These have been difficult days for C.J. Mahaney and Sovereign Grace Ministries (SGM). On July 7, in the midst of what has become an increasingly public controversy, Mahaney announced that he would take a leave of absence from SGM. He did this so the ministry's board can evaluate charges that have been brought against him and so he can examine his own heart and seek reconciliation with people he has wronged. Joshua Harris has since resigned from the SGM board due to disagreements with the board's handling of the situation; C.J. Mahaney's two sons-in-law have resigned as pastors at Covenant Life Church (CLC) due to disagreements with CLC's handling of it.

This leave of absence, and all that followed it, came just as a series of documents were made public via the Internet. These documents, which were compiled by a former SGM pastor and board member named Brent Detwiler, have been styled a "Sovereign Grace wikileak." In exhaustive detail amounting to some 600 pages, they describe Detwiler's long list of grievances against Mahaney, sharing correspondence between SGM board members, emails, minutes from meetings, and summaries of conversation. [Note: though Detwiler did not post these documents publicly, he did send them to a very long list of people which essentially guaranteed that they would become public] Many other issues have been made public by a handful of blogs dedicated to exposing what they consider systemic issues within SGM.

It was almost 6 weeks ago that this information came to light. Beyond a brief mention in an interview, this is the first I've written about it, despite being rebuked by a handful of bloggers and receiving many email requests for comment. I guess this is the kind of situation I typically comment on since, in some ways, that's what I do on this blog: I try to write about what is of interest to Christians in this little slice of the Christian world. Yet I have hesitated, not because I am in any way formally connected to SGM or CLC and not because I have anything to lose. Rather, my hesitation has largely centered around the way all of this information came to light. I have wanted to be very careful to avoid gossip or speculation and I've wanted to avoid drawing attention to information that was never meant to be made public.

I suppose it will not surprise you to learn that I maintain a list of future topics I hope to write about on this blog. Near the top of that list is one I titled simply, “Matthew 18 and the Internet.” That is an issue near and dear to me. Let me explain.

Through my years of blogging (I'm coming up on 8 years of it now) I've often written critiques of books and even some people or the things they've done or the words they've said. In many ways this blog simply reflects the thinking I've done about issues that arise within the church. I do not really know what I think or what I believe until I write about it, and I tend to share my thinking through the blog. And when I write about people or their books, it is nearly inevitable that someone sends me an email or leaves a comment saying, "Did you follow the procedure laid out in Matthew 18?" This is sometimes a kind suggestion and sometimes a harsh rebuke. But either way, it almost always seems to come. This was true when I wrote critical reviews of 90 Minutes in Heaven and The Shack. It was true when I shared some concerns about men whose ministry I respect. In each case, people suggested that I ought to follow Matthew 18 and speak to the men themselves before publicly critiquing them.

The Internet has made the Christian world much smaller, allowing more Christians to have a voice that extends across the globe. And with this new ability to communicate comes new questions about how we are to deal with conflict, how we are to deal with questions and concerns. Matthew 18 is a text most of us know well, and one we quickly turn to when grappling with such issues.

In the most recent edition of Themelios, a theological journal, D.A. Carson addresses what he calls abuse of Matthew 18. Because Themelios is not standard reading for most of us, I thought I'd share some of Carson's perspectives on this issue. I found it very helpful and feel that it offers a lot of biblical wisdom.

Carson forms his arguments around 3 points: the context, the offense and the motives.

The Context

Whatever the sin is that is in Jesus' mind as he speaks the words of Matthew 18:15-17, what is clear is that it takes place in the context of a local church--a local gathering of believers. If we are going to extend this passage to a much wider context, such as a book that has been widely distributed and a blogger who has written a review of it, the text will need to support this. I believe we have a lot of trouble allowing an honest and accurate reading of Matthew 18 to extend so far. It seems clear that the sin of Matthew 18 is a private and quiet kind of sin, the kind that only a very few people have noticed. Perhaps you have spoken to a friend and heard from him that he is cheating on his taxes. You would then be following Jesus' teaching to follow the pattern he laid out. As Carson says, "The impression one derives from reading Matt 18 is that the sin in question is not, at first, publicly noticed (unlike the publication of a foolish but influential book). It is relatively private, noticed by one or two believers, yet serious enough to be brought to the attention of the church if the offender refuses to turn away from it."