Not too long ago, I attended church where I had been the senior minister/pastor many years earlier. After church, I had a conversation with a man about a Bible professor we both knew from a Christian university who was teaching pro-LGBTQ theology. I voiced my concern about the increasing influence of more progressive professors on local churches. These professors use their influence to weaken a church and lead it away from Jesus’ teachings.
One of the people who joined the conversation was a woman I had baptized years earlier and who was now an elder’s wife at the church. “Well, Bobby,” she said, “we want people who live an LGBTQ lifestyle to be totally accepted and involved in our community as a church—because, if we do not, how do we influence them?”
Can I push pause on that question?
What my friend was saying is that acceptance—along with vague comments in a sermon, but with no accountability—is how churches influence people. Is that true?
I was bothered by her statement because here is what I knew about that current church:
- The church was losing (or had lost) its clear membership and accountability process.
- Acceptance and involvement in the community life of the church, without accountability, is a clear path to affirming LGBTQ+ beliefs and behavior.
- The kind of acceptance she described makes it highly unlikely they will influence those embracing an LGBTQ+ lifestyle to repent and change.[1]
The topic of Christians holding each other accountable is a vitally important one for our churches today. Can I share what I have learned from the Bible and from wise leaders who went before me about how to handle accountability in the local church?
“The topic of Christians holding each other accountable is a vitally important one for our churches today.”
Let’s picture three different models churches can have for accountability when it comes to sinful lifestyles. Accountability is best done in discipling relationships, and each model reflects a different philosophy when it comes to disciple making. In what I write below, I am drawing material that I wrote with Alex Absalom in the book Discipleship That Fits: The Five Kinds of Relationships that God Uses to Help Us Grow.[2]
1. Bounded-Set Churches
This approach for discipling people in the church is rigid. It is one that is above all focused on the boundary that determines who is within, and who is outside, the church.
A classic example is a legalistic church, where you have to adhere to the church’s moral standards, keeping the church’s spoken and unspoken rules (e.g., divorced people are not allowed, no one who drinks is allowed), to be a member of the church. This is a binary world; either you are in, or you are out.
In this image, the circle represents the boundary, and the arrows are different people. Some (arrow A) try to enter, but fail to clear the fence around the organization and are turned away. A few (arrow B) manage to hop inside, but become like arrow C—drifting around, but without any further growth, meaningful goals, or objectives. As long as they don’t upset the leaders who are in charge (represented by the crown, as they often have near-absolute authority!), they can stay in the group.
Of course, many of the things listed as church boundaries can be good, but by over-emphasizing a few specifics we unwittingly create a reductionist approach to disciple making. I know churches that have rejected people upfront because of their views on end-times, or because they had been divorced, etc.
Here’s what happens: those who pass the test are now on the inside, but then where are they going? Where is the sense of pilgrimage, of ongoing growth and maturing as a follower of Jesus Christ? Bounded-set mentalities hinder our missional openness. A church that is seeking to be missionally fruitful, including reaching previously unreached people groups, must be willing to build authentic Christian community with people who are not like themselves.
“A church that is seeking to be missionally fruitful, including reaching previously unreached people groups, must be willing to build authentic Christian community with people who are not like themselves.”
Accountability in bounded-set churches looks like . . . You must possess both right behavior and right beliefs before you can belong in any meaningful sense. You are either “out” or “in.” For example, the man who discipled me many years ago was kicked out of the church a few years later when he simply changed his understanding of the meaning of baptism. The elders wanted him out because his thoughts did not conform to theirs. Or, as another example, when I started in the ministry in 1987, a woman met with me to see if she could come to our church. Twenty years earlier, her husband had divorced her (through no fault of hers), and the church had kicked her out because of it. I am still regularly amazed at the heartbreaking stories of legalistic churches like these.
2. Fuzzy-Set Churches
The opposite of bonded-set churches is fuzzy-set churches. Declaring that all are welcome into their church, the leaders emphasize freedom and resist boundaries in their church. They might advocate, for example, that the New Testament was all about valuing diversity. Or they may want to respect the different journeys that people take, assuming that if all the wonderful attributes of Jesus are promoted in the preaching, eventually the wayward will come around to living right, even if there aren’t direct calls to repent.
The accent in fuzzy-set disciple making is organic: the environment and the Holy Spirit will lead people to do the right thing. But the actual result in these churches is typically very different than what people imagine. People in this kind of community often move in very different directions, morally and theologically. In the image below, the arrows represent people moving around as they please. It’s been described as a hippie paradise!
This fuzzy-set approach can feel wonderful at first, since it is so relaxed, relational, and optimistic, especially when compared to a controlling environment.
Unfortunately, though, this collegial climate doesn’t last for long. Without any defining identity and direction, disobedience to Scripture can become entrenched. People choose alternative paths away from Jesus. People begin to pull away, and over the years, the group dissipates like a mist on a sunny day.
While the fuzzy-set approach may sound ideal, in practice it’s an approach that is not biblical and it is not robust enough to deal with the fallen nature of humanity and the pernicious nature of sinful lifestyles.
“In practice a fuzzy-set approach is not biblical and it is not robust enough to deal with the fallen nature of humanity and the pernicious nature of sinful lifestyles.”
Accountability in fuzzy-set churches looks like . . . no accountability for behaviors or beliefs. Everyone is welcome to belong. Several years ago in Nashville, I attended a gathering of church leaders from all the branches of the Restoration Movement (many RENEW.org churches have a Restoration Movement heritage). Several church leaders were from the far progressive side, and I wanted to understand them better. I soon identified their fuzzy-set approach when one of the lead pastors of a local church started bragging about how they were so open-minded that they have an adult Sunday school class where the teacher did not even believe that Jesus Christ rose from the dead. They were proud of that. And when it came to behaviors they accept, I will just note that many of these churches are draped with the LGBTQ flag, as a statement to the community.
3. Centered-Set Churches
A centered-set church community is explicit about its focus. Here, the key element is a defining idea that is at the center of the group’s life, giving it cohesiveness, direction, and structure.
For the disciple-making church, our uniting idea and center to which everything points is Jesus Christ and his gospel (in the image, this is represented by the cross at the center). We are together on a journey toward Christ and Christlikeness. None of us make it all the way there in this life, but with Jesus and the gospel at the center, we have a vision to unite us, as well as a framework for resolving every dilemma and relational difficulty (if we will obey his teachings).
In terms of our posture toward the world, a centered-set church can invite even the most notorious of sinners to start to learn from Jesus in one area of life, even if everything else bears little resemblance to him (arrow C on the image). This creates a low bar of entry into the church’s services, groups, and community activities, yet without causing the people in the church to compromise their understanding of the gospel and its demands (more on that below).
The point is less about getting someone to make an upfront decision and more about inviting people into the journey at the heart of the church. It is about inviting everyone 1) into community/relationship and, 2) to take their next step toward Jesus Christ. Church leaders often describe it this way: people move from belonging, to believing, and then to behaving.
“People move from belonging, to believing, and then to behaving.”
The dotted line in this image is crucial. It represents conversion. (It’s a dotted line not because conversion is unimportant (it’s of utmost importance!) but because we want to emphasize that all are welcome in the community and they cross an important line when they place faith in Jesus. And it’s at this dotted line that people should be expected to commit to a local church and its leadership. This commitment, which I will describe below, is something I refer to as “covenant membership.” I believe that it’s in centered-set churches with covenant membership that a church can truly hold each other accountable.
But before we explore covenant membership, just how important is accountability in a local church? We see the importance of accountability most clearly when we understand the danger of ongoing, unrepentant sin.
The Danger of Ongoing, Unrepentant Sin
We discover in Scripture that once a person has made the commitment to be baptized and follow Jesus, they have obligations that are not to be imposed on outsiders. In the passage below, Paul warns the Christians in Galatia about making sinful lifestyle choices. Note that he is not describing those who struggle or who stumble and fall (see 1 John 1:5-9 for that). Instead, he describes ongoing lifestyle choices, by people who claim to be disciples—lifestyle choices that will exclude them from God’s eternal kingdom:
“The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.” (Galatians 5:19-21, NIV)
Note the last sentence in these texts: “those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.”
Similarly, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 describes unrepentant sin that will keep us from God’s kingdom:
“Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” (1 Corinthians 6:9-10, NIV)
The Bible and accountability: “Those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.”
Yet, aren’t we saved by grace through faith, not through our holiness? Yes, we are saved by grace through faith. Grace is God’s part, and faith is our response:
“For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast.” (Ephesians 2:8-9, NIV)
Grace is God’s free gift—we cannot earn it. We simply receive it by faith. But true faith is substantive. It is Jesus transforming our inner person so that we give our allegiance and faithfulness to God through him (Romans 1:5; 1 Thessalonians 1:3).
Faith, the human response, is made evident by its actions. In fact, the Bible does not recognize faith apart from obedience. Jesus himself said it plainly: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 7:21, NIV). True faith is a life of obedience, aimed toward Jesus and away from sin. “Whoever says, ‘I know him,’ but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in that person” (1 John 2:4).
The Bible and accountability: “Whoever says, ‘I know him,’ but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in that person.”
The most prominent means listed in Scripture by which people turn from genuine saving faith is the ongoing practice and indulgence in sin. Every Christian is engaged in a life-long struggle with sin, but the Bible warns us that deliberate and ongoing sin—as a conscious choice—is in a different category. The book of Hebrews lays down the basic principle which lies at the heart of this issue:
“If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God.” (Hebrews 10:26-27, NIV)
According to this passage, the key characteristic of those in danger is that they “deliberately keep on sinning after receiving the knowledge of the truth.” At the risk of being repetitious, this passage is not saying that a Christian cannot sin. Every Christian struggles with sin, giving in to its power in one area or another (see James 3:2). But this passage teaches that giving into a lifestyle of deliberate and continual sin is a different matter entirely.
It is in this light that the Bible teaches that God wants us to uphold healthy accountability for sin in the church. This is why the book of James says, “My brothers and sisters, if one of you should wander from the truth and someone should bring that person back, remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of their way will save them from death and cover over a multitude of sins” (James 5:19-20, NIV).
The Bible and accountability: “If one of you should wander from the truth and someone should bring that person back, remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of their way will save them from death and cover over a multitude of sins.”
So, what should accountability look like in the church?
Accountability in the Early Church
The earliest Christians after the apostles (100s-300s), the Protestant Reformers (1500s), and the early Evangelical church in North America (1800-1950s) all emphasized accountability. The Protestant Reformers used to say that there are three signs of a biblical church:
- the Word is preached,
- the sacraments are offered (baptism and communion), and
- church discipline is practiced.
These groups of Christians didn’t make these concepts up. Rather, they embraced accountability because it’s taught in Scripture.
We are not commanded to hold everyone accountable to follow Jesus. Scripture teaches us to focus our concern upon people who call themselves Christians and are part of the local church. In 1 Corinthians 5:9-13, the Bible teaches us that the church community must not passively tolerate the practice of ongoing sin by brothers and sisters.
“When I wrote to you before, I told you not to associate with people who indulge in sexual sin. But I wasn’t talking about unbelievers who indulge in sexual sin, or who are greedy or are swindlers or idol worshipers. You would have to leave this world to avoid people like that. What I meant was that you are not to associate with anyone who claims to be a Christian yet indulges in sexual sin, or is greedy, or worships idols, or is abusive, or a drunkard, or a swindler. Don’t even eat with such people. It isn’t my responsibility to judge outsiders, but it certainly is your job to judge those inside the church who are sinning in these ways. God will judge those on the outside; but as the Scriptures say, ‘You must remove the evil person from among you.’” (1 Corinthians 5:9-13, NLT)
The Bible and accountability: “It isn’t my responsibility to judge outsiders, but it certainly is your job to judge those inside the church who are sinning in these ways.”
Christians have a special responsibility to other Christians, within their church, which they do not have to those outside the church. We are to leave outsiders alone on these matters, in the hands of God.
Jesus taught us a specific format for dealing with serious sin in Luke 17 and again in Matthew 18:15-17:
“If your brother or sister sins, go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.” (Matthew 18:15-17, NIV)
This process described by Jesus teaches a healthy accountability that requires wisdom. The truth is, we cannot function as a biblical church without accountability for sinful lifestyles. We do not have space to address this topic in more depth here, but I would recommend some of the resources at 9marks.com.
One thing that is important to address, however, is a way to hold each other accountable which is called “covenant membership.” What is “covenant membership”?
Covenant Membership
The lack of accountability and discipline—for example, which we see in a fuzzy-set church—will mean that the local church will live more and more like the world. A centered-set, disciple-making church gives us the opportunity for there to be accountability for those who are baptized, but especially when they have committed to be a member with an agreement or “covenant” with the church.
A “covenant membership” is where the local church asks those who make the local church their home to commit to be accountable to one another for lifestyles that are obedient to the teachings of Jesus. This is an explicit decision and an explicit covenant between the members of the church and the leadership of the church. The concept is grounded in being explicit about how the members will obey the teachings of passages on accountability such as Matthew 18:15-17 and 1 Corinthians 5:1-13.
I believe we ought to restore the concept of covenant membership with the local church. True, it’s a concept only implicit within the teaching of the New Testament. We have no record in the Bible that early Christians formally committed themselves to membership in a local congregation. But they also lived in a time when every person who was a Christian was automatically included as part of a local church (Romans 12:4 calls us “members” of Christ’s body, and Ephesians 2:19 calls us “members” of God’s household).
“A covenant membership is where the local church asks those who make the local church their home to commit to be accountable to one another for lifestyles that are obedient to the teachings of Jesus.”
There was just one church in each city or town in the New Testament (e.g., in the book Revelation we read letters “to the church at Laodicea” and “the church at Ephesus”), although each church may have been divided up into various “assemblies” or “gatherings.” Each person in the church was part of the same family—as they gave and received support and placed themselves under the teaching and spiritual guidance of the local leaders. Within the church, they were held accountable for living the Christian life—as the passages we have looked at teach. Different denominations and affiliation options did not exist. Formally or informally, everyone was a member of the local church and received the benefits and responsibilities described in the New Testament discussions about church.
But how can people receive these benefits of support and accountability today, especially if there’s no agreed-upon commitment and if church leaders do not even know who they are and where they stand in regard to Christ?
The Need for Relational Accountability
You might be reading this and agree that accountability within the church is needed, and be able to picture someone entering an agreement to be held accountable—but wondering, “What would it actually look like to hold somebody accountable for sin?”
That takes me back to something we explored earlier: the importance of centered-set, disciple-making relationships. It is in the context of intentional disciple-making relationships, focused on Jesus, that we can lovingly and effectively hold each other accountable.
I’ll give you an example of what this can look like from my own experience—not because the story has a happy ending but because the story gives a picture of the necessity of an ongoing, loving relationship when we confront others over sin.
I first met them on Christmas eve. They came to our services and “Lily” wanted me to meet her wife “Jean” (not their real names). When I met them, they introduced me to their adopted baby. I was happy to meet them and wanted them to know by my words and my actions that I accepted them and welcomed them into our church community.
“What would it actually look like to hold somebody accountable for sin?”
We want to love like Jesus, so we developed a definition of what that means. Loving like Jesus is “grace and truth in actions, with grace leading the way.” My goal was to love Lily and Jean like that.
In January, when they came back to church, I asked Lily and Jean to join our home group. They happily joined us and became regulars as we met every week. Over the next one and a half years we involved them in our homes, in our lives, in our home group and in our church in the following ways:
- They became regular group and church attendees.
- We shared picnics, fun gatherings, and service events together—including when we all got dressed up for Halloween.
- They helped the church by volunteering in non-member service roles.
- We loved them, embraced them as seekers, and served them.
At the same time, we never changed any teachings for them, and on a few occasions, we talked about how true believers must turn from sinful lifestyles, like drunkenness, cheating, gossip, and homosexuality. We were kind, loving, and clear at the same time.
Two times, Lily asked to meet with me about baptism. I asked her to look at Scripture with me, and we discussed the nature of true, repentant faith. We processed the teaching of Scripture that if Lily and Jean were to repent and turn to Jesus, they would have to commit to turn from their homosexual relationship. We offered to help them financially with what that would mean for their child and for their budget. We offered to help them in the journey because it would mean huge changes.
“We offered to help them in the journey because it would mean huge changes.”
We kept up the relationship and their engagement for months after the conversation because neither Lily or Jean was ready to turn from their lifestyle for Jesus. We gave them space and kept loving them. In the meantime, I had to have a few side conversations with those who were members of our church and my home group about our church’s value of loving like Jesus—which meant loving people where they are at and helping them to move to embrace the gospel and discipleship.
I wish I could tell you that this story ended up like Rosario Butterfield’s or Guy Hammond’s or another amazing conversion. But it did not. Eventually they stopped coming to our home group and then stopped coming to our church. When we reached out, they thanked us for loving them but informed us they had moved on to another church (more of a “fuzzy-set” church as described above).
It was hard, but we had loved Jesus and Lily and Jean well.
The practice of covenant membership lived out in discipling relationships restores the heart of the New Testament teaching on what it means to be accountable in the local church. Biblical church accountability can happen where there is relationship. We all have times where we need to be challenged and held accountable, as that is part of what it means to grow in Christ-likeness. But if we are to obey Jesus’ teachings, I believe we must choose to be accountable—we must commit to it—and it is vitally important to know that those who are calling us into account truly love us.
“If we are to obey Jesus’ teachings, I believe we must choose to be accountable—we must commit to it—and it is vitally important to know that those who are calling us into account truly love us.”
Again, we do not hold people into account unless they have repented, been baptized, and have committed themselves to the teaching of Jesus—and have agreed to be accountable for his teachings, as covenant members of the local church. This practice is an important step in one’s growth and an important step in how the church reaches out to help those living in sinful lifestyles.
The unbaptized or the uncommitted are loved, welcomed, and involved in church life. But they are not considered true disciples or members. They can serve in some limited roles that are clearly defined and are not leadership or influence roles. The line is clear, and the holiness of our covenant people is upheld, while love is extended to the unconvinced.
One of the most important reasons for following church discipline is described in 1 Corinthians 5: it has a purifying effect on everyone in the church. Paul writes, “Don’t you know that a little yeast leavens the whole batch of dough? Get rid of the old yeast, so that you may be a new unleavened batch —as you really are” (1 Corinthians 5:6b-7a, NIV). The process of holding people in church accountable (and sometimes having to exercise church discipline; see Matthew 18:17) is very difficult, yet it helps everyone in the church to live with an active realization that holiness is essential for God’s people. As God says, “Be holy, because I am holy,” for “without holiness no one will see the Lord” (1 Peter 1:16, NIV; Hebrews 12:14b, NIV).
“Don’t you know that a little yeast leavens the whole batch of dough?”
In closing, if you are a church leader, I highly encourage you to have membership structures in place that you can be crystal clear about the danger of 1) abandoning the gospel by denying essential teachings, and of 2) abandoning an obedient, repentant faith through ongoing, sinful lifestyles. Centered-set disciple making requires clarity from church leaders and a serious call to commitment for everyone in our churches to grow in Christlikeness.
I’m interested in your feedback! Having a covenant membership has worked in the church I serve, but this sort of accountability is very rare for most churches I’m familiar with. Do you think this could work in a local church? What would need to be in place to make it gracious and effective? If you’d like to give your feedback on this topic, please contact [email protected], tell us a few sentences about yourself, and give us your thoughts; I look forward to hearing them.
[1] For a helpful exploration of how to both embrace the hard teachings of Scripture regarding LGBTQ+ matters and embrace hurt people, walking beside them in compassion and truth, check out the forthcoming RENEW.org book by Guy Hammond Following Jesus in an LGBTQ+ World.
[2] The following material is from Bobby Harrington and Alex Absalom, Discipleship that Fits: The Five Kinds of Relationships God Uses to Help Us Grow (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2015).
