In the Presbyterian Church in America, provision is made to remove folks from the roll after 12 months. I like the 6 months idea.

Another aspect of this is the question of letters of recommendation from sending churches to receiving churches. How can we as elders vouch for the current Christian character and conduct of someone who is several months' removed from our active oversight?

From that standpoint, our elders in our congregation will not receive anyone via transfer of their membership who are 12 months removed from their "home church" (except in case of military moves). We require the individuals to be received by reaffirmation of their faith after a new member course and examination by our elders.

I think there needs to be some room for people in different circumstances. For instance. I graduated from college in Texas in May '03, and started seminary in August of the same year. During the 3.5 months in between, I was in neither location. So I was supposed to find and join a church in two and a half months? Sure, its possible, but in many cases that's not enough time.

When it becomes such a set process that its automatic, removal from membership wouldn't really mean anything. I would have left the church knowing that my membership would have been cancelled in November of that year, and if I hadn't found a church by then, my thought would have been 'oh well, that's the policy, it's not really saying anything about me.'

But if you have exceptions or work on a case-by-case basis, then removal actually means something to the church member being removed.

Brent, I think the sort of situation you describe is precisely when the elders of the church need some measure of discretion in removing members from the rolls. But just as crucial in such a situation is the member keeping the elders informed of their circumstances, which in my experience does not typically happen. I would guess (though admittedly I don't have hard evidence to back it up, only anecdotal proof) that in the sorts of situations that prompted this thread of discussion, people typically just leave without letting the elders know. Hence the need for some definite time period. I like six months -- a year is too long. I actually like three months, but then the elders would be making an exception for every other situation.

Great site! Just wanted to say hello from a fellow brother! Be sure to check out our sites as well. We are about to go on the offensive with Paul Washer's - Ten Indictments Sermon. Check out my latest blog. www.time2stand.wordpress.com
God bless,
Jeremy Strang
www.time2stand.net
www.time2standladies.wordpress.com

Very challenging questions.

For my part, I am very uneasy about 'striking' absentee members from the rolls. I acknowledge that it has become commonplace in Presbyterian and Reformed circles. Our own Presbyterian church has also practiced it in various instances.

But I only ask the question, is there such an animal - biblically speaking - as removing a member from the rolls without due process? It seems as though the only three grounds are death, transfer, or excommunication. Striking or removing just seems like practical excommunication without censure or due process.

This is not to suggest that I'm altogether comfortable with proceeding against members who have moved simply for having moved or who are taking a wee too long to settle. However, it is amazing that many people can't find a Bible-believing church somewhere to settle down - in the United States of America! You've got 31 flavors on every corner. This isn't Siberia. Do we need to cater to this?

Can't we apply Matthew 18? If someone is going through exceptional circumstances, that is one thing. But if there is foot-dragging, church-dating, or searching for the 'ideal' church, and so on, let's confront it. And if they won't hear us, maybe they will hear the church.

On a historical note, a very interesting and comprehensive opinion from the New England Puritans on this subject can be found in Chapter 13 of the Cambridge Platform, entitled "Of Church Members, Their Removal from One Church to Another..."(http://www.pragmatism.org/american/cambridge_platform.htm).

Michael Ives,

The Unites States may not be Siberia, but there are parts of this country in which it can very difficult to find a Bible-believing church. Driving distance is also a factor for some people. If there isn't a good, Biblical church within two hours' distance, as is the case for some, they simply can't afford to drive to where there is such a church.

America may have "31 flavors on every corner," when it comes to churches, but that doesn't necessarily mean, in every case, that *any* of those flavors contains the Gospel.

Christopher,

I grant you that there are exceptions.

But if someone is leaving a solid church for a job in a place where he/she has no guarantee that there will be a sound, Gospel-preaching church on the other end, then we need to exhort hard against the move in the first place. At least until such a church is found first. To let them go is like letting a friend walk out into the desert without a compass.

But I also think we need to develop a culture of a stronger commitment to the local church, at least within reason. It is not a prison, true. But committing yourself to a community of God's people is more binding than joining Kiwanis club. If someone loses their job, we should rise to the occasion to the best of our ability to help them diaconally. Perhaps we can buy them the time to find a job that will allow them to stay in the church. But if not, then of course let's help them find a church where they find a job. Then we can send them out with God's blessing.