. Although if there has been moral failing, the truths should still apply. If there has been repentance, forgiveness and restoration is the goal.
2. If there has been repeated sin and there has not been shown fruits of true repentance.
This is a more serious matter. It is one we have seen in churches. A pastor or leader has fallen, but then discovery finds that there has been multiple victims and multiple failings over long periods of time. There hasn’t been consistent and true repentance.
This is a problem. There needs to be higher level of accountability, higher levels of walking with a person, and great caution when allowed them back into forms of leadership.
3. Should a person, leader or not, who has committed a sin in the distant past and demonstrated repentance, be forever disqualified?
Not necessarily. The question is has there been evidence of true repentance, a careful safeguarding, and no longer a flirtation with evil?
Here’s a reality. We are in a time and season where even the ages of 4-5 are exposed to sexual matters that some adults are not even aware about. There is a disgusting level of sexualization of children. The fruit is going to be moral shortcomings because “lust” was awakened way too early.
If we completely disregard anyone and everyone because of a singular moral failing, then we are in trouble. The future will hold no leaders.
This doesn’t mean we pretend sexual depravity in a person’s life doesn’t matter. A person’s life still has to bear the fruit of repentance.
But we cannot hold someone’s sin over their head the entirety of their lives. We see here from Paul that restoration is the goal. Not necessarily restoration in leadership, but restoration as a sister or brother in Christ.