Church Discipline, Contemporary Grace Style

I have so far refrained from public comment on the
resignation of Tullian Tchividjian in light of his confessed sexual sin, limiting
myself to praying for him and his family. 
As one who has strongly criticized his theology, I wanted to avoid the
impression that the personal failure of a leader automatically invalidates his
teaching (or vice versa).  Only the Word of
God proves our teaching.  Recent
developments warrant comment, however, particularly as the actions of a
theologically motivated community make clear its actual values and
beliefs.  In the two-plus months since
Tullian’s resignation, we have witnessed the Contemporary Grace Movement (CGM)
in action, applying their doctrine to one of its most prominent spokesmen.  It is not fair, of course, to ascribe these
attitudes to everyone associated with the CGM. 
But if I was a card-carrying member of the movement, or a pastor who
frequently endorsed the “grace” and “liberation” teaching espoused by Tullian
and company, here are three questions I would be asking myself and other
leaders:

1.      
Does
pastoral godliness matter?  This
question is fairly raised, given both Tullian’s writings (including tweets) since his admitted sexual infidelity and
now the response to it by his supporters.  For his part, Tullian
has expressed an unwillingness to cease his public ministry, saying this would “undermine
the very message” he teaches (one can only but regrettably agree).  This attitude has now been confirmed by
Willow Creek Church (PCA) in Orlando, which just announced hiring Tchividjian
to its ministry staff.  This a mere two
weeks after Tullian filed for divorce, three weeks after he was deposed from
the ministry, and a little over two months after he resigned his pastorate over admitted moral unfitness.  The apostle Paul’s
teaching that a pastor (and by extension, a celebrity preacher) must be
faithful to his wife and above public reproach (1 Tim. 3:2) also does not seem
to matter.  Perhaps because Paul’s
teaching falls into the category of law it is deemed irrelevant to the celebration
of grace.

2.      
Does the
covenant nurture of women matter?  One
of the more horrific moments in this affair was Tullian’s disgraceful exposing (even
highlighting) of his wife’s sin
before the national media.  Likewise,
Paul Tripp’s public article defending Tullian’s divorce implied that the
problem was her unwillingness to reconcile. 
One may wonder why a private counselor would even publish such
information about his clients (for the answer, see #3).  It certainly does not seem that the CGM
emphasizes the duties of husbands to protect and love their wives, perhaps
since teaching male obligation would under Tullian’s doctrine amount to
legalism.  Sadly, we are reminded of what
happens not only when sin is given license but when our “glorious ruin” is
celebrated: many vulnerable people, starting with women and children in the
home, suffer from the tolerated sins of men.  Of all the
people who should express concern about attending CGM churches, prospective wives may be
among the first.

3.      
Does the
church matter?  By immediately
seeking a ministry position, Tullian was showing little concern for the
division and discouragement that would ensue in the church.  (By the church, I do not mean only Willow Creek PCA, but the broader church, including Coral Ridge and the PCA as a whole.)  Moreover, since the Bible
requires good household management as a qualification for both elders and deacons, a church that
was concerned for its people would not likely bring a man onto its staff just weeks after he filed for divorce and was defrocked. 
Then comes the matter of the role of a celebrity counselor acting in the
place of the established courts of the church. 
Why was a private counselor the one to oversee Tullian’s repentance
instead of his presbytery?  With what
authority did Paul Tripp publicly endorse Tullian’s action to divorce his wife (in an article
since taken down)?  The most likely answer seems to be that in the concern to minister to Tullian, biblical concerns regarding the church were pushed aside.

In observing this affair, I was perhaps most
aggrieved by a statement that is itself wonderfully true.  After reading on Paul Tripp’s website that Tullian’s marriage is damaged beyond repair
only two months after the sin was revealed, my eyes wandered downward to read his
banner slogan: “Connecting the transforming power of Jesus Christ to everyday
life.”  Here, then, is a fourth question
I would ask leaders of the Contemporary Grace Movement: what can a statement
like this possibly mean in light of the “discipline” of Pastor Tullian?  For if we really believed that Christ has
power not only to forgive and remove the sorrow of sin but also to transform
and sanctify us from sin itself, it seems to me that the CGM’s response to Tullian’s scandalous sin would be very different. 

Now back to prayer…