|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 5/22/2008 4:36:46 PM
|
|
|
drfuss
Posts: 203
Joined: 3/9/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JimboFletch
quote:
ORIGINAL: drfuss
For example, my church has about 5500 members on the rolls, with a weekly attendance of about 2300 which includes non-member visitors and children.
Either my math skills have really deteriorated or your church has roughly the same sort of attendance as most SBC churches, around 40% of membership rolls.
So, what's the beef?
drfuss: The beef is it should be corrected. Just because my church does it does not mean I think it is right. My church was given just as an example of the problem. Your math is correct. I am not one of those that automatically defends my church regardless of the right or wrong of an issue.
When I suggest something should be done at my church, I get these strange looks. Many agree the membership rolls should be updated, but say they have no idea how to do it in a large church.
A SBC membership integrity resolution could give churches an imputus to get started on it.
< Message edited by drfuss -- 5/22/2008 7:43:03 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 5/22/2008 9:26:41 PM
|
|
|
zoebob
Posts: 8825
Joined: 4/13/2005
From: land of limbo
Status: online
|
Also a non SB here but I just scanned through our directory. We have maybe 110 families in our directory of members and regular attenders. I would say at least 60% (but probably more) of the families are members (by that I mean at least one adult and most age appropriate children). Of the members I know most of them and would guess that at least 75% are still regular attenders...maybe more because I don't know everyone. Also that inlcudes those who may be away at college most of the year. I would say we do a pretty good job of keeping our rolls updated. Every year they put out the previous year's directery for people to make updates before they put out a new one. They probably go thorugh at that time and contac any member who hasn't attended regularly to check their status and find out why they haven't attended regularly.
_____________________________
L-R: DD1, Ellies DS2, DD2, Ellies DS1
L-R: Ellies DD1, Ellies DD2, DS, Ellies DS3
|
|
|
|
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 5/24/2008 10:10:08 AM
|
|
|
drfuss
Posts: 203
Joined: 3/9/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: zoebob
Also a non SB here but I just scanned through our directory. We have maybe 110 families in our directory of members and regular attenders. I would say at least 60% (but probably more) of the families are members (by that I mean at least one adult and most age appropriate children). Of the members I know most of them and would guess that at least 75% are still regular attenders...maybe more because I don't know everyone. Also that inlcudes those who may be away at college most of the year. I would say we do a pretty good job of keeping our rolls updated. Every year they put out the previous year's directery for people to make updates before they put out a new one. They probably go thorugh at that time and contac any member who hasn't attended regularly to check their status and find out why they haven't attended regularly.
drfuss: Sounds good. We have attended a large SBC church for over 15 years. The churches we attended previously, updated the membership roll every year. They were smaller churches so it wasn't as difficult as in a large church. However, I think the smaller SBC churches also tend not to update their membership rolls
I heard that one non-SBC church that I went to, had to forward to the distract headquarters an annual amount based on the numbers on the membership roll. They had incentive to update their membership rolls.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 5/24/2008 11:32:36 AM
|
|
|
zoebob
Posts: 8825
Joined: 4/13/2005
From: land of limbo
Status: online
|
Yes, our denomination also expects support to the denomination in proportion to your membership. We actively encourage regular attenders to join but don't pad with people who haven't attended in a while either.
_____________________________
L-R: DD1, Ellies DS2, DD2, Ellies DS1
L-R: Ellies DD1, Ellies DD2, DS, Ellies DS3
|
|
|
|
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 5/25/2008 5:08:39 PM
|
|
|
pruned
Posts: 1105
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
I don't think a majority of SBC churches intentionally pad their membership roles. However, they are limited by removing people from those lists by their own constitutions and by-laws.
Due to job relocations I've had the privilege of belonging to eight SBC congregations. Many of these churches have similar constitutions and by-laws, in that there is no legal mechanism to remove someone from their membership unless the individual initiates the request. The individual can ask for their name to be removed or transfer their membership to another congregation.
I'm currently attending a church where our non-resident and non-attender members are about 50% of our membership. I live in a college community, so the city is very transient. The church reflects that dynamic as well.
The problem I see that startles me the most, is that legally, if these non-resident and non-attender members chose to do so, they could legally relieve the active members of the church property and assets. All they would need to do is show up at a business meeting in greater numbers than the actives, present a motion to sell the property and divest the assets. It makes me shudder.
We do have a constitution review and revision committee working on this and other situations that need to be addressed.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 5/26/2008 7:31:56 AM
|
|
|
drfuss
Posts: 203
Joined: 3/9/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: pruned
I don't think a majority of SBC churches intentionally pad their membership roles. However, they are limited by removing people from those lists by their own constitutions and by-laws.
Due to job relocations I've had the privilege of belonging to eight SBC congregations. Many of these churches have similar constitutions and by-laws, in that there is no legal mechanism to remove someone from their membership unless the individual initiates the request. The individual can ask for their name to be removed or transfer their membership to another congregation.
I'm currently attending a church where our non-resident and non-attender members are about 50% of our membership. I live in a college community, so the city is very transient. The church reflects that dynamic as well.
The problem I see that startles me the most, is that legally, if these non-resident and non-attender members chose to do so, they could legally relieve the active members of the church property and assets. All they would need to do is show up at a business meeting in greater numbers than the actives, present a motion to sell the property and divest the assets. It makes me shudder.
We do have a constitution review and revision committee working on this and other situations that need to be addressed.
drfuss: Just wondering, are you now a member of eight SBC churches? Counted eight times?
Our church, for a number of years, has had a six week new member course which must be completed before becoming a new member. I don't know if member transfers from other Baptist churches are required to take the new member course.
Before the new member course was instituted, the approach was to "kneel em, dunk em, and join em". It was during this time, that the membership became so bloated. We still have no effort to remove the bloat which is still being added to. As you point out in the above post, a member can totally desert the church and retain all the legal rights of an active member.
It appears that church membership has great meaning when it comes to joining a church, but no meaning at all when it comes to leaving or deserting a church.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 5/28/2008 2:21:41 AM
|
|
|
pmilst
Posts: 60
Joined: 2/22/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Mrs.Noah
In a SBC, if understand correctly, a person's name remains on the membership list until another church contacts the first church and asks the member to be transferred. If a person has left one church and not joined another yet, can he simply request his name to be removed?
I am a member of a sbc church and have seen (at least 2 times) a letter of recommendation granted to a member in good standing by the local church in a church business meeting. This was done without fanfare. I have never witnessed the removal of church membership without it being granted to the individual or to another church body. Each church tends to set its own policy.
_____________________________
1 Cor. 2: 9-10 "Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love Him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit..."
|
|
|
|
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 5/28/2008 5:07:04 AM
|
|
|
Romans16_20
Posts: 300
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Jawja.... Yall
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: pruned
...
The problem I see that startles me the most, is that legally, if these non-resident and non-attender members chose to do so, they could legally relieve the active members of the church property and assets. All they would need to do is show up at a business meeting in greater numbers than the actives, present a motion to sell the property and divest the assets. It makes me shudder.
We do have a constitution review and revision committee working on this and other situations that need to be addressed.
Pruned, the last SBC church I was a member of had a similar fear and 'sold' the church and land back to the Assoc (sorry I don't remember if it was Ga Baptist or Southern Bapt. conventions) for like a penny. Then the assoc sold it back to the church for a penny with the right of first refusal. If the land/church was ever sold they had to offer it to the assoc first. Also, if the church ever stopped being SBC it went back to the assoc. Now the land is worth a mint (sits right on the main hwy through the county and the county has now adapted a 'no new zoning for churches' stancs... unofficially of course ). The Pastor there now was also there when I left, he had tried to pull out of SBC due to its rep. as not being able to get along. I think he just wanted to have full control of the church which is what he has slowly done.
_____________________________
With every Mac startup chime an angel to get its wings; Windows gong sends an angel crashes into a tree... Vista sends it into a tree, rolling down a mountain, and headlong into a tractor trailer doing 80!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 5/28/2008 7:52:42 AM
|
|
|
P31W
Posts: 2442
Joined: 6/13/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: pruned
...
The problem I see that startles me the most, is that legally, if these non-resident and non-attender members chose to do so, they could legally relieve the active members of the church property and assets. All they would need to do is show up at a business meeting in greater numbers than the actives, present a motion to sell the property and divest the assets. It makes me shudder.
We do have a constitution review and revision committee working on this and other situations that need to be addressed.
A couple of things must fall into place for this to happen. First the members who don't attend must somehow be in contact with one another. The percentage must be higher than the resident members. Those inactive members must also all be able to attend the business meeting at the same time.
In my church to do what you say required an 85% vote. Not a fifty one percent vote. We also must have a 85% vote to hire a new pastor or song leader or youth leader.
Some SB churches have in their consitutions that people who have not attended a certain percentage of time over the past year or whatever lose their right to vote. In other words voting priviledges are "given up" by the people who are placed on the "inactive" list.
It's all in how the church decided to handle things. Each church has the legal right to make their own rules concerning this.
I looked at our church figures the other day. We have 185 on roll. We have 113 who are active members. Out of those who are inactive I would venture to say over half of those are elderly and unable to attend chruch.
< Message edited by P31W -- 5/28/2008 8:01:01 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 5/28/2008 7:59:12 AM
|
|
|
P31W
Posts: 2442
Joined: 6/13/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
I am a member of a sbc church and have seen (at least 2 times) a letter of recommendation granted to a member in good standing by the local church in a church business meeting. This was done without fanfare. I have never witnessed the removal of church membership without it being granted to the individual or to another church body. Each church tends to set its own policy.
The SB chruch I currently attends does not send letters to any other Chruch other than baptist churches. Rather we simply remove your name from the roll. We to have this brought up in our business meetings.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 5/28/2008 11:46:54 AM
|
|
|
Ps103
Posts: 11525
Joined: 4/16/2005
From: Here, now
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: P31W
quote:
I am a member of a sbc church and have seen (at least 2 times) a letter of recommendation granted to a member in good standing by the local church in a church business meeting. This was done without fanfare. I have never witnessed the removal of church membership without it being granted to the individual or to another church body. Each church tends to set its own policy.
The SB chruch I currently attends does not send letters to any other Chruch other than baptist churches. Rather we simply remove your name from the roll. We to have this brought up in our business meetings.
Why? Is there a particular reason for this?
Some churches request such transfer letters. If you received such a request, what would you do with it?
_____________________________
Fasten your seatbelts...it's going to be a bumpy night.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 5/28/2008 12:29:05 PM
|
|
|
P31W
Posts: 2442
Joined: 6/13/2005
Status: offline
|
I don't know. If my brain can remember I will ask the folks at church.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 5/28/2008 1:10:50 PM
|
|
|
mushhead
Posts: 538
Joined: 5/29/2005
From: Kearns
Status: offline
|
quote:
Due to job relocations I've had the privilege of belonging to eight SBC congregations. Many of these churches have similar constitutions and by-laws, in that there is no legal mechanism to remove someone from their membership unless the individual initiates the request. The individual can ask for their name to be removed or transfer their membership to another congregation.
Constitution or by-laws? By-laws are much easier to change than a constitution, and all churches should regularly update their by-laws - especially concerning membership and voting privileges. Many newer congregations are distinguishing between active (voting privileged) members and inactive (non-voting privileged) members.
_____________________________
MUSHHEAD
Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces. Matt. 7:6
|
|
|
|
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 5/28/2008 1:18:36 PM
|
|
|
mushhead
Posts: 538
Joined: 5/29/2005
From: Kearns
Status: offline
|
quote:
Also, if the church ever stopped being SBC it went back to the assoc.
I know of a church that did something similar to this in order to protect the church and its resources from being raided by non-SBC entities (they entered into an agreement with their state convention and NAMB to insure their properties or the proceeds from it stayed in SBC entities). However, when the church decided to close, they sold their property and tried to donate the proceeds to their local SBC association. However, the State Convention and NAMB both stepped in and took the proceeds.
Churches need to be very careful how they word their agreements or they might lose control of their property, even when they remain faithful to their denomination.
_____________________________
MUSHHEAD
Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces. Matt. 7:6
|
|
|
|
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 5/28/2008 4:33:52 PM
|
|
|
youthrev
Posts: 82
Joined: 9/18/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ps103
quote:
ORIGINAL: P31W
quote:
I am a member of a sbc church and have seen (at least 2 times) a letter of recommendation granted to a member in good standing by the local church in a church business meeting. This was done without fanfare. I have never witnessed the removal of church membership without it being granted to the individual or to another church body. Each church tends to set its own policy.
The SB chruch I currently attends does not send letters to any other Chruch other than baptist churches. Rather we simply remove your name from the roll. We to have this brought up in our business meetings.
Why? Is there a particular reason for this?
Some churches request such transfer letters. If you received such a request, what would you do with it?
Typically, SBC churches grant and receive transfers of letter only to other SBC churches. In most by-laws that I have seen, the statements for granting a transfer indicates that the member is a "member in good standing" and that letters are sent to churches "of like faith and doctrine" (or message). So why only other SBC churches? Because some of the doctrines in question, even varying throughout a singular denomination, include eternal security, salvation by faith alone, baptism by immersion, and the ordinance of the Lord's Supper. Many denominations are on different pages than the SBC on one or more of these issues and rather than calling each church and asking for a doctrinal statement to be perused or studied upon request for letter, the sending church can feel fairly confident that the sheep that is moving to a different flock will receive teaching in keeping with SBC doctrine.
Before I get a bunch of irate responses proclaiming that I implied that your denomination is not biblical or is somehow off-base, I want to make it clear that I am not saying that. I simply answered the question that was asked about "why" SBC churches only grant letters to other SBC churches. That said, we will receive members from other denominations by "statement of faith" from other denominations, independent churches and members of churches without access to a letter of transfer. But these members are asked a series of questions regarding their beliefs and are told in a required five-week membership class what our doctrines and history are, as well as a clear teaching concerning faith in Christ. Is this a necessity? To us it is. For example, one family recently joined and all of them had received Christ here in the last few months. The statement made by the mother was, "How come at my last church (another denomination) I never heard about salvation for the sixteen years I was there?" That is why we only grant letters to churches of "like faith".
As for the purging of rolls, yes churches do it different ways and membership integrity is being increased through annual membership covenants. Some churches just don't remove people from rolls without a request because they want to make sure a believer is always connected to a church for ministry. Do they always/ever get ministered to? Not necessarily. Some churches aren't very good at it and some members don't want it. And yes, some stay just for voting rights and burial plots. And those are both poor reasons to stay and membership requirements should be changed, IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 5/28/2008 9:15:15 PM
|
|
|
Ps103
Posts: 11525
Joined: 4/16/2005
From: Here, now
Status: offline
|
quote:
Typically, SBC churches grant and receive transfers of letter only to other SBC churches. In most by-laws that I have seen, the statements for granting a transfer indicates that the member is a "member in good standing" and that letters are sent to churches "of like faith and doctrine" (or message). So why only other SBC churches? Because some of the doctrines in question, even varying throughout a singular denomination, include eternal security, salvation by faith alone, baptism by immersion, and the ordinance of the Lord's Supper. Many denominations are on different pages than the SBC on one or more of these issues and rather than calling each church and asking for a doctrinal statement to be perused or studied upon request for letter, the sending church can feel fairly confident that the sheep that is moving to a different flock will receive teaching in keeping with SBC doctrine.
Thanks for you answer--I am not planning to attack you 
However, there was a time when I requested a letter of transfer from a church and something signifying that I had been duly Baptized--not from or to an SB church, but it goes to my question.
The church refused, saying they "didn't do that." They claimed to have no records of Baptisms (although Himself asked the same of his old church, which was the exact same kind of church, and they graciously checked their records and typed up a letter with the Baptismal information.)
I was not hateful to the church that refused, and since I was "of age" when I was Baptised, I was able to recall the information and my own testimony was accepted, so there was no real problem.
But--I was left with a bad taste in my mouth about the whole deal. I asked nicely--I did not say I had found a "better" church, just that I was joining a new church and needed information from the church in which I had been Baptised. It would not have hurt them to write the letter--and even if that were an inconvenience, I offered to type up a letter for them to sign and bring it to them. Still they refused.
They knew full well I was not asking for another church of the same denomination, so I as left with the knowledge that they were just being intractable, uncharitable and trying to cause me as much grief as they could. All they really convinced me of was that my decision to leave them was the correct one.
So again, I ask--what is to be gained by refusing to send a letter of transfer or a similar letter if one is requested?
_____________________________
Fasten your seatbelts...it's going to be a bumpy night.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 5/28/2008 11:27:39 PM
|
|
|
lmwal931
Posts: 96
Joined: 4/16/2005
Status: offline
|
going to church don't save. some may use the churchlike a country club. you need to be born again. on fire for the LORD. devil stomping. foot washing. and the church needs to evangelize. you don't complain. you get to work. you are your brother's keeper. if it's too hot get out of the kitchen. a la harry s. truman. don't play
the numbers game. this is eternal life or damnation.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 5/29/2008 8:03:18 AM
|
|
|
P31W
Posts: 2442
Joined: 6/13/2005
Status: offline
|
Shew Youthrev! That would take me 4-ever to have responded. I have not asked yet but plan to later today. If the anwer is anything close to what you said and I believe it's dead on then I won't respond. LOL Man am I glad you responded.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 5/29/2008 7:51:23 PM
|
|
|
pruned
Posts: 1105
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Just wondering, are you now a member of eight SBC churches? Counted eight times?
I am a member of one SBC church. The letter followed me from church to church.
I was a member of an SBC church and one of another denomination simultaneously. I had moved across country, and there was no SBC church within driving distance. I joined a local nondenominational church by meeting their requirements for membership, while leaving my letter at my previous church. I knew I would be returning to that area within 3-4 years. When I left the nondenominational church, I asked my name to be removed from their roles. And once back "home", I began attending my church again.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 5/29/2008 7:53:41 PM
|
|
|
pruned
Posts: 1105
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: mushhead
quote:
Due to job relocations I've had the privilege of belonging to eight SBC congregations. Many of these churches have similar constitutions and by-laws, in that there is no legal mechanism to remove someone from their membership unless the individual initiates the request. The individual can ask for their name to be removed or transfer their membership to another congregation.
Constitution or by-laws? By-laws are much easier to change than a constitution, and all churches should regularly update their by-laws - especially concerning membership and voting privileges. Many newer congregations are distinguishing between active (voting privileged) members and inactive (non-voting privileged) members.
Constitution or by-laws? I don't recall, but I would guess it would be a combination of both / and for any of them. Currently, it's constitution.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 5/29/2008 7:56:36 PM
|
|
|
pruned
Posts: 1105
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: P31W
quote:
ORIGINAL: pruned
...
The problem I see that startles me the most, is that legally, if these non-resident and non-attender members chose to do so, they could legally relieve the active members of the church property and assets. All they would need to do is show up at a business meeting in greater numbers than the actives, present a motion to sell the property and divest the assets. It makes me shudder.
We do have a constitution review and revision committee working on this and other situations that need to be addressed.
A couple of things must fall into place for this to happen. First the members who don't attend must somehow be in contact with one another. The percentage must be higher than the resident members. Those inactive members must also all be able to attend the business meeting at the same time.
In my church to do what you say required an 85% vote. Not a fifty one percent vote. We also must have a 85% vote to hire a new pastor or song leader or youth leader.
Some SB churches have in their consitutions that people who have not attended a certain percentage of time over the past year or whatever lose their right to vote. In other words voting priviledges are "given up" by the people who are placed on the "inactive" list.
It's all in how the church decided to handle things. Each church has the legal right to make their own rules concerning this.
You said it all in the last bolded statement.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 5/29/2008 8:05:22 PM
|
|
|
pruned
Posts: 1105
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
Ps103
quote:
However, there was a time when I requested a letter of transfer from a church and something signifying that I had been duly Baptized--not from or to an SB church, but it goes to my question.
The church refused, saying they "didn't do that." They claimed to have no records of Baptisms (although Himself asked the same of his old church, which was the exact same kind of church, and they graciously checked their records and typed up a letter with the Baptismal information.)
So again, I ask--what is to be gained by refusing to send a letter of transfer or a similar letter if one is requested?
I didn't quote your entire text, but regarding Himself's request, your church's inability to comply with your request may have been due to poor record keeping.
If the pastor/staff did not know you, and there was no paper/electronic record that you were a member, I can understand their reluctance.
I think also with the transfer letter there is a tacit understanding if your local ax murderer or child molester has requested a transfer of letter, there is some onus on the part of the church currently holding said letter to inform the other church that this person is not in good standing w/ the former congregation. That being said, I realize that born again baptized believers are not supposed to be ax murderers or child molesters or the like, but you get the idea. It's a very rare occasion when comments of that kind can and should be made to the requesting church.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: ? regarding SBC membership - 6/6/2008 8:32:37 AM
|
|
|
KatMack
Posts: 964
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Along the Canopy Roads
Status: offline
|
Baptist Press had an interesting article on just this issue here. This is of particular interest to me because I work for a SBC member church and am in charge of membership. I haven't read the whole article yet. Plan to do so this afternoon.
Our previous leadership definitely played the numbers game. I would fill out the report with the accurate numbers and they would have me redo the reports expanding the criteria to make sure our numbers stayed up.
I'm blessed that our current leadership wants to give accurate numbers no matter what the little line graphs look like afterwards. I'm working now to purge and update our databases to accurately reflect what's going on in the life of our church. It's difficult because it's hard to make a bunch of numbers and database entries reflect spiritual growth.
--Kat
_____________________________
<-- My sweet blessings.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
