Confronting Doctrinal Error
Doctrinal errors are the present-day leaven in Christ’s church and cannot be ignored. Left unchecked, they can spread like a cancer, undermining the unity and health of the congregation. However, dealing with doctrinal error is nuanced and the particular approach requires wisdom and discernment. Thankfully, since this is not a new problem, we can learn from those that came before us. This article addresses the issue from the perspective of multiple Puritan pastors.
Defining Error
In order to deal with error, we must first define it. Recently, I began reading the first volume of the Works of Samuel Rutherford published by Reformation Heritage. This volume contains Rutherford’s response to the error of Arminianism. In his first chapter (the longest by far), he discusses Scripture itself. Rutherford says right up front that God has left us His Word as our “standard that binds consciences definitively” and that “the conscience would be endlessly in flux and would not have anything to stand upon unless the Scriptures were the final arbiter of controversies.” Suffice to say that dealing with error requires a standard we must use to judge the error. After all, if there is no authoritative standard we are left without grounds to say it is error at all. Our knowledge and view of Scripture is vital. We must first see the Scriptures as the standard. Then, we must actually know what the Scriptures say in order to employ them in the face of error because doctrinal errors are simply positions that are contrary to the Word of God.
The Importance of Dealing with Error
Rutherford’s approach to countering the error of Arminianism resulted in over 700 pages of systematic theology, primarily using Scripture to combat the error. This attests to his belief in the importance of weeding out error and comprehensively dealing with it.
First, let’s consider why dealing with error is vital to the health of the church. Christ dealt with this very thing regarding the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees in Matthew 16. He tells the disciples to “watch and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” (v.6) After letting the disciples flounder in confusion for a bit, He clarifies that He is comparing their teaching to leaven. Now, the point is not that leaven itself is negative, although it usually is in Scriptural analogies aside from a few positive examples like in Matthew 13. In this case, he is using leaven as an analogy of how pervasive false teaching can be in affecting the church. Another Puritan, Matthew Henry, expands on the analogy of leaven:
“Though Christ did not tell them plainly, yet now they were aware that by the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees, he meant their doctrine and way, which were corrupt and vicious, but, as they managed them, very apt to insinuate themselves into the minds of men like leaven, and to eat like a canker. They were leading men, and were had in reputation, which made the danger of infection by their errors the greater.”
William Hendriksen adds another key explanation in his commentary on Matthew (Hendriksen was not a Puritan but wrote some of the best and most useful commentaries of the 20th century):
“It is against this teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees that Jesus is here earnestly warning his disciples. He calls their teaching “yeast,” for like an increasingly penetrating principle it influenced their own as well as other lives.”
The point is that leaven, whether good or bad, has comprehensive influence on the whole. It penetrates and can infect everything. In the case of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees, their doctrine was something Christ told His disciples to “watch” and “beware of.” In other words, you have to be paying attention (watching) and, when you notice error, you have to do something about it (beware). But who is responsible for seeing and addressing error? We all must carry this task but the elders of the church carry a unique responsibility for the care of the flock. Part of shepherding the flock is protecting it from harm.
How to Deal with Error in the Church
Despite the simplicity of our definition of doctrinal error, when deciding upon a method of dealing with error, we must separate manner from matter. The matter of error is binary. Something is either true or it is not. Absolute truth does exist and it is our conviction that it exists within God’s Word as He graciously revealed it to us. So, the matter of error is fixed. However, the manner of error resides on a spectrum. Not all positions of error penetrate as deeply or as consequentially as others and we must consider this.
Rutherford separates manner into three distinct categories based on their effect on the congregation:
- “Professing a fundamental error is more serious than holding one. Promoting and defending one is more serious still. But forcing such an error on others’ consciences by tyrannical compulsion is by far the most serious. The church should tolerate those who are in error or uncertain about the fundamentals until they are properly instructed (2 Tim 2:24-26). Those who profess fundamental errors should be restrained. Those who teach fundamental errors and lead others astray must be put out of the church.”
He is arguing that our response to error depends on the situation (i.e. the manner).
First, he presents a person in the church who holds a position of fundamental error (an essential of the faith) but does not proclaim it to others. They keep it to themselves. In other words, they are not trying to promote it or convince others of their position. Rutherford says “the church should tolerate those who are in error or uncertain about the fundamentals until they are properly instructed.” As we progress in our knowledge of God and His Word, we will inevitably correct errors in our thinking along the way. The role of other believers and the elders of the church is to help people along this journey, not alienate them, dismiss, or discredit them. This is sadly an area where many reformed churches fall short. We have adopted a cancel culture mentality within our own circles and this shouldn’t be. In 2 Timothy 2:25, we see that the elder is to correct his opponents (in this case error) “with gentleness.” (ESV) He shouldn’t chastise or degrade a fellow believer that holds a position of error, but should help them see what God’s Word says and gently point them to the truth. If they conform to God’s Word, the issue is complete. If they hold firm to their position and then begin to promote it to others, we must progress in our response.
The next level of response is for those who have been taught properly and gently corrected but stand fast to their position and then begin to promote it to others. Once a person takes this step with their erroneous position, professing it in some public manner, they should be restrained immediately. If not already in sin because of their position, they certainly are now. If the elders are not involved at this point, now is the time to loop them in and allow them to shepherd those involved. As Matthew 18 outlines for us, the issue is still being handled as privately as possible without blasting them publicly.
Finally, “those who teach fundamental errors and lead others astray must be put out of the church.” A person in a teaching role, or one who is leading others astray despite being restrained and corrected, must not be allowed to remain amongst the body. The effect of this “leaven” is too catastrophic. It is interesting how his response to the three manners of error mirror the steps of church discipline in Matthew 18. We deal with it as we would with any other sin when it comes to discipline. Once corrected, to continue on and to promote the position of error is simply adding more sin to the situation.
The Unique Role of the Elders
While all of us carry the burden of protecting the truth of God’s Word and the unity of the body, the elders carry a unique role. It is helpful to understand their responsibility as we should all be supporting them and submitting to their leadership. Let us consider this role.
First, it is vital that an elder be a man of the Word. He must know the Scriptures! Much as an attorney will defend a contract by using the words of the contract, an elder must defend the truth by using the words of Truth. A man who does not know the Scriptures should not be an elder because they are incapable giving instruction in sound doctrine and of defending truth.
Next, the elder must be willing to confront. One of the biblical qualifications of an elder is to rebuke those who contradict truth. We see this in Titus 1:9: “He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.” (ESV) This implies confrontation which is why fear of man has no place in the life of an elder. You must be willing to confront people when necessary. To avoid confrontation in this instance is to be negligent in your duty as an overseer. Silent error does not simply disappear on its own. It grows. It inevitably becomes public as the person grows more assured of their position. The gravity and effect become more severe when left unchecked. It’s not an option for an elder in Christ’s church to avoid confrontation when it comes to defending truth.
Finally, an elder must be willing to stand firm amidst difficulty. When dealing with a defiant, willful refusal to obey authority, the elder must remain firm. At this point, people will likely be quite difficult and sometimes even lash out in anger. They are, after all, under church discipline. It’s important that the elder remain humble and must remember that his credibility in the situation lies not in his own perfection but in the authority of God’s Word. He must stand firm on this fact, not his own record. If the elder starts to compare his own sinful nature to the situation, he might start to accommodate the error which cannot be allowed.
Richard Baxter, in his great book The Reformed Pastor, provides a brief explanation of how this plays out. He says “we must reprove and admonish.” It is not an option or a particular gift that only certain elders possess. He goes on to say “there is required much skill, and a difference must be made, according to the various tempers of the offenders; but with most it will be necessary to speak with the greatest plainness and power, to shake their careless hearts, and make them see what it is to dally with sin; to let them know the evil of it, and it sad effects as regards both God and themselves.” Speak clearly and directly when confronting error. You are dealing with sin. The consequences are death. This is no time to beat around the bush or provide a long leash. Especially in the case of someone as influential as a teacher, dallying will only make the damage exponentially worse. For the protection of the body, restrain it rapidly and extract it without delay when necessary. It is a battle and you are leading the way. Protect your people.
The fundamentals of our faith are extremely important. We’re not talking about some tertiary point of doctrine; we’re addressing what defines us as Christians. Rutherford said one reason knowing and keeping the fundamentals is that it is necessary for “defining the true church precisely, for the true church is one that has a foundation.” We have a foundation of truth, God’s Word, and He gave us elders to help protect that truth. It is our role as the body of Christ to know truth, to pray for and support our elders in defending it, and stand firm in the face of opposition. As elders, it is our role to stand between the sheep and the wolves and to do it without reservation and without fear. Doctrinal error is not something to mess around with. Doctrine is important. We must study truth so we can help defend it, not just so we can argue about it. Let us all take up our post in this fight for the sake of Christ’s church and His truth. Rutherford found it necessary to respond with a mammoth book refuting the error of Arminianism. He used the Word to do it. We certainly don’t have to write a book every time we see doctrinal error but we should be willing and able to defend what we believe. Don’t diminish sinful error when you see it. Deal with it or our enemy will use it to harm Christ’s church.
Books mentioned in this article:
The Works of Samuel Rutherford, Volume 1: Arminianism: A Systematic and Theological Response by Samuel Rutherford
Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible (don’t get the abridged versions) by Matthew Henry
The Reformed Pastor by Richard Baxter
