You’re doing it right, I think. The benefit of signed minutes is the “blessed assurance” that there is one true copy, and that any edits made to the draft minutes have been done. Having both the secretary and the president of the body sign the minutes increases confidence that the minutes are true. In these “what can you trust” days, every bit of check and balance helps.
OK, first off I am not an attorney. Second, the rules of Illinois are probably different than those of Michigan. That being said, I believe that the primary purpose of modeling articles of incorporation became evident when churches began splitting and leaving the denomination during the long national nightmare of the WIO (Women in Office) issue. The practical question was this: If half of the congregation votes to leave the CRC and join the XYZ denomination, are they entitled to take the property with them? Who owns the property? By designating the relationship as one with the CRC, it helps with that question. One less piece of agony to work through during what can be an otherwise messier divorce situation. Read Article 6 D.
We're a satisfied Servant Keeper subscriber too. Can't say a lot more about it, because I myself don't use it, but it's been the source of many reports over the past few years. We're going to start using a customizeable part of the program to record spiritual gifts soon this month, which will be a great asset as we continue down the path of being/developing a gifts-based ministries effort as part of the Natural Church Development planning we've done.
I suppose that is true to some extent. I know that in practice (and as a person who has participated in the nominating committee several times), there is an effort to be inclusive rather than exclusive. Maybe it would be helpful to note that we aim to nominate at least 3 times the number needed (3x3=9) for each office and put at least 2 times the number needed on the ballot (2x3=6). With people who have served at three year term ineligible for nomination for three years, and a congregation that isn't that large (less than a hundred families), I think you'd find that we're not eliminating too many people from nomination. We pray for the Spirit to help us discern those with gifts for service. Again, the effort feels inclusive.
One thing I would suggest for anyone who wishes to serve but has not been nominated would be for them to (1) nominate themselves - especially if it can be done anonymously - and (2) talk with the nominating committee about the sincere interest in being nominated. Perhaps that's been done. If so, then the person may want to think about participating in a congregation that is able to recognize their gifts for service more readily. If the person is mis-perceiving their giftedness (which can happen), then that's a more complicated situation and a more sensitive matter as well, of course.
We've gone to a process of selection by lot that feels pretty successful. Even though we're an average sized church, we've had a good response to calls for nominations, a good amount of people willing to serve after being nominated, a good number of ballots returned affirming nominees, etc. I'd be happy to share the policy/procedure documents if interested. We just selected new elders and deacons yesterday. It's so cool to see God's work in selecting people who we know are qualified, but who might not have been chosen in the past simply because they are less well known (or, dare I say it, "popular"?) in the church. These people have grown in their gifts, have been affirmed through their service, and have become more tightly knit into the life of the congregation. Win-win-win.... Go God!
Here's our process. The Nominating Committee solicits nominees from the congregation and eventually brings a list of its recommended nominees to the Council. The Council approves the list (which is confidential to the Council). We send each nominee a letter notifying them of their nomination. Unless they successfully object (meaning that the Council agrees to remove them from nomination), they are announced to the congregation as the candidates for Council, either as Elder or as Deacon. Congregation members submit a ballot which allows them to approve or disapprove of each listed nominee. The Nominating Committee and a small group of tellers tally the votes. All nominees that receive a majority affirmative vote from the congregation are moved on to the selection process.
It is very important that each person who is eventually appointed as an Elder or Deacon know that they have received a majority affirmative vote of the congregation!
The results of the voting are confidential to the Nominating Committee and tellers. Then, during a Sunday worship service, the names of each an "surviving" nominee are put in an Elder or Deacon "hat". Each retiring Council member draws a name out of the hat, Elder for Elder, Deacon for Deacon. Those not drawn are not identified. It avoids the "popularity contest" phenomenon, and "saves face" for those not selected who might not have obtained the necessary majority vote of the congregation. We get more people in Council than might otherwise have served, and no one avoids the process out of a desire to avoid "losing" a public election.
One technical point. We don't prohibit spouses from being nominated for different offices. Our particular church only nominates males as Elders. So, for example, if a husband were to be selected as an Elder, and his wife is a nominee for Deacon in the hat, then she would become instantly ineligible for selection...and vice versa. If the other spouse's name got picked from the hat after that, then that selection would be considered invalid and another pull would occur.
Posted in: How Does Your Church Manage Council Meeting Minutes?
You’re doing it right, I think. The benefit of signed minutes is the “blessed assurance” that there is one true copy, and that any edits made to the draft minutes have been done. Having both the secretary and the president of the body sign the minutes increases confidence that the minutes are true. In these “what can you trust” days, every bit of check and balance helps.
Posted in: Articles of Incorporation?
OK, first off I am not an attorney. Second, the rules of Illinois are probably different than those of Michigan. That being said, I believe that the primary purpose of modeling articles of incorporation became evident when churches began splitting and leaving the denomination during the long national nightmare of the WIO (Women in Office) issue. The practical question was this: If half of the congregation votes to leave the CRC and join the XYZ denomination, are they entitled to take the property with them? Who owns the property? By designating the relationship as one with the CRC, it helps with that question. One less piece of agony to work through during what can be an otherwise messier divorce situation. Read Article 6 D.
Posted in: What software works for tracking church membership information?
We're a satisfied Servant Keeper subscriber too. Can't say a lot more about it, because I myself don't use it, but it's been the source of many reports over the past few years. We're going to start using a customizeable part of the program to record spiritual gifts soon this month, which will be a great asset as we continue down the path of being/developing a gifts-based ministries effort as part of the Natural Church Development planning we've done.
Posted in: How does a church find willing members to serve as deacons and elders?
I suppose that is true to some extent. I know that in practice (and as a person who has participated in the nominating committee several times), there is an effort to be inclusive rather than exclusive. Maybe it would be helpful to note that we aim to nominate at least 3 times the number needed (3x3=9) for each office and put at least 2 times the number needed on the ballot (2x3=6). With people who have served at three year term ineligible for nomination for three years, and a congregation that isn't that large (less than a hundred families), I think you'd find that we're not eliminating too many people from nomination. We pray for the Spirit to help us discern those with gifts for service. Again, the effort feels inclusive.
Posted in: How does a church find willing members to serve as deacons and elders?
One thing I would suggest for anyone who wishes to serve but has not been nominated would be for them to (1) nominate themselves - especially if it can be done anonymously - and (2) talk with the nominating committee about the sincere interest in being nominated. Perhaps that's been done. If so, then the person may want to think about participating in a congregation that is able to recognize their gifts for service more readily. If the person is mis-perceiving their giftedness (which can happen), then that's a more complicated situation and a more sensitive matter as well, of course.
Posted in: How does a church find willing members to serve as deacons and elders?
We've gone to a process of selection by lot that feels pretty successful. Even though we're an average sized church, we've had a good response to calls for nominations, a good amount of people willing to serve after being nominated, a good number of ballots returned affirming nominees, etc. I'd be happy to share the policy/procedure documents if interested. We just selected new elders and deacons yesterday. It's so cool to see God's work in selecting people who we know are qualified, but who might not have been chosen in the past simply because they are less well known (or, dare I say it, "popular"?) in the church. These people have grown in their gifts, have been affirmed through their service, and have become more tightly knit into the life of the congregation. Win-win-win.... Go God!
Posted in: How does a church find willing members to serve as deacons and elders?
Here's our process. The Nominating Committee solicits nominees from the congregation and eventually brings a list of its recommended nominees to the Council. The Council approves the list (which is confidential to the Council). We send each nominee a letter notifying them of their nomination. Unless they successfully object (meaning that the Council agrees to remove them from nomination), they are announced to the congregation as the candidates for Council, either as Elder or as Deacon. Congregation members submit a ballot which allows them to approve or disapprove of each listed nominee. The Nominating Committee and a small group of tellers tally the votes. All nominees that receive a majority affirmative vote from the congregation are moved on to the selection process.
It is very important that each person who is eventually appointed as an Elder or Deacon know that they have received a majority affirmative vote of the congregation!
The results of the voting are confidential to the Nominating Committee and tellers. Then, during a Sunday worship service, the names of each an "surviving" nominee are put in an Elder or Deacon "hat". Each retiring Council member draws a name out of the hat, Elder for Elder, Deacon for Deacon. Those not drawn are not identified. It avoids the "popularity contest" phenomenon, and "saves face" for those not selected who might not have obtained the necessary majority vote of the congregation. We get more people in Council than might otherwise have served, and no one avoids the process out of a desire to avoid "losing" a public election.
One technical point. We don't prohibit spouses from being nominated for different offices. Our particular church only nominates males as Elders. So, for example, if a husband were to be selected as an Elder, and his wife is a nominee for Deacon in the hat, then she would become instantly ineligible for selection...and vice versa. If the other spouse's name got picked from the hat after that, then that selection would be considered invalid and another pull would occur.