Humble Confrontation and Why the Medium Matters

Beloved,

In last week’s evening sermon I emphasized Jesus’s command to go when we humbly confront a brother or sister about their sin (Matt. 18:15). Jesus assumed that before we can tell someone their fault, we first need to physically go to them. While there was obviously no digital technology in the first century, there were modes of communication that didn’t require going (e.g., letter writing), and yet Jesus stressed the need to go. I made the application that if at all possible, confrontation should be done face to face in physical proximity with the offending party. I went so far as to say that if someone commits a serious moral offense against you, don’t send them an email about it. Physically get up and go to tell them their fault.

After my sermon, one of you mentioned the fact that the apostles confronted churches through hand-written letters, suggesting that perhaps I had gone too far in my application. We had even read 1 Corinthians earlier in the service which is about as confrontational of a letter as you can get (though Galatians certainly rivals it).

It was a good point, but I still stand by my words. And I think it is worth fleshing out why.

First, the application in the sermon was that whenever possible we should confront face to face. For the apostles, the ideal was always to be physically present to communicate about anything, especially weighty spiritual matters. John sums it up well when he writes, “Though I have much to write to you, I would rather not use paper and ink. Instead I hope to come to you and talk face to face, so that our joy may be complete” (2 Jn. 12). Paper and ink was better than nothing, but it certainly was no replacement to talking face to face. Sometimes being physically present with these distant churches was not possible, and yet there was a need to address serious sin. So they resorted to letter writing, rather than not confronting at all. I was making particular application to our local congregation when I made the comment about email. It’s hard for me to imagine a legitimate situation in which one member of our church would be physically unable to be face-to-face with another member for an extended period of time, warranting another mode of communication like a letter. Sure, you might need to drive thirty minutes, and it might take some effort to find a time when your schedules coincide. But you ought to go to the trouble of going to the person in-person. For the message is far more prone to be misunderstood when physical connection and non-verbal forms of communication are missing. 

Second, not all communication mediums are equal, not even all written communication mediums. No one denies that Paul wrote a letter to Corinth to rebuke them. But if he were living in the 21st century, would he have written that same correspondence in an email? No one can know for sure, but I highly doubt it. A hand-written letter and a typed email are not equals. Everyone understands that. Why do I bother to write Tessa paper-and-ink love letters when I could type up that same message and shoot if off in an email much more easily and effortlessly? Because the medium of a hand-written letter communicates something that an email does not. As Marshall McLuhan famously remarked, “The medium is the message.” A letter communicates weight and importance. For it is costly, requiring you to buy paper, ink, envelop, and stamp, while email requires none of those things. It is time-consuming, considering how slow the average person writes in comparison to typing. Furthermore, it is far more personal to have something written with your own penmanship than the perfect script of a word processor. On top of that, just think about how you receive a letter as opposed to an email. Opening the envelop, unfolding the letter and holding it in your hands, smelling the paper, ink, and perhaps even the fragrance of the person–all of this is part of the experience. But an email is digitally opened without any of that and ordinarily with an inbox of 50 other inconsequential messages. To put it simply, a letter is a heavyweight written medium, whereas an email is a lightweight written medium. They are not equals. So if a need arises for confrontation and there is no way to be physically present, write a letter (or make a phone call), but please don’t send an email. 

Why make such a big stink about this? Because I believe there really is something to Jesus’s twofold command to go and tell (Matt. 18:15). I’ve watched what happens when Christians who are local to one another (i.e., in the same congregation) use digital mediums to confront that don’t require going. Email rebukes rarely end well. There are many reasons why that is, but one of them is that being unwilling to physically go communicates that this person and situation are not all that important to you. When you go, you demonstrate you are willing to undergo the uncertain social outcomes of a face-to-face conversation and the inevitable discomfort of looking into someone’s eyes while you confront them. But that is not so in an email. Add to that, the impersonal, disembodied, lightweight nature of a typed and digitally-sent message, and you have a recipe for a weighty message calling someone to repentance to be misconstrued. If you really want your brother to listen to you so that the confrontation results in him owning and turning from his sin, then you ought to utilize a medium that communicates weight and gravity.

So I don’t deny that Paul wrote confrontational letters to people not local to himself. You might need to as well. But when it comes to your interactions with saints in your local church, there is rarely (if ever) a time when physically going is impossible. If ever that time does come, don’t send an email. Get out your pen and a piece of paper, for the weighty act of confrontation warrants it.

Yours in Christ,
Pastor Nick