The Subjectivity of Appointing Elders
An Observed Concern
In the 28 years that I have been a Christian, I have participated in a pastoral evaluation group with four different churches. During the first one, the church split due to leadership conflict. I was the only one to complete the second one, which ended with getting an offer to be a pastoral intern at another church in another state. The third one was at the church where I was the pastoral intern, and that ended with the pastor getting fired for disqualifying himself as an elder. The last one I participated in was in another state and ended with me being qualified, but the church could not ordain me and bring me on as an elder.
For the past twenty years, I have focused on the Biblical qualifications for being an elder in four churches with different cultures and leadership types. The Biblical passages most relied on to determine if someone is qualified to be an elder come from 1 Timothy 3:1–7, Titus 1:5–9, and 1 Peter 5:1–3. All the qualifications deal with one’s character, except one that deals with one’s ability (“able to teach”). The term that best summarizes an elder’s character is “above reproach.”
Elders sin without being disqualified. So that’s not what I’m talking about here, that the elder needs to be like Mary Poppins (Practically perfect in every way). What disqualifies the elder is if sin has become characteristic of the individual. If you woke up the following day and read in the newspaper that an elder was arrested for _____, would it shock you? That’s what being “above reproach” is about. A charge is brought against an elder who is above reproach, and the charge doesn’t stick; there are no witnesses (1 Timothy 5:19), no evidence, etc. But where there’s smoke (witnesses/evidence of said charge), there’s fire.
New Insight
I used to think the qualifications were objective. I thought, “There’s the list of qualifications; learn what each one means, and that’s it,” right? My naivety caused me to believe that if I met each of the qualifications and the church confirmed my calling to the eldership (external confirmation of an internal calling), I would be appointed as an elder at the right time. After all, he who “aspires to the office of overseer, it is a fine work he desires to do” (1 Timothy 3:1). Paul is determined to appoint elders. He tells Titus, “For this reason I left you in Crete, that you would set in order what remains and appoint elders in every city as I directed you” (Titus 1:5). Therefore, if a person eagerly desires to be an elder and meets all the qualifications combined with the congregation’s approval… and if Paul says the work of an elder is good, noble work, and he desires many elders to be appointed, why wouldn’t that person become an elder?
It’s taken me far too long to realize this:
Determining whether a person is elder-qualified is based on the opinions of other elders—the decision on whether one is fit to be an elder is subjective!
This realization of the subjective nature of determining an elder didn’t dawn on me until two months ago; honestly, my head is still spinning. As we will soon see, the subjective decision to appoint or not appoint a person is not necessarily immoral. It's unavoidable, actually. Let’s look at the following three examples to help make the subjectivity involved in appointing an elder more transparent.
Example #1– 1 Timothy 3:4
During my pastoral internship in the summer of 2014, the church’s only pastor went on a three-month sabbatical. Among the tasks assigned to me was to pick up and drop off all the elders we flew in to be guest speakers on Sunday morning. I transported five elders over the summer. I don’t exactly remember why, but for some reason, I decided to ask each elder during our car ride what they thought 1 Timothy 3:4 meant. Since it was one of the elder qualifications, who better to ask than many elders?
The first part of that verse reads, “He must be one who manages his own household well,” and I would ask the guest elder, “What does it mean to ‘manage his household well?’”
Out of the five elders I asked, I received five different answers!
One explained that “household” meant property and finances, so he emphasized budgeting and managing the family’s finances. That elder’s church was financially thriving, but there was no joy among the people.
Another explained that the emphasis is on marriage, how the health of the marriage will affect the children’s health, etc.
Yet another explained to me that the point of the verse is how well the aspiring elder cares for his entire family.
Still, another one explained that the point of the verse is not on the children, wife, or possessions but on how well one manages. Then he described how you’re dealt five cards and how well you manage the cards is Paul’s point. Everyone has different pressure points in their family, so what type of manager you are is in view.
Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately), I don’t remember the fifth interpretation. But do you see how multiple interpretations of this qualification are problematic? Each of these elders was a lead elder who shaped the culture of their eldership and church. If you have an elder candidate who could care less about his kids but is good with money and budgets, he would more likely become an elder in one church than another, while another church might discipline that person!
The Word of God is objectively true, but the gatekeepers/decision makers of who is elder qualified are very subjective.
Example #2– 1 Peter 3:7
I don’t want to use real elder names in this article; my goal is not to rebuke or call out anyone publicly. But I will say that this is not merely a hypothetical example.
Let’s say you have an elder candidate who is young, in his late twenties, but highly intelligent. He has his Master of Divinity and a Ph.D. from a well-respected university. His teaching ability is par excellence, both in writing and preaching. The board of Elders was enamored by his degrees and skillset, so they confirmed that he would be their lead elder.
However, no church member ever took the time to get to know the man personally. If they had, they would have noticed (or would they?) the tension in the air between him and his wife. The longer they were involved in his life, the longer their marital strife would continue. In fact, things between the husband and wife would continue to be rocky for the next fifty years with no sign of improving.
Here’s the subjectivity when appointing an elder: An eldership prioritizing scholastic degrees and intelligence would ordain this young man as an elder. Another eldership that values healthy marriages might look at 1 Peter 3:7 and not only determine that the young candidate still needs to be qualified but also offer to disciple the couple for their mutual well-being.
The same candidate is a lead elder in one church who is not fit to lead a small group in another.
Example #3 — All the Qualifications
All of the elder qualifications are open to subjective application! The evil underbelly here is not that the voting elders don’t have a correct interpretation of the qualifications (I mean, other than that guy interpreting 1 Timothy 3:4 to mean property/possessions! What’s up with THAT interpretation? The rest of the verse states, “keeping his children under control with all dignity.” Finances are not what Paul meant, but the family relationship is what is in view). The sinister reason the eldership might vote for a candidate who isn’t qualified is that one or two voting elders fail to live up to the character qualifications themselves but don’t want to draw attention to themselves.
The compromised voting elder might approach the qualifications like this:
💋 Is the candidate “the husband of one wife?” He’s looked at pornography much less than me. So, compared to me, he’s met this qualification.
🤬 Is the candidate “temperate?” I don’t want to draw attention to my anger issues at home, so I’ll go ahead and vote in the affirmative for this qualification.
🗣 Is the candidate “able to teach?” He speaks more eloquently than I do.
🍷 Is the candidate “not addicted to wine?” I have one glass a day, and I’m not addicted, so he passes the mark.
💰 Is the candidate “free from the love of money?” Of course, he is! He’s very precise and entirely devoted to his budget.
👨👩👧👦 Is the candidate “one who manages his own household” well? His children are better behaved than mine. So, I’d say “yes” to him.
The voting eldership will read the Biblical qualifications for an elder through the grid of whether they themselves would be qualified. And where they would not, it’s okay to lower the Bible bar for the candidate.
Likewise, the opposite may occur. As highlighted in the above example two, perhaps a candidate excels in one or two characteristics that are subjectively deemed by the eldership to have more value than the others. In this case, the other qualifications are swept under the rug because of how amazing this candidate is in one area.
A Better Way
The objective truth of the Bible must be the standard for assessing elder candidates, not the subjective competency of the voting eldership. Churches often review their voting structure to help with accountability. Some are elder-led, and others have congregational voting to decide on candidates. These types of church governments will vary across denominations (here’s just to name a few):
⛪ Episcopalian — An archbishop has authority over many bishops.
⛪ Presbyterian — Each local church elects elders to a session; the pastor is one of the elders and is equal in authority to the other elders.
⛪ Congregational — Plural local elders with authority only over their own congregation.
However, all government systems will have a human or humans casting the determining vote for an elder candidate. There’s no getting around it. It’s not like the Bible, which is like Thor’s hammer that would righteously judge the worth of one’s character. That would be pretty awesome; I’m not going to lie. If all that was needed to determine if an elder is fit to become an elder, they would just need to try to pick up the Bible in front of the entire church, which would solve this issue.
What we’re left with is the discernment level of those voting on the candidate. Perhaps the following questions are to be asked about those voting:
1. Do those voting agree on the meaning of each qualification in the Bible?
2. Is the agreed meaning behind each qualification an accurate interpretation of the text?
3. What does each voting member’s spiritual walk with God look like? Are they reading the Bible and praying daily? Are their discernment levels in tune with God’s guidance?
4. Will the results of the voting be made public, showing who voted which way and why?
Conclusion
It does come down to the local church’s trust in those who vote and make such decisions for the church. Does a local church member trust the voting body to be God-fearing, Bible-saturated, prayer-loving people? If the voting members are such people, then God will lead them to the right decision; I have no doubt about that.
You might be reading this article thinking, “Just trust in God; He won’t let unqualified elders become elders of His church!” This reflects a “let go and let God” mentality that paralyzes the participation of the church members. “Those in our government structure who make such decisions will do right,” you might affirm. I wish this were the case, but it’s not.
The Apostle Paul warns us in Acts 20:28–31 that we must be alert since “savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock.” Liars with seared consciences will teach the church demonic teachings, according to 1 Timothy 4:1–3. False teachers are coming and are already in your midst. Are you able to spot such savage wolves? Are you Berean-like in your personal devotion to the Bible (Acts 17:11–12) that you can discern when a teacher does not sound like the voice of Jesus (John 10:4–5)?
Listen, wolves protect wolves. If wolves are currently in your church’s leadership, they will reject a Godly qualified elder candidate and wholeheartedly embrace one of their own.
If your church is considering an eldership candidate, I hope this article will serve you. You have a role in this process; pray for the candidate and those voting, know your Bibles to offer helpful feedback, and hold the voters accountable for their votes. Both the ordination of an elder and the dismissal of a candidate are crucial points in the life of the church.
May more God-fearing, Bible-loving, Prayer-saturated elders be appointed every day so that the ministry of the gospel will be spread by the Spirit through above-reproach elders. For the glory of God, Amen!
