God qualifies persons for leadership and when one desires to be an elder, they need to be examined, evaluated, and once proven, placed into that role – as a leader. Having grown up in the more exclusive branch of Plymouth Brethren, the argument that “only apostles and their delegates ever chose elders” and therefore, elders were never recognized (some would say they had them, but would never say who they were…definately confusing especially if you wanted to obey James and call for the elders of the church when you were sick…) God put the qualifications there in His Word and because Paul told Titus to “set in order what remained” by “choosing elders in every city”, this Apostolic mandate requires that the church have elders. If assistance is needed in choosing them, perhaps calling on another established church can be done since Paul told Timothy to commit to other faithful men what Paul had spoken of so that they could pass on to others and keep the Faith going. Since it is not abundantly clear from Scripture, in a direct command, on HOW elders are to be chosen, but that they should be chosen and since we are given their qualifications, prayer and a confident, fearful trust that the Lord will guide should be exercised about how a church chooses them.

As for “blamelessness”… wow, that is tough. We all sin…and pepetually (that is why Christ is our [perpetual while we are still on earth] High Priest, no?, and why we must “confess our sins” (perpetual). However, if a candidate for an elder has a “habit” of being a pugilist (brawler) or getting drunk, that is a clear disqualification. As a computer manager, I deal constantly with people who believe using unlicensed software as being “ok” because “everybody does it” – as well as downloading unlicensed songs. I can tell you of so-called Christians who think it’s okay for them to not claim ALL their tips as income on their taxes…I would definately NOT consider them for leadership in the church. Are elders perfect, no, but do they have a habit of exercising godliness – YES…. And to such as the Holy Spirit has made overseers, I will submit to.

Solo Deo Gloria….

~ I’d have to take exception to this statement simply because even elders are men who, in a fallen and imperfect estate, can and will continue to sin in thought, word or deed in this life. Entry into the ministry (eldership) should not be viewed as a ticket to perfection. This is an unreasonable expectation for anyone.

It is an unobtainable standard, save for Jesus Christ, to say that elders must not be accused of “anything sinful” whatsoever. Only Christ is free from the Accuser. Therefore, I believe, as we take the whole of Scripture in account, we must limit the requirement for “blamelessness” to a degree or type of sin which incurs unrepairable damage to the man and the name of Christ. Just as Peter was restored as an apostle after his sin, we too should realize the frailty and limitations of men we put in office.

Unfortunately, there are a LOT of churches and denominations that don’t obey this biblical commandment.

If one subscribes to a doctrinal taxonomy, then I have never seen anyone ascribe egalitarianism (or evangelical feminism) as being a first-order doctrinal error.

I’ve seen egalitarianism regarded as a 2nd-order doctrinal error. And I have seen egalitarians claim that complementarians (and the historical Church) are wrong for oppressing women with their incorrect exegesis. And I have seen them claim that their doctrinal practice is adiaphora or a matter of indifference. After all, it’s non-salvific. (They claim that their denial of the claim that the office of elder is limited to men is not salvific.)

What say thee?