When it comes to identifying and appointing elders, most churches rightly turn to 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1. The qualifications listed there are the non-negotiable. But is there more to the discernment process than checking a list? Recently, Rob Weddell, the pastor of another church in our city, shared six helpful categories that his church thinks through when appointing elders.
None of these categories—competence, character, calling, care, chemistry, and capacity—replaces the biblical qualifications; together, they help to flesh them out.
Competence
At the most basic level, an elder candidate must meet the job description. In 1 Timothy 3:2, Paul requires that an overseer be “able to teach,” and in Titus 1:9, that he “hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.” Competence, then, is the ability to feed the flock with the word—to counsel people, steer them clear of error, and point them to truth.
Importantly, competence in teaching does not necessarily mean pulpit ability. Not every elder will preach publicly, but every elder must be grounded in Scripture and able to apply it in the lives of those he shepherds.
A practical test of competence is whether a man is already doing it. Is he discipling someone? Is he caring for people in the congregation, helping them mature in Christ? If so, that is an encouraging sign. Where training is offered, it will focus on the hands-on work of shepherding: praying for the sheep, being present with them, having the hard conversations, and doing the difficult thing when it is required.
Teaching opportunities—whether in a Sunday school setting, a small group context, or eventually the pulpit—will help to reveal where the candidate is theologically and whether he can handle the word with care and clarity.
Character
The ability to teach is the only qualification that distinguishes an elder from a deacon. Everything else in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 concerns character. This is worth pondering: The bulk of what God requires of an elder is not skill or gifting, but godliness.
Is the man respectable? Does his family respect him? Do those in the congregation who know him say, “I can follow that man—he will point me to Christ”? The author of Hebrews writes, “Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God. Consider the outcome of their way of life, and imitate their faith” (Hebrews 13:7). A man’s character is what makes his ministry credible and his leadership followable.
Calling
Paul writes in 1 Timothy 3:1, “The saying is trustworthy: if anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task.” The word “aspires” matters. There must be a genuine, compelled desire to shepherd God’s people—not simply a desire to lead, teach, or hold a position.
Many men want to be leaders, but the motive behind that desire is what distinguishes calling from ambition. The aspiration Paul describes is specifically the desire to help God’s people follow Christ. Eldership is not a platform; it is an often costly form of service. A man who understands this—who wants to come alongside the flock, to get underneath them and lift them up—is showing signs of a genuine calling.
Care
There is a way of thinking about pastoral ministry that keeps a man in his study and behind his pulpit, but seldom among the people. The fourth C is a corrective to that tendency. An elder must care for the flock—genuinely, personally, and sacrificially.
It is often said that a good preacher must love God, love his word, and love his people—and that love for people is what drives him to labour so that they understand the word. That same love is what defines care in this context. It is not merely sitting with someone in a crisis (though it includes that), but smelling like sheep: being so present with the flock that you know their heartaches, struggles, and joys.
The people know whether you care. They can tell.
Pastoral care is costly, and elders will at times be hurt by the very sheep they are serving. What keeps a man going through those seasons? In John 21, Jesus asked Peter three times, “Do you love me?” After each answer, the same instruction follows: Feed my sheep. The foundation of care is not love for the lambs (though that grows) but love for the Lord. You go into ministry because you love him. And because you love him, you care for those who belong to him—even when they bite.
As Peter himself wrote later: “Shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight, not under compulsion, but willingly, as God would have you” (1 Peter 5:2).
Chemistry
Every church has a culture, a personality. Two churches may share identical doctrine, but each has its own way of doing things, its own congregational makeup, its own history. When considering an elder candidate, the question of whether he fits within the existing eldership and church culture is a legitimate one, though it must be handled carefully.
Chemistry is not about finding men who are alike. A healthy eldership will often be diverse—older and younger, businessmen and fulltime ministers, extroverts and introverts, more academic and less academic. That diversity is a strength. What chemistry does ask is whether a man’s presence in the eldership is going to be generative or corrosive.
Pushback within an eldership is healthy and necessary. A man who can say, “I think we need to slow down here—I can see this causing real problems in the congregation,” is a gift. Elders are not looking for yes-men. The risk of an eldership dominated by a single strong personality is that others become reluctant to disagree, which is not spiritually healthy for anyone. The ability to push back with gentleness, to be heard, and to hear in return requires humility and mutual respect.
But a man who always pushes back, who turns every elders’ meeting into a debate, who cannot move forward in unity exhibits a chemistry problem. It may not reflect a failure of character or doctrine, but it still matters. Elders need to be able to make decisions together and to trust one another in the process.
Secondary and tertiary doctrinal differences may also play a role here. A man who agrees on the fundamentals but is continually agitating over third-tier issues is likely to strain the fellowship of the eldership over time. Chemistry is not the most important C—but it can derail the train if it is ignored.
Capacity
A man may meet every other qualification and still not be in a position to serve as an elder, simply because of the season of life he is in. Capacity is about time, energy, and mental bandwidth.
If a man is carrying an unusually heavy load at work, if he is travelling constantly, if there is illness in his household requiring significant time and attention, he may not have the capacity to shepherd well. In those seasons, the right decision may be to wait before pursuing eldership, or for a serving elder, to step back temporarily.
There is also a gentler application of this principle within a functioning eldership. Capacity can fluctuate. A man who is going through a particularly demanding stretch may need to have responsibilities eased for a season, not because he is stepping down, but because his brothers are caring for him and managing the load wisely together.
Paul’s requirement that an elder manage his household well (1 Timothy 3:4–5) connects here: A man who lacks the capacity to care for his own home is unlikely to have sufficient capacity for the Lord’s household. The two are not unrelated.
It is worth noting that some capacity problems are self-made. Recreation that has grown too large, a work schedule that has never been examined, and habits of over-commitment are things a man can, with discipline, address. Sometimes, the honest question is not, “Does he have the capacity?” but, “Is he willing to free up capacity to serve?”
Putting the Cs Together
These six categories—competence, character, calling, care, chemistry, and capacity—do not replace the biblical qualifications for eldership. They are a way of thinking comprehensively about what those qualifications look like in practice, and about the additional factors that make a man ready to serve in a particular church at a particular time.
A man might teach well, but lack the character to be followed. He might have the character, but not yet the calling. He might have the calling and the care, but not the chemistry to serve alongside the present eldership. He might have everything else, but not the capacity, at this point in life, to shepherd well.
Appointing an elder is not a simple matter of checking boxes. It requires prayer, patient observation, careful conversation, and a willingness to take the long view. The flock deserves shepherds who are genuinely ready—and shepherds who are genuinely ready deserve a church that has taken the time to identify them well.