Elder Discipline Process
God is committed to the unity of the church. Jesus prayed for it and the Spirit produces it by His power. Christians are exhorted to earnestly pursue it. One of the most critical aspects of unity is between elders and members. The Pastoral Epistles provide instructions for how to conduct the household of God (I Tim 3:15). I Timothy 5 Paul lays out protections for members against elders and protections for elders in the face of unfair accusations. Elders have both significant responsibility and power in the church. They are to resemble the Chief Shepherd as they lead God’s flock.
This is why Paul charged the Ephesians elder to “Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. (Acts 20:28)
The Holy Spirit has delegated authority to elders. Diane Langberg summarizes this stewardship of power well…
"Godly power is derivative; it comes from a source outside us. It is always used under God’s authority and in likeness to his character. It is always exercised in humility, in love to God. We use it first as his servants and then, like him, as servants to others. It is always used for the end goal of bringing glory to God.”
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. The surest way to avoid having leaders fall into sin is to use caution (5:22) and careful observation (5:24-25) in the process of selecting elders. That said, sin happens and false accusations come, so God has wisely given us a process. This document exists to clarify a biblical process that takes contextual realities into account.
This process was developed by the Soma Family of Churches and as members of that family we’ve agreed to follow this guide if accusations against an elder arise and consult with Soma Area Leadership through the process. You can see a current list of area leaders that would be called upon to help in this process here.
A. The process for examining accusations against an elder requires…
1) A clear understanding of the Biblical qualifications for an elder. The precondition for a 1st Timothy 5 process must be based on the Biblical standards for elders as a baseline. The Scriptures teach that the church is to be led by a plurality of qualified male-elders who lead the church by example and in humble service. Qualification involves examining the character, teaching competency, and capacity of a man (I Tim 3:2, Titus 1:5-7). These qualifications are intended to be generally true of the man, not perfectly true. It is what he is generally known for. No one but Jesus himself attains to this standard in sinless perfection.
2) Multiple witnesses making the same accusation. Multiple witnesses were required in mosaic law and remain necessary in the disciplining of an elder.
Deuteronomy 19:15 states, “A single witness shall not rise up against a man on account of any iniquity or any sin which he has committed; on the evidence of two or three witnesses a matter shall be confirmed.”
Without this requirement, a single individual could consume an elder, team, and church health. So, there is a simple principle: accusations against an elder must first come from at least 2-3 witnesses and then they must be properly investigated based on evidence, not hearsay or rumors.
There is one important exception to this rule. When accusations are sexual in nature, even one accuser coming forward will launch an investigation. Sexual abuse often occurs in isolation and even one accuser must be take seriously. .. Moreover, pastoral leaders are mandatory reporters for abuse involving children. We report any allegations of sexual or physical abuse to the proper authorities immediately.
With non-sexual accusations of a general nature, 2-3 witnesses are required to protect elders from a single divisive person This is also not grounds for 2-3 people with different accusations. It’s not enough to find 2-3 disgruntled people with complaints. 1st Timothy 5 requires an investigation to confirm evidence of the same accusation from 2-3.
3) You must form a team of elder investigators. It is never wise for one individual to conduct an investigation alone. This leaves both the investigator and the accused vulnerable to partiality. A team of 3+ internal and/or external elders or leaders is required. Where internal or external elders don’t exist, the Soma Area Leader will build a team of elders and deacons. These are men women who are qualified themselves and have a strong reputation for both personal integrity, discernment and the ability to speak the truth in love.
Should an entire elder team collectively be accused of wrong doing, the Soma Area Leaders and North American Soma Lead Leadership Team will assemble a group of Soma Elders to investigate.
4) An interview process that is prayerful, thorough, and fair. While there are many ways to conduct interviews, it’s wise to always have elder pairs who will be responsible for interviewing the accusers. Elder pairs both increase clarity and provides inherent accountability for all involved. These same teams will need to follow up with the accused elder for cross examination.
As part of the agreed upon process, the elder investigation team will:
A. Create a shared Google Drive to store all findings in a centralized/sharable location.
B. Scan all original notes and add them to the Google Drive.
C. Schedule a team meeting to pray, discuss and discern the validity and severity of the accusations.
Pre-work for that meeting. Have a team member Create a Google Sheet of the “Slight concerns” and “major concerns” to objectively quantify what you heard.
What are the accusations?
What is the severity?
Does the accused elder agree with the accusations?
What should be done in response? (e.g. confession, fruit in keeping with repentance, reconciliation, etc)
D. Report their findings and recommendations to the entire elder team.
Here are some dynamics the team will take into consideration…
1) At times members have too high of a standard for elders. They imagine an elder should be close to sinless perfection. In these cases, the investigative team will work with the accusers to explain the “glory it is to overlook a minor offense” (Prv 19:11). Or they may need to explain the elder qualifications as general “famous for” qualification but not “100% sinless in every regard” requirements. However, sin needs to be repented of and reconciliation needs to happen. Some investigations will end with an elder and a member reconciling, and seeking and extending forgiveness. But will not lead to a public rebuke or removal of an elder.
2) At times elders are more liable to receiving false accusations and slander than others, especially men who preach God’s truth. Satan is a liar, an accuser and a divider. It is strategic for him to discredit God’s elders. When the shepherd is struck, the sheep scatter (Matt 26:31). If people doubt the elder’s integrity, they more easily rationalize sin or choose to disengage the church. Do not be unwise to the Enemies’ schemes as he often stirs up people who have been offended by the preaching of God’s truth, or have been confronted themselves or feel passed over for roles they wish they had. Some people will spread half-truths and outright lies to discredit the elder. If the person is spreading rumors or gossip, they need to be corrected. This can be one of the outcomes of this process.
3) Those close to an elder may be susceptible to partiality. Elder discipline is just only when it is applied impartially. If a man of influence is shown leniency, while a less powerful man is treated harshly, this is wrong. Gene Getz identifies this common temptation saying…
“When someone has worked closely with someone in ministry and has developed a trusting relationship over a lengthy period of time, it becomes very difficult to be objective in evaluating accusations of sinful behavior.”
Paul is quite solemn to Timothy on this point invoking “in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of His chosen angels, ...” “God and Christ Jesus.” This reference is no doubt intended to remind investigating elders that God is the ultimate judge, who has committed all judgment unto the Son (John 5:22, 27) and the elders will be called to give an account (Her 13:17). The elect angels are likely invoked to capture the awesome picture of God on His high and holy throne, surrounded by the angels. In effect, Paul is saying, “Timothy, don’t give into fear of man. Fear God by being impartial.”
There may be times impartiality seems to challenging and unattainable because of the nature of the accusations and the leaders around them. In this case we appeal to elders in other churches to be on the team or lead the investigation. This can be done by Soma Area Leaders and within Acts 29 local leadership, too.
4) Some investigations will result in the discipline of the elder because the allegations were proven credible and serious requiring discipline and at times complete disqualication and removal.
B. Elder Discipline
If 2-3 witnesses with the same accusation are found to be credible here is the process for disciplining an elder after the investigation has taken place.
Proper discipline of an elder requires public rebuke. 1 Timothy 5:20.
The proper translation here is, “Those who are sinning,” meaning, those who are found guilty of the charges who do not repent. Sinning means some clear violation of God’s Word, not that someone simply doesn’t like the way a leader is leading (e.g. not visiting the members enough, preaching the way they prefer, etc).
1) If the sin is public and serious, such as false teaching on some major issue or a sin that is in public view, then a public rebuke is mandated here (as Paul did with Peter, Gal. 2:11). For example, if an elder preaches something unintentional but nevertheless false in a sermon, it is entirely appropriate for the elders to correct it in an appropriate moment publicly. This doesn’t have to feel punitive, it’s clarifying and will lead all preaching elders to be sober and diligent in their preparation to teach God’s truth (2 Tim 2:15).
2) If a leader has a character issue, then he should be approached privately with what the team has found. This will give him an opportunity to confess, repent, and to seek reconciliation where possible. If the issue has been public in the church, it will be important to have the leader publicly confess his sin and for the elders to discuss the steps that have been taken to correct him and to seek unity. Clearly laying out a path to greater health and maturity is a gracious, hopeful way to demonstrate a commitment to erring elders.
3) With egregious, disqualifying sin, the elder will need to step down from eldership until he rebuilds a godly reputation. While moral failure doesn’t necessarily disqualify a man from eldership for the rest of his life, he won’t restore the necessary qualifications of being above reproach and having a good reputation with outsiders in a few months (1 Tim. 3:2-7). Restoration is a deep, heart-level process that generally takes years not months.
Many churches are reticent to share leadership sin publicly. But this is direct disobedience to I Timothy 5:24-25 which promises “The sins of some are obvious, reaching the place of judgment ahead of them; the sins of others trail behind them. In the same way, good deeds are obvious, and even those that are not obvious cannot remain hidden forever.” Who are we to imagine we can keep hidden, what God says will be exposed?
There are at least three benefits to public rebuke before the church:
(1) A public rebuke clears the name of God and His church from association with and toleration of evil. It’s counter-intuitive, but this actually builds trust and unity. Mature adults don’t expect moral perfection, but they expect issues to be dealt with integrity according to God’s guidelines. If we don’t deal with accusations as God prescribes, Satan will deal with it his own most destructive way. Sins have a way of becoming public. The recent scandal with Catholics in Boston and Southern Baptists in Houston demonstrate that the cover-up does just as much damage if not more than the sins themselves. It allows abusers to continue to abuse and ultimately deeply erodes trust when the big lie finally surfaces. Remember what the Lord said to David after his sin with Bathsheba, “Indeed, you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel, and under the sun” (2 Sam. 12:12). God exposed evil so that the world may know that He is apart from all sin and does not tolerate it.
(2) Public rebuke instructs the flock by way of example and causes them to be fearful of sinning (5:20). Fear and accountability are not necessarily a bad motivator as they keep us from sin. Public discipline, especially of a church leader, makes people see the gravity of sin. It causes a healthy fear of God. If people know that church discipline will be administered impartially (5:21), they will be fearful of becoming the object of such rebuke and will avoid sin.
(3) Public rebuke builds trust amongst the church that no one is “above the law.” When the church practices church discipline of members (Matthew 18:15-20) or elders (I Timothy 5) the Body is always purified. Leadership credibility goes up and a safer, gospel environment is created. This is the most counter-intuitive principle but churches grow in gospel-clarity and public credibility as they call sin by its name and agree with God and hold to His holy standard.