Stephen Crosby comments

Jesus and Paul clearly evaluated doctrines and "isms" and made determinations about them without any direct contact with the individuals responsible for them. This includes going public with "counter" points of view. Matthew 18 does not apply to the free exercise of our evaluative faculties applied to "stuff." This can be difficult if one's identity is wrapped up in ones teachings and practices. An individual can feel personally attacked,
when his or her "stuff" is evaluated. This is unfortunate. The "person" and his or her "stuff" are two separate matters.

Ideally the relational sphere of covenantal love should be the context for the exercise of interpersonal behavioral evaluations. However, the effect of modern telecommunications complicates matters. If an individual or ministry decides to use technology and media to promote themselves and their ministry to the world, they have de facto, enlarged their influential sphere to the whole world. The whole world is entitled to evaluate the ministry, its message, and practices in both content and spirit.

Those who use media cannot have it both ways. They cannot use mass media and technology for promotion and then insist that critique of their ministry and message only occur privately by a small circle of hand picked associates and friends. The sphere of influence is the sphere of evaluation. If someone desires a global sphere of influence, then the same individual or group must accept the scrutiny and evaluation that may come from the global community, justly or unjustly. Should anyone in the global community exercise discriminating faculties regarding a presence in the global media, they're not violating the principles of Mt. 18 (go privately, etc.)

What if a person bringing an evaluative judgment is wrong in content, spirit, tone, or method of delivery-or all of these? It's a human and religious response to negate the content of a message because of flaws in the messenger and his/her methods. Imperfect persons and processes are not legitimate excuses to categorically ignore what is being said. "They didn't do it right" (follow appropriate procedures and protocol) is often used to avoid the merit of content. Bad methods may, but do not automatically negate an accurate message, though they are never an acceptable state of affairs and they cause great harm.

I've learned the hard way that God often has something to say to me through my enemies or people who dislike me. Our "non-friends" are less likely to be influenced by our feelings. They can be more apt to tell us brutal truths about our behavior than our friends might because of a desire to preserve the friendship and avoid uncomfortable interpersonal dealings.

I can't cavalierly dismiss the voice of my critics. This does not mean that I automatically receive every comment that comes from critics and enemies. I'm more likely to listen to those whom I know have my genuine best interests at heart, not my personal destruction, or those who simply want to be "right" at my expense.

Someone once said each of us needs three key people in our lives to have a full expression of the life of Christ. Why three? To provide a full spectrum of possible perspectives. Please don't take what follows rigidly or idealistically. It's meant as general wisdom, not a binding rule. We're all brothers/sisters before the Lord. We all can receive from, and minister to, any one, at any time, by the Spirit. Here they are, the key word being relational:

• A Paul: a relational "superior;"a father to receive from.


• A Barnabas: a relational "peer;"a brother to share with.


• A Timothy: a relational "subordinate;"a disciple to impart to.

It can take a lifetime of effort for these relationships to emerge in a healthy and mature way especially a fathering one. Also, if the only relationship you have is with subordinates, you're in a spiritually unhealthy place. My point is, pursue each of these relationships. It's worth the effort, however discouraging the pursuit can be at timesand-you might as well accept it: you're going to be hurt and disappointed in the process.

We must all pass the disillusionment and disappointment test. Passing it is a measure of our spiritual fortitude and courage. If you believe in the value of a treasure, you will dig for it, even if it's buried in a field of manure. If the reality and smell of kingdom manure is going to discourage you, don't expect to receive much in Jesus' earthly kingdom. The treasure is always in earthen vessels. You have to dig for it.

In my opinion, if at the end of one's life you have 3-5 trustworthy, "my life for yours," sort of people who in some degree fulfill these relationships for you, you are blessed indeed.

When I receive a judgment or evaluation through imperfect method (we're all imperfect people-some imperfections are just more noticeable than others) I present the content of the comments to those in my life who relate to me in each of the three categories. Each is likely to bring a representatively unique perspective, hopefully reflecting a unified wisdom.

A subordinate may let insecurity or a desire to please influence his or her comments. A peer may tend to see things the same as I do and may not tell me the necessary thing. We process the universe so similarly that objectivity might lack. A father hopefully would have broad enough perspective and interpersonal security in relationship with Christ and others that he or she can tell me potentially uncomfortable truth. All three together are highly likely to represent the fullness of the mind of Christ for me.

Conclusion