Cleaning up church rolls is a concern for all church members

How can we lovingly remove members from Church rolls without causing discord and resentment among those who remain?

A pastor may be concerned that the church's membership rolls are becoming too bloated and out of touch with the actual activity in the community. However, it is difficult to predict how the very active members he seeks to serve will react to a proposal to reduce those rolls.

The issue of list cleansing is not simply an administrative task. It touches on important spiritual and interpersonal aspects, and therefore requires a delicate approach and clear communication.

At several membership meetings in our church, I and other elders have repeatedly encountered situations where the decision to remove someone from the church roll has caused offense or even anger among the congregation. Most often, the offended members have repeated the same phrase: «You elders, you are acting too quickly; you lack information!»

I recall a case of a woman we will call Kate. She had been an active part of our community, but her attitude toward the church had changed. Over the course of several months, she gradually lost interest in church activities and limited her socializing. We, the elders, received indirect information that her dissatisfaction might have been related to our complementary approach to the roles of men and women or to our funding of missionary projects. However, Kate herself did not come to us with specific complaints.

When we tried to contact her, she responded politely but without any hint of a problem. Eventually, Kate requested a meeting with our senior pastor to express her desire to resign. She did not express any criticism. The senior pastor informed the other elders, and they prepared a motion to terminate her membership for approval at the next membership meeting.

That's when the difficulties arose.

After the presentation, a member of the church raised her hand and said, «I just had lunch with Kate, and she said she didn’t want to leave the church.» She offered no additional evidence. This put the congregation in a difficult position: they were faced with two conflicting testimonies. This was a particularly sensitive issue for the elders, as their integrity was called into question.

Someone was clearly not telling the truth. Were the elders really acting hastily to force Kate to leave the church? Was it an act of love? And most importantly, was this the right approach?

Such situations require not only careful decision-making but also wisdom in communication to avoid doubts and mistrust among church members.

In Kate’s case, it was a matter of actual withdrawal, but in general, we have found that active members generally object when someone is being disciplined for non-participation in the life of the church. Disciplining for non-participation is difficult (Heb. 10:25-26), because it is a common problem that does not appear to be an obvious violation, like, say, adultery or fornication. Few people would object to disciplinary action against an unrepentant adulterer. However, the most difficult and, frankly, most dangerous thing is when we are dealing with members who are on the periphery of church life, not attending services for months, sometimes attending other churches, but still maintaining contact with a few friends in their home church. They are not out, but they are not present! They are alienated, but for some reason they do not want to cut ties with the church.

Two important steps for transparency and unity

The Kate situation, while difficult and sensitive, led to two important changes in the life of our church. They helped to reduce anxiety among both the elders and the church members.

First, withdrawal from church membership must now be confirmed in writing. This can be an email, a paper application, or even a note on a sticker. The main thing is that it is an officially recorded document. This practice eliminates misunderstandings, such as what happened with Kate and her friend, who claimed that Kate had changed her mind. Thanks to the written form, the elders and the entire congregation have clear proof of the person’s intentions, which ensures transparency and reduces the risk of conflict.

Second, a «concern list» was created. This approach allows the congregation to participate in communicating with those who may be drifting away from the church. Before recommending someone for disciplinary expulsion, elders at membership meetings announce the person’s name and explain the situation. For example, they might say:

«Bill has not been to church for five months. Elder Bob and his assistant Ben have tried to contact him repeatedly by phone and email, but Bill has not responded. Therefore, we are adding him to the «care list.» If you know Bill or are friends with him, please contact him. Let him know that we love him and want him back to worship together. If this does not happen, we will be forced to remove him from the church roll at the next membership meeting in two months.».

This practice allows the church community to be more involved in the spiritual life of its brothers and sisters, and creates additional space for the expression of love, care, and support. At the same time, it provides a clear process that avoids hasty decisions and conflicts.

Such changes not only help maintain order, but also contribute to building greater interaction and trust between elders and community members.

Notice that we list the name (Bill), the reason for our concern (persistent absence), the action that has already been taken (Bob and Ben have tried to contact him), and what to expect in two months (a proposal for church discipline). We also tell members that they can come to us after the meeting if they have important information, but the «concern list» is not discussed during a simple Sunday meeting.

Why are such efforts justified?

Satan has repeatedly used suddenness or unexpectedness in disciplinary decisions at our membership meetings. Elders may have worked with an alienated member for months, but without success, they have failed to inform the congregation of the difficulties. Therefore, when a decision to impose discipline was made at a general meeting, it seemed to many to be unexpected and too harsh.

Sometimes the community took the news calmly, but there were times when it came as a shock. Even if members were inclined to support the elders' recommendations, there was still a sense of reticence, and unresolved issues undermined trust in the elders.

With the implementation of the «list of concerns,» we began sharing our concerns about individual members with the congregation even before the official announcement of church discipline. This made the process clear and predictable for everyone, building trust and unity in the church.

«The »list of concerns« has expanded to include more than just issues that could lead to church discipline. We also include other issues, such as members» health or financial needs. Sometimes, church members themselves ask to be added to the “list of concerns” so that the congregation knows they are going through a special time and need special support.

We do not publish the «concern list» in writing, but announce it aloud during a membership meeting that is closed to non-members. This avoids any potential awkwardness or undue embarrassment for those on the list.

Benefits of the "Care List":

1. He removed the «shock» element that Satan often used against us.
2. He defended the elders from unfounded accusations.
3. And, most importantly, he involved the entire church in prayers and concern for his brothers and sisters, urging them to return and live up to their vows.

I am happy to say that after several years of working with the «care list,» situations that previously caused division are now contributing to unity, strengthening, and protecting both the church and the relationships between leaders and community members.