This is a split-off from Pentacost's thread "Church Government or How Shall We Govern Ourselves" How I interpreted the OP took the thread off topic so I'm starting again.
The question here: if you could write the local constitution of a church body, what would you put in?
My initial thoughts were:
A response from Cow Poke:
To which I now respond: we're coming at this from the opposite end of the church government. I've seen too much leadership abuse the body. Put another way, we're all sinners and want to see effect checks and balances to protect both. You've seen the hand of God moving and don't want to restrict Him. I think we need to find common ground on this.
From Jedidiah:
Be nice but not always possible. One church I read the constitution and it basically came out "What pastor wants; pastor gets."
Finally from One Bad Pig:
I agree. I personally what I need to hear which is not always pleasant. What is wrong that the pastor can't always preach what needs to be said?
I have had the sense for the past 5 or so years that how church in the US done has failed. At the risk of asking an unanswerable question, what could be done differently? I don't want to go down what seems to be the standard road these days of throwing out the doctrine. I want to keep this at the local level as I am far more likely to affect that than at the national level.
Thanks in advance for sharing.
The question here: if you could write the local constitution of a church body, what would you put in?
My initial thoughts were:
The pastor has to be accountable to other members of the church.
There would be strict rules against the involvement of the pastor's relatives (besides his wife) in church leadership. Under no circumstances could any of his relatives be employees of the church. Under no circumstances would the son, son-in-law, other relative be allowed to succeed as the pastor of the church. This would probably also include the other major leader positions in the church. I am really trying hard to avoid having the church becoming the family business.
The pastor would not be head of the legal organization (i.e. the 401(c)) that takes care of the church's earthly requirements to exist.
There would be strict rules against the involvement of the pastor's relatives (besides his wife) in church leadership. Under no circumstances could any of his relatives be employees of the church. Under no circumstances would the son, son-in-law, other relative be allowed to succeed as the pastor of the church. This would probably also include the other major leader positions in the church. I am really trying hard to avoid having the church becoming the family business.
The pastor would not be head of the legal organization (i.e. the 401(c)) that takes care of the church's earthly requirements to exist.
Yeah, it would really be rare -- but I just think we put WAY too much in the "Constitution" that prohibits us from doing something "out of the box" if the Lord should so lead.
From Jedidiah:
If this is a problem I think a change in the church leadership is in order.
Finally from One Bad Pig:
What the congregation wants to hear is not necessarily what the congregation needs to hear.
I have had the sense for the past 5 or so years that how church in the US done has failed. At the risk of asking an unanswerable question, what could be done differently? I don't want to go down what seems to be the standard road these days of throwing out the doctrine. I want to keep this at the local level as I am far more likely to affect that than at the national level.
Thanks in advance for sharing.
Comment