We appoint elders for 3 year terms and encourage them to take a 1 year sabbatical after 6 consecutive years.

They have to be re-affirmed/re-elected, however, after each 3 year term, which requires a 75% majority.

Honestly, we're too young as a church to know the long-term effects of such, but I like the built in aspect of having to have a vote of confidence every 3 years.

From past experience, I have certain fears and reservations about lifetime appointments for leaders.

I like the idea of the potential for parole for a congregation.

Gunny Hartman, pastor (SBC)
www.ProvidenceChurch.info
The Lone Star State

We appoint elders for life. Over the past 25 years it has worked very well, and has helped with stability through strong and difficult times. I understand the human logic (possibly American logic) of why terms are used. It allows for a safety net and chance for a break for some who have other vocations. It also could allow for the removal of someone that is not qualified but was elected at the end of his term. However, I see that as a bad reason to have terms and a poor way of keeping purity in the church. The position of pastor is a calling. I see a distinction between a vocational pastor and a lay pastor, but both are still a calling. Where does scripture support this calling coming to an end simply because 3-6 years is up? If one is called, how can they stop being a shepherd for a period of time or the rest of their life? I would like to hear sound biblical support for term eldership.

I would agree with my friend Andy. If the office of elder is a calling by the Holy Spirit, recognized by the congregation, someone doesn't stop being called and gifted as an elder because his term is up.

Our church has appointed elders for life for its almost forty year history. It has also worked very well. At a few points, an elder became disqualified for the office (due to various circumstances and issues in his life). Each time, that elder became aware of his disqualification himself (or through loving confrontation), and offered his own resignation to the congregation. Our Constitution also allows for officer removal by a vote of the congregation - similar to a church discipline proceeding. (I have heard of some churches that have a periodic, three-year review of each of their elders' qualifications for the office - basically a committee of the congregation along with the other elders conduct an interview with the man and his family. There is not a vote to 'restore' him to the office at the end; such a process would only be necessary if the committee found the man disqualified. I haven't fully thought through what I think of this procedure...)

Our internal documents do encourage our elders to take periodic sabbaticals from their official duties (elder's meetings, public responsibilities) - but these are at the personal prerogative of the elders and are not enforced.

I heartly agree..."If the 'office' of elder is a calling by the Holy Spirit, recognized by the congregation, someone doesn't stop being called and gifted as an elder because his 'term' is up."

After 40 years, we too have seen elders removed for cause, resign when they lose the spirit to go on and retire when they feel they cannot fulfill their calling.

Again I agree about terms and undertand about the term 'parole'. They are humanistic and show our democratic nature and defile the theocracy. Use the bible as your rulebook and keep your opinions out of making sound decisions about leadership.