Adult Sunday School - The Congregation’s Authority

Dear Holy Father, I pray that you would bless our Sunday school this morning, that you would bless also the children as they study your word, and I pray that you would make us more like your son as you teach us his ways, in Jesus' name, amen.

Alright, well, I've got a sheet of verses, as Tim did last week, just pass those back there. Alright, so we're doing a number of lessons on ecclesiology, on how the church ought to operate, and other things related to the teaching ministry of the word.

For those who have recently been in my orientation class, a lot of this will look familiar, but hopefully you're up for going through a lot of this a second time. Also, Pastor Tim last week went through a number of things about the elders' authority.

There will be a bit of overlap this week, not necessarily because there's anything lacking in what he was teaching, but yeah, today we're going to be talking not just about the congregation's authority, but how it interacts with the elders' authority.

So, just beginning with that, and considering, and once again, feel free to ask questions at any point, this is the setup for how congregationalism works in that first line. You see, there's authority, it has been delegated from God to Christ, to the congregation, to pastors, to deacons, right?

Alright, so, first, God to Christ. It might seem odd that authority would need to be delegated to Christ, doesn't he have.

Authority?

Isn't he God? Doesn't he have authority over all things? Well, as a man, he does not take these positions for himself, he must be appointed to them, as it says in Hebrews 5, that no man takes that position for himself, as high priest or even as king, it's not right for someone to do that.

And so, all authority is given to Jesus, Matthew 28, 18 says it, and Jesus came and said to them, all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me, okay? So, God has all authority, naturally, right?

And he grants all authority to the God-man, Jesus Christ, okay? And then, Christ grants his authority to the congregation. Now, what is, we're gonna talk about, like, what the scope of that authority is and what it looks like, but every church has to answer this question, and they, even if they don't consider the relevance of the passage, they end up answering this, and it is, who holds the keys of the kingdom?

That's not just a phrase you hear stated as, I don't know, I hear people say that occasionally when they hand people keys, right, or something like that, I hear the keys to the kingdom. But no, this is a biblical phrase, it talks about the keys of the kingdom of heaven.

Let's read some of Matthew 16, so if you go ahead and turn to Matthew 16, I want us to read through a larger passage than just what's written down here. All right, we're gonna read Matthew 16, verses 13 to 20.

Now, when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, who do people say that the Son of Man is? And they said, some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah, or one of the prophets.

He said to them, but who do you say that I am? Simon Peter replied, you are the Christ, the Son of the living God. For Jesus answered him, blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.

And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven.

Whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Then he strictly charged his disciples to tell no one that he was the Christ. All right, so it's at this event that Peter is given the keys of the kingdom, right?

It's authority in the church. Now why is it Peter who is given the keys? Usually this is phrased as, Peter is given the keys of the kingdom as first of, and then you insert something there, right? As first of blank.

So like, for example, in Roman Catholicism, he would be first of popes, okay? You could say, well, he's first of apostles, first of bishops, he's first of presbyters. You could change this to be whatever you want, and so that's why different churches, once again, not necessarily looking at this passage and answering the question explicitly, but this is implicitly what's going on, is that they are answering, or however they run the church, is answering the question of who holds the keys of the kingdom?

Who under Christ has the authority to be wielded? And so what would you say, someone who hasn't heard me answer this question before, I know almost all of you have, but maybe someone who doesn't remember me answering this question, what is Peter first of here?

First of.

Like, not first of popes, not first of bishops, not first of apostles, what is he? Why this context? Why here? Why does he say this here?

Yes.

Sure. Right.

Yeah, so that's a good question. I've honestly seen enough answers on this that I don't feel absolutely confident of what the right way of phrasing it is, but yeah, definitely his confession is a significant part of that.

Yeah, so for those who don't know, Peter's name, you know, he names him Peter, which means, you know, rock, and then he says, he says, on this rock, right, and these are different.

Words.

So some people phrase it as, oh, Jesus is talking about himself, right, like he's saying, you're Peter, and on this rock, I'm holding my church, or he's saying rock is the confession, et cetera, right?

I think it must involve something about the confession, that's the whole point of this event, is that Peter has made the confession that Jesus Christ is the son of God, so Peter is the first of confessors, okay?

This is why Peter, in particular, Jesus says to him, I will give you the keys of the kingdom, it's because he's not first among popes, not first among apostles, but first among confessors, since he has just confessed that Jesus Christ is the son of God.

So that tells you the, I don't want to overuse the word scope here, because I'm using it in a different sense, but the scope of those who could possibly wield the keys includes all confessors, okay?

Yes?

It's singular. It's singular. He is just talking plural. So yeah, one thing, this is the reason why a lot of people like King James, is because it distinguishes the yous and yees, so that one is plural, one is singular.

You don't really have that in English, naturally, but you do in King James, so that's nice to.

Have.

All right, so yeah, he is talking to Peter, so it's a question of, yeah, what is Peter.

First of?

He's first of confessors, that's the whole reason for this. Otherwise, why didn't he say this at some other time? Why this event? All right, so Peter's giving the keys. Now, you don't really know what the keys are here.

It doesn't really explain it here, right? And there's a mixed metaphor going on. There is loosing and binding being talked about, but keys don't typically loose and bind, right? Keys, well, I mean, I guess they could if they're for manacles or something, but keys open and close, ropes loose and bind.

Point is, we're going to need more context in order to know what the keys do. Also, most of what I'm saying, I very much like the book by Jonathan Lehman called Don't Fire Your Church Members. If you want to know more about this, I would recommend that book, Don't Fire Your Church.

Members.

Okay.

Matthew 18 speaks to these keys again, if you look at Matthew 18. Okay, Matthew 18, we're going to look at verse 15. Also, I would highly recommend that you memorize those chapter numbers, okay? Memorize 16, 18, and then 28, because this is the chain to show what the keys of the kingdom are.

Okay, 16, 18, and then 28. There's only one digit that changes each time, all right? First time is the six turns to an eight, second time, the one turns to a two, okay? 16, 18, 28. All right, Matthew 18, verse 15.

If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses.

If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven.

Whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. This is the same phrase, right? Again, I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven.

For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them. All right, so what is, this is at least one example, if not the main thing that the keys.

Are for here, right?

What's happening here? What's the context? What is the loosing and binding doing?

Right?

Excommunication.

So it's an authoritative declaration on Christ's behalf that this person is not to be identified as one of his people, right? It is, you know, you think about it, a lot of people think about the authority that they have from Christ as something, especially when we get into Matthew 28, it's, you know, it's like the authority to proclaim his word, et cetera.

You know, on one hand, I'm not sure there's anything, any special authority that someone would need just to read his word to another person, right? He's given his word, someone can say what it says to that other person, right?

They can declare that. But you do not have authority to say on Christ's behalf who belongs to his kingdom and who doesn't belong to his kingdom. Like, you know, people can make all kinds of claims, those claims are meaningless unless they have that authority in order to say this.

So who has authority to say this? It is the one who exercised the keys, or the ones who exercised the keys. Now, here in Matthew 18 describes those who exercised the keys, right? If your brother sins against you, you go show him his fault.

If he doesn't listen to you, take one or two others. If he doesn't listen to them, tell it to the church. And this is interesting because this is all pre-Pentecost and everything, right? But Jesus is still talking about the church, the gathering of the saints, that's what the word ekklesia means, right?

It's the gathering of the church. A lot of people over-etymologize it and say, oh, ekklesia means called out, so it's the ones who are called out. There's some significance to that, but really that's, you know, one example is, you know, a butterfly is not a fly made of butter, right?

You can make way too much of the etymology there, right? You can make way too much of the etymology of ekklesia. It is a congregation, like that is what a church is, is a gathered people. So, he says, tell it to the church.

If he refuses to listen, even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and tax collector. So this is something the church does. So a lot of times you have many churches who say, okay, well, it's the church, but it's the, but it's, yeah, it's some representative acting on behalf of the church rather than the church itself being the one who needs to hear, the one who needs to do this.

And so at the end when it says, for where two or three are gathered in my aim, they.

Are among them.

When do they even have this authority? Okay, this authority is not an authority that's possessed when they are not gathered. It's authority that's possessed when they are gathered. Also, you've probably heard this used in like workplace prayer meetings and stuff like that, right, where someone says, ah, wherever two or three are gathered, their Jesus is among us as though their prayers are specially heard when there's two or three of them together.

Hopefully there's not four because then maybe he won't hear you as well. No, that's not the point of this passage. Now, you know, God's always with us in that other sense, but this is talking about having his authority, right?

A couple of people gathered at work in a prayer meeting do not have the authority to excommunicate unless they've decided they are a church, you know, and they're going to operate as.

A church.

But that would be pretty unwise on a number of accounts. But there is not, yeah, to appeal to this verse is to say too much, right, for those workplace prayer meetings or whatever, because these are not people who would take into their hand the keys of the kingdom to excommunicate anyone.

All right, moving on to Matthew 28. Matthew 28, verse, let's see, start with verse 16. Now, the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed.

Them.

And when they saw him, they worshipped him, but some doubted. And Jesus came and said to them, All authority in heaven and earth has been given to me. That's the verse we just read a minute ago. Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you, and behold, I am with you always to the end of the age.

So once again, this is very similar to Matthew 18. It's kind of hard to, it's hard to catch it on your first pass, but notice the similarities. Matthew 18 ended with the statement, or at least that passage ended with the statement that Christ is with his people wherever two or three are gathered to make a declaration about who belongs to his church, right, or who doesn't belong to his church.

Okay, here it says, I am with you always to the end of the age to do what? To authoritatively declare who belongs to the church. Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

Right, baptism is an authoritative declaration about someone belonging to the church. And so Jesus doesn't go through the keys of the kingdom here. He doesn't talk about whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven, etc.

But he talks about his authoritative presence to make a declaration about who does or does not belong to his church. Okay, so the context is very similar to Matthew 18. And so if Jesus doesn't explain how we are to, how these decisions are to be made, etc.

Here, he's already told us in Matthew 18 wherever two or three are gathered, etc. Okay, so you see the loosing and binding is primarily found in the authoritative declarations on Christ's behalf about who his people are.

Okay?

Is everybody on board with that?

Yes.

Yeah, so if you are not gathered together with the others, like that's how you are being.

Admitted.

You're being baptized into the body, right? You can't be baptized and remain out of the body. Like, that's not a possible option here. So, yeah, if you were to be identified as his people, as part of his church, that would then mean that you would then become one of the participants in this process, right?

Because now you are one of those who is deciding who belongs to his people. And that's a really key thing. A lot of people want to divorce church membership from baptism or divorce baptism and communion from any kind of responsibility to each other or to the church as a whole to deal with anything with excommunication, to deal with anything with membership, right?

This is a very frequent thing. And especially depending on how a church wants to involve children, right? So, like, Presbyterians do it where, okay, their child's a member of the church, but then it's not until he's a communed member that, you know, there's some other responsibilities and privileges, right?

But this is what the nature of being a member is, is to be part of that body that is making these declarations on Christ's behalf. If someone is not capable of making these declarations on Christ's behalf, he's not capable of membership in a formal sense, right?

Like, no, I'm not denying that someone could be saved by the Spirit at a very young age. You see that with John the Baptist, right? But anyone who's, you know, I believe I was saved at a very young age.

Anyone who's saved at a young age, what we're not talking about is citizenship in the kingdom of heaven. We're talking about recognition of that citizenship on earth. So one of the analogies that Lehman uses that I really like is the church is like an embassy, right, that stamps passports.

Okay, so you can be a citizen of a nation and not have a passport. Like, you're still a citizen of the U .S. if you lose your passport. But you can't expect anyone to recognize you as a citizen. You're not going to have the rights of a citizen, at least not outside of your country, right?

You're not going to experience his rights. And that's what we are. We're all sojourners, right, in this world. It's not our ultimate home. Not that, I mean, obviously there will be new heavens and a new earth.

I'm not denying that the earth is part of the ultimate, is part of God's ultimate plan here. But I'm just saying that right now we are sojourners in a hostile world. And so the way it works with these embassies, right, is that those embassies have certain rules that Christ has established for recognizing who the citizens of that foreign land are, right, that land that is our home elsewhere.

Okay, so hopefully that makes sense. Any questions about that? Alright, this comes out in a few places. This, you see the church using the keys to make declarations about the church's identity and what it is, right?

First Corinthians 5, 4 through 5. This is another passage that you might as well go ahead and read a larger context if you want to turn there. First Corinthians 5, I'll begin in verse 1. It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that is not tolerated even among pagans.

For a man has his father's wife. Are you arrogant? Ought you not rather to mourn? Let him who has done this be removed from among you. For though absent in body, I am present in spirit. And as if present, I have already pronounced judgment on the one who did such a thing.

When you are assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus, and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus, you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.

Alright.

So, he's telling them that this person who's identified as part of the body, later on he calls him a so-called brother, right, is to be removed. What is the process for doing that, right? It says, when you are assembled, very, very similar to Matthew 18, right, wherever two or three of you are gathered.

When you are assembled in the name of our Lord Jesus, so in the name of our Lord Jesus, you're not just assembled, but assembled for the particular purpose of being in the church, right? And my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus, you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh.

Okay.

So, this is something that is only accomplished when people are gathered together in the name of the Lord, as a church, and it's there that they have his power, his authority, once again, to make these declarations, and remove him from the blessings of church membership.

Later on, when it says not even to eat with such a one, there's a number of papers that have been written about this. I am of the thought that this might be better translated, simply do not eat with such a one.

The focus being on the Lord's table, rather than on fellowship. Now, obviously, there's going to be an impact on your relations to anyone who is excommunicated, but I believe this is talking primarily about the Lord's Supper, rather than those relationships.

Okay, so, removed from the benefits of church membership, he's delivered over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, no longer able to benefit from church membership in that way. Okay, so you see that in 1 Corinthians 5.

Also, 1 Corinthians 5, who's it written to? This is not one of the pastoral epistles. It's written to the church. It's not telling the elders, when you gather together. He's telling the church, when you gather together, you all are supposed to be in agreement about what the church is, about who belongs, who does not belong.

2 Corinthians 2 .6 likely refers to the same person. That's the traditional position. It kind of fell out of popularity, and it's regaining popularity. But it says, for such a one, this punishment by the majority is enough.

Okay, so it's talking about someone who had been excommunicated, right? And it is talking about him needing to be restored. And it speaks of this as the punishment of a majority. Now, it's not that a majority are treating him as one excommunicated, and the other half of the church is treating him as one who is still part of the body.

That's not really something that's possible, right? You're either part of the Lord's Supper, or you are not part of the Lord's Supper, right? You're either part of the Lord's Church, or you're not part of His Church.

It's not possible for there to be a split on those things when it comes down to that formal recognition that exists in things like the Lord's Supper. So when it says, this punishment by the majority, what it's talking about is the fact that suffrage, voting, maybe not with ballots, but with a general sense of church agreement, is what decides the matter that this man was brought out, was taken out of the congregation.

A lot of people will say that there's a lot of disunity that ends up happening in church voting, and so most church models don't necessarily have that, right? And so a lot of people look at that and say, well, that seems real unbiblical.

I don't see anywhere in the Bible that talks about church voting. I believe you have it right here. For such a one, this punishment by the majority is enough, so they are voting on who belongs to the church.

Like I said, even if it's not ballots, it is suffrage that is happening here. Okay, consider also how this applies to teachers, not just the identification of members, but the identification of teachers within God's church.

Galatians 1 .9, also written to churches, not written to an elder body, but to churches as a whole. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you receive, let him be accursed.

Okay, so if it is the responsibility of members of churches to recognize false teachers and let them be accursed, let them be anathematized, remove them. I do consider this to be something more than simply discipline.

This is something that is a greater declaration of this person not belonging. There are things said about false teachers that demand more of a permanent status, whereas the excommunication is something that people can come back from, like in 2 Corinthians 2, 6, right?

But anathematizing is a statement of this person is an enemy.

Yes?

Yeah, so I think I'll do that, but I'm also planning on doing that as we get to elders because I think that's where it becomes more obvious once you see the interplay. Like last week, we saw the things the elders are responsible for, right?

So that shows you what the congregations should be delegating to the church. But the congregation has the authority under Christ. However, the primary way that this is exercised in a direct way is through identifying who the body is, right?

Who the members are, who the teachers are, who the officers and members of the church are. I'll hold off on negative statements because I'm going to make some more of those later. Okay, but yeah, in the event, well, but it's interesting though because if they're not officers, then it really is everything.

Like the congregation is the one underneath Christ, and so it has to worry about everything. It's funny, even Presbyterians acknowledge this, right? They have a very different church structure, but even they will acknowledge that the authority of the elders is derived from the congregation if you look at their more formal works like James Bannerman or others.

But we'll talk about what those distinctions look like in practice in a moment. Okay, so elders' authority. This verse we went over last week, Hebrews 13, 17. Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls as those who will have to give an account.

Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you. The fact that churches are appointing elders, the fact that elders have authority to teach, etc., demonstrates what the congregation should be delegating to elders.

Okay.

So if the elders are to teach them, then that is at least one thing. It's not necessarily the only thing, but it is at least one thing that is to be delegated to them. I'll say a few words about the words that are used here.

The word for obey, pestese. So that is a word that means be persuaded by or heed. Okay, so the primary way that you are obeying your elders is to heed them. Now, if you've ever thought about it, it's interesting because the authority that the elders have to teach is not to force you to believe, and you do not have an obligation to believe every single thing that is taught.

You have an obligation, like the Bereans, to compare it to God's word so that you know whether or not it truly is God's word. So what this authority is is not to make you believe something or not to make you do a particular application, but that you, above what you might do for anyone else who tells you what God's word says or tries to apply to your life, heed them.

Okay, so it means hearing out the teaching. Now, that's your disposition to the teaching itself. It is a coming to those meetings that the elders would call people to in order to hear the teaching. And so heeding, if the kind of obedience that is to be done is heeding, it is primarily found in submission to both the teaching itself, hearing out the teaching itself, and all that would be implied with hearing out the teaching.

If the elders want to go through a certain book for a Sunday school series, it would be to hear out what that book has to say. Or if the elders want to start doing a, I don't know, there are things that could be too burdensome for schedules for it to be wise for elders to do, but if they wanted to call people to some special Thanksgiving meeting, some special meeting for mourning where we would lament over our sins, if there was something recent that happened, these could all be instances of the elders calling people to hear the teaching of God's word, where it would not be appropriate to say, oh, well, that's, yeah, I don't have to listen to that.

No, if you were to heed the elders, that's how you're to do it. Now, the other word is upekete, which means submit, be submissive, have a spirit that is, once again, these words just are playing off each other, to obey and submit, to heed and to submit.

These words give you a posture of listening to the elders' teaching and allowing them to teach as they see fit. Now, of course, there are limits to that, like we saw in Galatians 1 .9, right? The limits being, okay, well, a false gospel needs to be corrected.

That's in the congregation's responsibility. Elders to deacons, and I will say more about where these boundaries are in a moment, but elders to deacons, you see, so elders, it is not just the, so I said that teaching is one thing, right, that's being delegated to them.

It's not the only thing that's delegated to them. Acts 4, 34 through 35 says,. There was not a needy person among them, for as many as were owners of lands or houses, sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold, and laid it at the apostles' feet, and was distributed to each as he had any need.

Okay, so the elders here, the apostles functioning as elders of the church in Jerusalem, are also being delegated authority and administration over the material assets of the church, right? So, you know, every church is going to have resources that it has at its disposal.

These things are also delegated from the congregation as they give them to the elders to have authority over those things. Now, the elders then delegate authority of those things to deacons. It says in Acts 6, 2 through 4,.

And the twelve summoned the full number of the disciples and said, It is not right that we should give up preaching the word of God to serve tables. Therefore, brothers, pick out from among you seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we will appoint to this duty.

But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word. Alright, so see what's happening there. The elders are, they want to delegate some of the authority over the assets of the church, particularly those that would be redistributed to the widows.

Okay, and they're still directing it, right? They're still saying where those resources are to go. They're still supposed to go to the widows, right? If the deacons decide, well, actually, I think it should go to a new church building or something, right?

This would be outside of what's being delegated, right? So the elders are still directing this. And it is something that is still identified by the people, right? Pick out from among you seven men of good repute.

It's still the congregation's job, just like with members, with elders, and with deacons, the congregation's job is to identify who meets the criteria, either for membership, for teaching, or for being a deacon, according to 1 Timothy 3 and other passages that apply to these offices.

Okay, so once again, we see the ways that the congregation is directly exercising authority and not delegating. Okay, delegation is very healthy for a lot of this, but the way that they are directly exercising authority is in identifying the who of the church, right?

That's what, once again, I'm getting a lot of these phrases from Jonathan Lehman. He calls it the who and the what of the church. The congregation is directly using its authority on identifying who belongs to the church and who its officers are.

Now, what the elders are doing is directing the congregation in its use of authority. Okay, so they are selected for their ability to rule and teach. 1 Timothy 5, 17 says, Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching.

Once again, this is a verse that was talked about last week, but I will point out that, once again, there is a notion of ruling. There is a notion of teaching. Remember, we're talking about material assets.

We're also talking about administration of the teaching of the church. A lot of people get hung up and see ruling as different than teaching. Sorry, they are different, but they see the body, the elder body that is ruling and the elder body that is teaching as distinct.

I think a lot of times people read this with something like this in mind. Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of honor, double honor to those who labor in preaching and teaching. But that's not what it says, right?

It says they're all worthy of double honor, yes. Okay, first I'm going to ask you, what is double honor compared to? Once again, someone who hasn't heard me answer this question before, what is double honor in that passage compared to?

Go ahead and turn there and try to look it up, 1 Timothy 5. Something in the preceding context. There was single honor spoken of.

That's right.

Yeah, it starts off by saying honor the widows. Then later, let the elders be worthy of double honor. The context about the widows is financially supporting those who are truly widows. You financially give them a living, make sure they're not living in dire need or shame.

Let the elders be considered worthy of double honor. Now that doesn't have to be an exact double dollar amount, right? But the idea is, okay, if the widows are supposed to be elevated from shame, let the elders be worthy of double honor.

Okay, that's the idea. Especially those who labor in preaching and teaching, right? Especially those who are most engaged in the teaching ministry of the church. But given the requirement for all elders is to be able to teach, that is a job that all of them should be engaged in.

Okay, so if they're selected for their ability to rule and teach, that means that that is what they're supposed to be doing. They're supposed to be ruling and teaching. I know a lot of this was going over last week, but I want to say it all here because I'm going to put this together with the congregation in a moment.

Elders direct the congregation in identifying members, right? So Titus 3 .10, as for a person who stirs up division after warning him once and then twice have nothing more to do with him. Now depending on what that looks like, like we just saw who it is that's supposed to be removing something from the body.

If this person's not a member of a church, it might be a different story. But if this person's a member of a church, how is he supposed to be removed? We looked at Matthew 18, we looked at 1 Corinthians 5.

It's when the church is gathered together, when there are two or three of you gathered, when you have the power of the Lord Jesus and my spirit is with you, etc. If that is to happen and this is being written to, those passages being written to congregations, this passage being written to an elder, what does that mean?

Titus is supposed to do this. Titus is supposed to direct the church in doing this. He's supposed to teach the church, tell them what the right answer to this question of should this person belong or not.

3 John 1 .10. Now this is talking about diatrophies. Not a lot is said about him. But what does it mean to put someone out of the church and to not welcome someone? This is essentially talking about recognizing members and removing members.

And diatrophies appears to be this church leader who is doing these things. Now he's doing this all wrongly, but he is still having some action. So it's not something that the congregation does apart from any kind of elder direction.