Robert Roberts on Matthew 18

Andrew McFarland > Blog > Robert Roberts on Matthew 18

September 30, 2005

Len said:

Once they are aware of wrong-doing, they have no choice but to act.

Now, I don't agree with that. However, I understand that my opinion is not likely to cut much ice here, so I'm going to quote from the Ecclesial Guide, written by Robert Roberts, the first editor of the Christadelphian.

But supposing an offence arise which a brother cannot thus overlook, but which he feels to be a barrier between himself and the offender, then he is bound to take the course indicated. He is not at liberty to mention the matter to a third party, and he is not at liberty to stand aside in a state of alienation. If he do either the one or the other, he makes himself as much an offender as he may imagine the cause of his injured feelings to be. A man who disobeys the commandment of Christ on one point, is as much a transgressor as the man who disobeys it on another. Consequently, an ecclesia knowing of such a case, is bound to persuade the offended brother to see the offender in private, or to withdraw from him in case of refusal.

Ecclesial Guide, Section 36, emphasis mine.

In Robert Roberts' opinion no Christadelphian should have listened to the accusations against me until Matthew 18 had been followed. Not that tradition matters, but it would be hard to get more a Christadelphian who was more traditional than Robert Roberts!

There is a sample constitution in the Ecclesial Guide. Clause 31 reads:

That no accusation or matter of evil report against any brother shall be listened to in public or private, until the brother bringing or reporting the accusation shall have taken the course prescribed in Matt. xviii. 15-18; and any brother refusing to take this course while persisting in his accusation, or in alienation on account of it, shall himself be considered and dealt with as an offender against the law of Christ.

There is a similar clause in the Constitution of the Belfast Ecclesia

No Christadelphian should have listened to or acted on Mike Kragman's accusations until Mike Kragman went through the process of Matthew 18. I was and am prepared to do this, but I will not discuss the accusations with a third party. There is no loophole in Matthew 18. Nobody can be made to respond to accusations until the accuser has followed Christ's clear commandment. Read Matthew 18. Think about what Robert Roberts says about it in the Ecclesial Guide. Anybody who has seen the evidence and acts on it in any way should, in the words of the sample constitution "be considered and dealt with as an offender against the law of Christ."

Comments