I think one of the most misapplied understandings of Matthew 18 involves the issue of public critique. Specifically, some argue that prior to any public critique of a published work that the critic ought to first make personal contact with the person whose work is being critiqued.
Nonsense.
Public works and statements are open to public critique.
Developing this thought, Rick Nelson over at reformation 21 offers four reasons why those who argue that public critique violates Matthew 18 unless there has first been private dialog are completely wrong.
He writes:
1. Matthew 18 establishes a procedure for dealing with personal sins, not public debate. “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault,” said our Lord (Mt. 18:15). This establishes personal sin as the context in which Matthew 18 governs our actions. In contrast, disagreement with a public figure in his published writings falls into a completely different category.
Related Articles
1 user responded in this post
Good post! It is quite amazing how many articles and talks have come out to clarify what Matt 18 is dealing with. I’ll admit that I hadn’t thought about it being an issue of private/personal sin between two people since it is so often used with reference to discipline in the church.
I am glad for all of this good exposition of it though!