Exam Committee Vision

The following are excerpts from the Exam Committee Handbook that guide how our Committee does its work. This can be helpful for Candidates to clearly understand how we approach the examination process as an aid to their preparations.

PURPOSE OF THE EXAM COMMITTEE

Simply put, the Exam Committee serves as both a guard for the church and a guide for the candidates by examining their soundness for pastoral ministry.

As a guard, we protect the church from insufficiently qualified candidates for ministry.
As a guide, we promote the church by encouraging and acknowledging sufficiently qualified candidates for ministry.

Long version: The Exam Committee is charged to examine a candidate’s “connection between faith and practice, truth and duty [so as to make] effective provision that all who are admitted as teachers be sound in the faith” (adapted from BCO II. 4,5). It is the work of the candidate to pray, to prepare well in knowledge, understanding and application, and to fulfill stated requirements by stated due dates. It is the work of the Committee to communicate requirements, pray for and examine candidates, report, and make recommendations to the Presbytery.

VALUES

Bible – We take God’s Word very seriously and expect our candidates to do so as well. A candidate who has much theological knowledge and practical ministry experience but is weak in Bible knowledge is not fit for pastoral ministry in our Presbytery. We expect our candidates to demonstrate that they can ground their theological convictions and practical ministerial knowledge in the Bible.

Theology – Because theology is a comprehensive summary of what the whole Bible teaches and because it serves as the interpretive framework from which all ministry flows, we expect our candidates to demonstrate a thorough grasp of correct, biblically-grounded theology.

Depth of Comprehension – Not only should candidates demonstrate the ability to understand and communicate what they know, but also the ability to teach these truths winsomely and convincingly.

Godliness – Paul warns, “Watch your life and doctrine closely” (1 Tim 4:16). Because fitness for pastoral ministry includes the quality of a man’s spiritual life, personal character, morality, and relationships, we must be assured that the candidate is growing in grace personally before he teaches others how to grow in grace.

Experience – Because gifts of spiritual leadership must first be tested (1 Tim 3:10), we rely on the Candidates Committee’s recommendations concerning the adequacy of the candidate’s internship experience. We also require a review of a recorded sermon in order to validate the candidate’s abilities to preach. A man should not be licensed or ordained if he has not demonstrated sufficient ministry experience.

Encouragement – While this examination process is (by necessity) very serious and very difficult, we acknowledge that candidates need encouragement, good communication, and prayer along the way. We don’t want candidates to drop out or fail merely because of frustration toward the process. We commit to treating every candidate with utmost care and respect as they walk through this process. We welcome feedback from candidates on how to improve this process.

Fairness – We commit to maintaining clear and consistent standards of examination for all candidates in accord with the PCA, CFP, and general expectations for pastoral ministry.

EXAMPLES OF SUCCESS AND FAILURE FOR OUR COMMITTEE

In order to gain a sense of whether we’re adequately operating according to our stated purpose and values, it is helpful to paint a picture of various scenarios of success and failure for our team. This also helps us more practically evaluate how we’re doing.

Example “successes”

A candidate is fully qualified to serve the church in every respect and we recognize that and pass them.

We pass a candidate who started off being very weak in certain areas of their theology, but we had to fail them multiple times and give them mock oral exams and clear feedback until they were able to pass.

We pass a candidate who is theologically qualified, but has had a morally questionable past. However, it is clear that they have sufficiently repented and have current accountability structures in place to protect them from future failures in those areas.

Example “failures”

We pass a candidate who may adequately believe and understand the doctrines, but are not confident or skilled enough to teach them to others.

We pass a candidate who excels in all theological examinations, but has questionable moral problems or character issues without a sufficient demonstration of repentance or growth.

We pass a candidate who has a lot of ministry experience, even though he is not up to standard in his theological examinations.

We get too nit-picky about unimportant matters in our exams, or we are not clear enough or helpful enough with our process to the point that it frustrates the candidate and they drop out of the process, even though they are most likely qualified.