Search Committees and Qualifications for pastor/elder

[thistle93]

I am in the process of seeking another elder/pastor position in a local church and I have to say I have been somewhat discouraged by what I have observed. And these are predominantly in reformed type churches, which should know better. It seems decision about who gets position are much more based upon personality then character and qualification. Search committees often put the qualifications for a pastor/elder from 1 Timothy and Titus on their ads but at the end of the day seems decisions are more based on the vibe we get from you then are you qualified according to the Biblical standards. I have been in interview where qualifications for eldership/pastor were not even discussed. Seems rather that a church will get multiple candidates and then decide based on who wowed the congregation the most with their eloquent preaching. This could account somewhat for why much of the church is in the state it it in. It seems pragmatism is alive and well, even in some reformed churches.


For His Glory-
Matthew

 

[NaphtaliPress]

I can't speak for the generality. I have been on 3 search committees (none recently; all about 20-30 years ago) and while the whole question of such committees is debatable, at least in my experience, the first question was is the person doctrinal sound (confessional) and then, can he preach. The latter can run into subjective problems if folks have preconceived notions about style (ie, "He has to be Al Martin" etc.).

 

[Edward]

Seems rather that a church will get multiple candidates and then decide based on who wowed the congregation the most with their eloquent preaching.

Strong ruling elders can make up for shortfalls in counseling, pastoral care, or administrative skills. In a single pastor church, the ability to put together and deliver a sermon does seem like it should be a key focus. If one's strengths lie in other areas, one should probably concentrate one larger, multiple pastor, churches, and look for training that will bolster those skills.

I do think that Presbyterians do have the advantage on Baptists when it comes to process.

 

[Reformed Roman]

Seems rather that a church will get multiple candidates and then decide based on who wowed the congregation the most with their eloquent preaching.

Strong ruling elders can make up for shortfalls in counseling, pastoral care, or administrative skills. In a single pastor church, the ability to put together and deliver a sermon does seem like it should be a key focus. If one's strengths lie in other areas, one should probably concentrate one larger, multiple pastor, churches, and look for training that will bolster those skills.

I do think that Presbyterians do have the advantage on Baptists when it comes to process.

I would partially agree. Most baptist church's don't have a very good process in decision making, but also there aren't very many reformed baptist church's either.

I personally from the limited things I've heard I've heard bad things though as well about the Presbyterian selection committee.

I think it's really easy for churches to get caught up in some things. For example, I don't know many Presbyterian churches that will touch people that haven't been to seminary. I think that's a huge problem. Some people don't want to go to universities to get 4 year degrees, and most places that offer 4 year degrees are extremely expensive. For me it's pointless to get a 4 year degree. I don't have the time to do it, it's not practical in my life, and not to mention it's extremely costly. I make more than enough to survive with 2 years of education, and me and my wife, while we aren't rich, can at least afford our house and basic bills with no problems. But the amount of money it would take, to get the amount of education I would receive, would not be cost effective.

I think we need churches to train leaders. If a church thinks someone is called, I think they should spend some years discipling that person deeply and teaching him. I understand there are advantages to seminary, don't get me wrong. But not going to seminary shouldn't keep good qualified men from being elders.

I know I will probably get mauled for this post, but I think it has to be said. I by no means am implying we should do away with seminary, and I by no means want to imply that it's a waste of money for everyone. If I was single, didn't have a good job, and if my church didn't have a solid way of interning and growing me, I would probably be at seminary myself. But if you have good godly leaders willing to teach and train you, and you have countless resources at your disposal than you can surely grow into that calling and eventually be ready. Men discipling men. Men training leaders. Men sending men out to plant more godly churches. I think this is just as strong as a system as seminary. Anyone can go anywhere with a degree, but when you are given the blessing of your church, and raised up by godly leaders, and they consider you ready, I think that carries a great weight.

Now I can understand, even when that person would become qualified, I can understand how it would be hard for him to land a job. Apart from your church leaders deeply being known by other congregations, if your church doesn't send you to plant a church, you will probably have a hard time landing a job. Going to a solid theological seminary and graduating can at least be a verified thing, while it is indeed much harder to verify what type of training, and how in-depth of training your local church gave you. Still I think it's a viable model that should be recognized more often, and I think some of the best pastors have been great lovers of God, good readers, great preachers, but even then many of those people had some scholarly flaws, which still did not and doesn't disqualify you from eldership. (Of course, you do have to be able to rightly handle the Word, and handle it well.)

By the way, let me say again, I cannot judge all Presbyterian congregations on this in any means. In these matters I have a limited amount of experience with them so I can't even say if it's truly a problem or if it's just from the limited things I see, regardless I just wanted to point out some things I think need to be considered.

I don't know if you've ever heard of Art Azurdia, but I heard him recently say he even thought seminaries will start to be a way of the past. Maybe a good thing. Maybe not. It's just so hard to afford. I praise God for congregations that can overcome that and train up godly leaders.

 

[MW]

It is better to look at this in terms of Providence and the Lord opening/closing the door. If congregations are minded in a certain way it is not for the candidate to examine them, but to commit himself and them to the Lord to provide for both as seems good to Him.

 

[Jack K]

Good fit does matter. Perhaps it should not be the first thing that matters, but it should not be ignored. A lot of problems can be avoided if a pastor goes to a congregation that wants the type of man that he already is. And often, initial candidates are weeded out for doctrinal fidelity and character so that when it comes time for an interview, personality and good "fit" really are the main things to determine.

Matthew, there has to be a church somewhere that needs a pastor and would appreciate what you bring to that ministry. We need to keep praying that you and they would find each other.

 

[whirlingmerc]

I think it's a good idea to have an interim pastor or interim time and let the congregation grieve and move on

A concern in the process is that the committee doesn't recognize the weaknesses and eccentricities of the last pastor and might go out and find someone with similar strengths but also similar weaknesses. looking at that as success.

It should be a time to widen the search and correct past problems.... Don't rush the process perhaps involve someone with broad perspective to offer advice outside the local church or from the regional Presbytery or statewide Presbytery Seek broad advise. Try to hold onto the strengths and identify the weaknesses of the past and address them.

 

[Caroline]

I suppose it depends on what is meant by credentials. I think we all agree that it is important that a pastor have a good education. Experience can be helpful, too. But I'd rather have a pastor with a lower degree and less experience who really cared about people and worked hard than a PhD who couldn't get along with anyone. It may be helpful for candidates to anticipate some of these concerns and mention their qualifications in getting along with people upfront, if they don't do that already.

Some things I would want to know about any candidate:

- can he use a computer at least moderately effectively? If not, do we have a plan for dealing with that issue?
- does he answer emails and phone calls within a reasonable time frame?
- can he minister effectively to mentally disabled people? difficult people? teenagers? Mentally disabled difficult teenagers?
- can he get along with the church secretary? Things will be difficult if the pastor and the church secretary are kicking each other in the kneecaps every week.
- can he get along with the other elders? The only thing worse than a brawl in the church office is blood on the walls of a Session meeting.
- is he preaching at a level that people in the congregation can comprehend reasonably well? If not, is he willing to work on that?
- does he make a regular habit of praying for others? Especially people he does not like?

And so on. Good character is a must. Academic credentials and experience are important, but these "lesser" things are important also.

PS I thought of another one--I would ask him flat out whether he had close friends and how long he had been friends with said people. The point being--I would want to know whether he had staying power. I'd want to know that he not only could get along with people, but that he could get along with people over the long haul--that he could work out problems, patch up arguments, and stay around.