How Should The Spouse Of An Excluded....

A most interesting question!

I would present these ideas as a framework for BOTH the assembly and the spouse.

1) The assembly has NO authority over the married woman nor the unmarried daughter of a father/husband that is a member of the assembly. To try to extend such authority without the consent of the husband/father is just not Scriptural practice.

2) The husband/father has one FIRST loyalty following that towards God, that is toward the spouse followed by the children. He is to protect and love and example Christ even when it is not returned and spurned by the spouse and children.

3) The scenario is similar to that which is given by Paul when one spouse becomes a believer and the other is not. The believer is to remain in full fellowship with both the assembly and the unbelieving spouse as long as the unbelieving spouse is agreeable. However, if the unbelieving spouse is belligerent or obstinately opposed to the assembly, then the partner is to remain faithful to the spouse and let God deal with the belligerence and obstinacy.

4) If an assembly attempts to take action which is NOT approved by the husband/wife toward the other spouse, the husband/wife are to find that assembly as no longer expressing the authority of God and need to move on to a different assembly.

5) ONLY when a husband/wife approach the assembly and express that the spouse has taken a direction that is not Scriptural, that the action has resulted in the breakdown of the authority of the home and the unbelieving spouse has chosen to leave the home, is the situation like that which Paul mentions. The church may then take positional "oversight" in the matter, and provide the necessary ministry helps.

What are your thoughts?

 

Does church exclusion extend to their relationship as spouses ?
I think it goes without saying that an excluded member will voluntarily, either out of spite, embarrassment, or something else (other than repentance) not attend services, so how the spouse behaves towards the excluded spouse in church shouldn't be an issue.

If, on the other hand, the excluded spouse DOES go and attend church, why on earth should the non-excluded spouse's behavior towards the other be different in church than out of the church ?

 

I agree with agedman. This circumstance would never come up.

 

ON THE BAN: QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS.

By Menno Simons
1550

QUESTION 3. Should husband and wife shun each other on account of the ban---as also parents and children? Answer. First that the rule of the ban is a general rule, and excepts none: neither husband nor wife, neither parent nor child. For God’s word judges all flesh with the same judgment and knows no respect of persons. Inasmuch as the rule of the ban is general, excepts none, and is no respecter or persons---therefore it is reasonable and necessary to hear and obey the Word of the Lord in this respect; no matter whether it be husband or wife, parents or children,

Secondly, we say that separation must be made in the congregation; and
therefore the husband must consent and vote with the church in the separation of his wife; and the wife in the separation of her husband. If the pious consort must give his consent, then it is also becoming that he also shun her, with the church; for what use is there in the ban when the shunning and avoiding are not connected with it?

Thirdly, we say that the ban was instituted to make ashamed unto reformation. Do not understand this shame as the world is ashamed; but understand as in the conscience, and therefore let it be done with all discretion, reasonableness, and love. If then my husband or wife, parent or child is judged in the church, in the name of and by the power of Christ, to be banned, it becomes us (inasmuch as the evangelical ban is unto reformation), according to the counsel of the Holy Spirit, to seek the reformation of my own body, namely, of my spouse, and also of our nearest kinsfold as parent or child; for spiritual love must be preferred to anything else. Aside from this I would care for them and provide the temporal necessaries of life, so far as it would be in my power.

Fourthly, we say that the ban was given that we should not be sullied by the leaven of false doctrine or unclean-living flesh, by apostates. And as it is plain that none can corrupt and leaven us more than our own spouses, parents, etc., therefore the Holy Spirit counsels us to shun them, lest they leaven our faith and thus make us ashamed before God. If we love husband or with, parent or child more than Christ Jesus, we cannot possibly be the disciples of Christ.

Some object to this, saying that there is no divorce but by reason of adultery. This is just what we say; and therefore we do not speak of divorce, but of shunning, and that for the aforementioned reasons. To shunning, Paul (I Cor. 7:10) has decidedly consented, although this is not always coupled with adultery; but not to divorce. For divorce is not allowed by the Scripture except by reason of adultery (Matt. 5:32; Luke 16:18); therefore we shall never consent to if for other reasons.

Therefore we understand it that the husband should shun his wife, the wife her husband, parents their children and the children their parents when they apostatize. For the rule of the ban is general. They (the godly) must consent, with the church, to the sentence; they must aim at Scriptural shame unto reformation and dilgently watch, lest they (themselves) he leavened by them, as said above.

My beloved in the Lord, I would here sincerely pray you that you would make a difference between commandment and commandment and not consider all commandments as equally weighty. For adultery, idolatry, shedding blood, and the like shameful and abominable works of the flesh will be punished more severely than a misunderstanding in regard to the ban and particularly when not committed willfully and preversely. Therefore beware that in this matter of matrimony you press no one farther than he is taught of God in his heart and that he in his conscience can bear, lest you boil the kid while it is still sucking its mothers milk (cf. Deut. 14:21). On every hand the Scriptures teach that we should hear with the peak. Brethren, it is a delicate matter. I know too well what has been the result of pressing this matter too far by some in my time. Therefore I advise you to point all to the sure and certain ground. And those consciences that are, through the Scripture and the Holy Spirit, free and unencumbered will freely, without the interference of anyone, by the unction of the Holy Spirit and not by human encouragement, do that which he advises, teaches, and commands in the Holy Scripture, if it should be that one’s spouse should be banned. For verily I know that whoever obeys the Holy Spirit, with faithful heart will never be made ashamed.

 

If a person is in a church that has this type of thing practiced upon a spouse from a spouse they're in a cult not a church.

 

Which post or posts might you be referring to?


"If, on the other hand, the excluded spouse DOES go and attend church"

If they are in church they are not excluded.

 

I was referring to the OP and the questioning whether or not the spouse is to also avoid the excluded member. It is quite clear in the OP, not sure how you missed the glaringly obvious.

Perhaps re-read the OP then re-read my response? :wavey: :thumbsup:

 

Yet no scripture actually included to support this.

 

well, of course, they are not excluded, that is, both spouses.
only one spouse is excluded.
now, why should the unexcluded spouse be expected by this church to act differently to the excluded spouse while in church, and to act differently when out of the church ?
this is ridiculous.
if the unexcluded spouse is expected to shun the excluded spouse, where is the Scripture for that ?
and what does 'exclusion' actually mean ?
is there a scripture that says a church is to close its doors to an erring member ?
I think 'exclusion' is from activities of a church such as the Lord's Table, or fellowship meetings (the love feasts ?), and from being prayed for by the church (delivering such an one to Satan).

 

Sorry, after reading the tread twice I did not know which post you were referring to thus my question.

 

An excluded person is to be treated as a heathen and publican.

How are we to treat heathens and publicans?

I think this point is often missed.

 

Depends on what the offense was, was it for unrepentant sinning, bad doctrines, holding to other faith, or what?

On a general sense, isn't the hoerarchy
God
Huband/wife
children
church