When Public Shaming Fails to Correct Sin in the Church

Sin is a pervasive aspect of the human condition, affecting all individuals ^[1]. The Bible describes sin as a departure from God's will, encompassing both deliberate acts of rebellion and the inherent corruption of human nature ^{[4, 7]}. While the godly strive against their sinful nature, the wicked indulge it ^[1]. God's anger is a necessary response to sin, not a spontaneous emotional outburst, and the Old Testament frequently depicts this divine wrath ^[6].

The concept of sin is multifaceted. It can be understood as "vanity," encompassing various sinful acts ^[2]. Deliberate sins are often committed with an insolent or arrogant attitude, representing a form of rebellion against God ^[5]. The apostle John distinguishes between "having no sin," which refers to the guilt remaining from past sins and the corrupt old nature, and "not having sinned," which refers to the commission of actual sins even after conversion ^[7]. Augustine, as cited by Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, notes that while one can be "born of God," the devil does not "beget" anyone; rather, those who imitate the devil become his children through imitation, not birth ^[3].

The New Testament emphasizes the universal nature of sin. Paul, in Romans, establishes that both Gentiles and Jews are equally under sin's power and cannot achieve favor with God through their own actions ^[6]. This universal sinfulness is a foundational concept before exploring righteousness through faith ^[6].

When addressing sin within the church, the New Testament provides guidance on correction and discipline. The apostle Paul, in 1 Corinthians, expresses shame when Christians resort to secular courts to resolve disputes, implying that the church should be capable of resolving its own conflicts ^[8]. John Chrysostom, an early church father, emphasizes the importance of rebuking offenders with rigor, not lightly, so that others may be deterred from similar transgressions ^[9]. one tradition notes that failing to punish manifest offenses can encourage further wrongdoing ^[9]. However, Chrysostom also references Christ's instruction in Matthew 18:15 to first address an offense privately between the individuals involved ^[9].

The purpose of correction within the church is not merely punitive but aims at repentance and restoration. Calvin, in his commentary on 1-2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, discusses the concept of forgiveness for transgressions. He distinguishes between transgressions of the second table of the law (concerning human relationships), which are often forgiven even if voluntary, and sins against the first table (concerning one's relationship with God), particularly those committed knowingly and willingly against the Holy Spirit ^[11]. Such a sin, one tradition argues, is a direct opposition to God and not merely an error due to weakness ^[11]. The outright rejection of the Holy Spirit's conviction concerning Christ, or the ultimate rejection of the Good News by an unbeliever, is presented as an unforgivable sin ^[12].

Public shaming, when it fails to correct sin, can indicate several underlying issues. One reason might be a lack of genuine repentance on the part of the offender. Calvin stresses that it is insufficient to merely reverence God's judgment; one must also confess sins ingenuously and without evasion ^[10]. Those who attempt to escape God's judgment through dissimulation face a double condemnation ^[10]. If an individual remains unrepentant, public shaming may only harden their heart rather than lead to correction.

Another factor could be the nature of the sin itself. While some sins are matters of weakness or ignorance, others are deliberate acts of rebellion ^{[5, 11]}. When sin is committed with an arrogant attitude or represents a profound rejection of God's truth, public shaming alone may not be sufficient to bring about change. The individual may be so entrenched in their sinful nature or so defiant that external pressure has little effect.

Furthermore, the manner in which public shaming is applied can influence its effectiveness. If it is perceived as purely punitive, lacking in grace or a genuine desire for restoration, it may be counterproductive. Chrysostom's emphasis on "rebuke" with "rigor" is balanced by the broader biblical principle of seeking the offender's repentance ^[9]. If the shaming is not accompanied by clear pathways to repentance, forgiveness, and reintegration, it can lead to alienation rather than correction.

The context of the church's overall spiritual health also plays a role. If the church itself is compromised by sin or hypocrisy, its attempts at public shaming may lack moral authority and therefore fail to be effective. The integrity of those administering the correction is crucial.

Sources

Psalms (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on Psalms 58:3: 58:3 All human beings are born sinners (see 51:5); however, whereas the wicked indulge their sinful nature, the godly fight against it (Rom 7:19-23; Jas 4:1-10).”
Proverbs (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on Proverbs 30:8: vanity--all sorts of sinful acts (Job 11:11; Isa 5:18).”
1 John (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on 1 John 3:8: He that committeth sin is of the devil--in contrast to "He that doeth righteousness," Jo1 3:7. He is a son of the devil (Jo1 3:10; Joh 8:44). John does not, however, say, "born of the devil." as he does "born of God," for "the devil begets none, nor does he create any; but whoever imitates the devil becomes a child of the devil by imitating him, not by proper birth" [AUGUSTINE, Ten Homilies on the First Epistle of John, Homily 4.10]. From the devil there is not generation, but corruption [BENGEL]. sinneth from the beginning--from the time that any beg”
Genesis (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on Genesis 3:13: beguiled--cajoled by flattering lies. This sin of the first pair was heinous and aggravated--it was not simply eating an apple, but a love of self, dishonor to God, ingratitude to a benefactor, disobedience to the best of Masters--a preference of the creature to the Creator.”
Psalms (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on Psalms 19:13: 19:13 An individual who commits deliberate sins does so with an insolent (86:14) or arrogant (119:21, 69) attitude. • The great sin is rebellion (see 32:1).”
Romans (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on Romans 1:18: 1:18–3:20 Paul delays exploring the theme of righteousness through faith (see 3:21) until after he first teaches about universal sinfulness. Gentiles (1:18-32) and Jews (2:1–3:8) are equally under sin’s power and cannot find favor with God by any action of their own (3:9-20). 1:18 God’s anger is not a spontaneous emotional outburst, but the holy God’s necessary response to sin. The Old Testament often depicts God’s anger (Exod 32:10-12; Num 11:1; Jer 21:3-7) and predicts a decisive outpouring of God’s wrath on human sin at the end of history. While Paul usually de”
1 John (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on 1 John 1:10: Parallel to Jo1 1:8. we have not sinned--referring to the commission of actual sins, even after regeneration and conversion; whereas in Jo1 1:8, "we have no sin," refers to the present GUILT remaining (until cleansed) from the actual sins committed, and to the SIN of our corrupt old nature still adhering to us. The perfect "have . . . sinned" brings down the commission of sins to the present time, not merely sins committed before, but since, conversion. we make him a liar--a gradation; Jo1 1:6, "we lie"; Jo1 1:8, "we deceive ourselves"; worst of al”
1 Corinthians (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on 1 Corinthians 6:4: 6:4-6 I am saying this to shame you: It is a scandal for Christians to have to resolve their conflicts in secular courts, as if there were no one in the church sufficiently capable of resolving them.”
CCEL/NPNF (Eastern Orthodox) “John Chrysostom, Homilies on Galatians–Colossians–Thessalonians: thyself, then proceed against the offender with rigor, that others may take warning. For as it is wrong to condemn hastily and rashly, so not to punish manifest offenses is to open the way to others, and embolden them to offend. “Rebuke,” he says, to show that it is not to be done lightly, but with severity. For thus others will be deterred. How is it then that Christ says, “Go and tell him his fault between him and thee alone, if one sin against thee.” ( Matt. xviii. 15 .) But Christ Himself permits him to be censured in the Chu”
CCEL (Reformed) “Calvin, Commentary on Genesis, Vol. 1 (Gen 1-23), section 22.14: of those who mock God with false pretences, and at length rush into gross contempt of Him. However he may seem to leave us unnoticed for a time, yet he will fulminate against us with that terrible voice, ‘It is not as you pretend.’ In short, it is not enough that the judgment of God should be reverenced, unless we also confess our sins ingenuously and without shifts or evasions. For a double condemnation awaits those who, from a desire to escape the judgment of God, retake themselves to the refuge of dissimulation. We must, there”
CCEL (Reformed) “Calvin, Commentary on 1-2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, section 6.4: God never pardon any one who has sinned knowingly? I reply, we must observe the word unbelief ; 20 20 “ Par incredulite, ou, n’ayant point la foy .” — “Through unbelief, or not having faith.” for this term limits Paul’s statement to the first table of the law. Transgressions of the second table, although they are voluntary, are forgiven; but he who knowingly and willingly breaks the first table sins against the Holy Spirit, because he is in direct opposition to God. He does not err through weakness, but, by rushing wickedly again”
Matthew (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on Matthew 12:32: 12:32 One may stumble over Jesus’ mysterious revelation of himself as Son of Man and be forgiven, but one cannot be forgiven for attributing the work of the Spirit to Satan. The present-day analogy is the outright rejection of the conviction of the Holy Spirit concerning Christ—that is, the ultimate rejection of the Good News by an unbeliever (cp. Heb 6:4-6; 1 Jn 5:16-21).”

Ask Your Own Question