meetings

I think it works much better if the pastor/moderator of the meeting asks for a motion and second instead of making the motion himself.

 

No, as moderator, he cannot make a motion, but can say he will "entertain a motion"

 

Tim is right.

I would think that you might want to rework your constitution and bylaws very soon.

If they're still talking kerfloots, my bet is that the rest of them are pretty old and need some updating.

 

Some I've seen have a moderator that is not the pastor per the constitution.

 

I've seen that too.

 

I was always at churches where the Deacon Chair was the moderator. The church I am in now has the pastor as mod.

I like this better because it forces me to work thru people to get things done. They can present any motions necessary and we have already talked thru the issues involved.

Like Maxwell says, "the meeting before the meeting is most often the most important meeting"

 

I am not the moderator of our Business Meetings. I do serve as moderator in the absence of our moderator. By not being the moderator, I am able as a church member to speak for or against a motion - the moderator does not have that ability.

Only once has there been a problem at a business meeting in the 4 1/2 years I've been pastor, and that was a personal attack from another member on me and my family. We're in the process of dealing with that now. (I must admit that it does make it a little difficult to minister to all of the church family equally.)

 

You would have to discuss this with your congregation. Some congregations want to limit their pastor, others don't. I was in a church a few years ago where the pastor had no vote in any committee/meeting/get together even though he was a member :tonofbricks:

It was in their constitution that way. That group were very controlling.

 

No you as the moderator can not make a motion or second a motion.
You can say "I will entertain a motion to......"

"The meeting before the meeting is the most important meeting".

When I served as the president of a state level teacher organization I had to set the agenda for the meeting.

Here is what I did:
1.Write up the agenda / order of business.
2. Talk to a few trusted teachers and advisors (church members/deacons etc)
3. Write out my oppinion of how each agenda item should be handled. This was written in the agenda under the item in question.
I found in most cases the items were handled in the way that was stated in the agenda.
Not all, but most.

It worked for me, your results may differ.

BTW The pastor of my church which is fairly large (The church not the pastor) appoints a moderator so that he will not be "in the line of fire"



Saulnier

 

Steve,
Tread softly when changing by laws and constitutions in the midst of difficulties. It almost always leads to over-reaction.

Money almost always causes churches to lose perspective. Praying for you.

 

I am pastor of a small church also, although I suspect that our definition of small here in the UK might be different. Kerfoot or Roberts? Pastor as moderator or another overseer? Erm....pardon the suggestion:love2: but why are you getting tangled up in making your church meetings bureaucratic and legalistic in referring to rule books? It's simple, as I see it. The pastor is to chair the meeting and has the right as pastor to present as much as he (or sheraying: ) wishes. The church meeting is the sovereign body of the church and can so choose to agree or not and often does. Any wise pastor would be able to sense the meeting and membership and frame a proposal in such a way as to ensure that a wise decision is taken. I suspect you might need to go back and let the church give some thought under God as to what a church meeting is actually for before you redraft the constitution. You never know, it might free the church up a little:thumbs:

 

I think with Robert's rules, you have to have someone else moderate if you present something.

 

Re: meeting

The way we do things in the Old Regular Baptists is, the Moderator can only vote if there is a tie. He can only speak on a business matter, if someone else fills in as moderator while he speaks. If moderator "X" wants to speak on work needing done to the church, usually assistant moderator "Y", will have to fill the moderator position. Then, and only then, can "X" speak. After he finishes what he says, "X" then takes over as moderator. The moderator in the ORBs, is the same as "pastor". They are one-and-the-same. They also have a second-assistant moderator..well most do, but not all. I hope this hasn't "muddied" the waters.

 

I am not in favor of running church meetings strictly by Robert's Rules. I do act as moderator and it would be irresponsible for me not to take a position on matters. I think too many churches are tied up in trying to run things and leadership actually gets abdicated.

We have a fall back to Robert's Rules, but we are not strict about it, and in our next revision, I will try to lead us to have it removed. Most church meetings should run by common sense. When someone is not acting in order and with grace, call them out and deal with the spiritual issues. Too many let Robert's Rules become an excuse for not dealing with sin issues as sin issues.

 

The way I moderate is I certainly give my opinion on the subject at hand. I believe I am not only to moderate, but give council also, on all matters coming before the church. The church can take my advice or one of the others who speaks on the matter. If It goes a different way than I think it should go, I have not problem with that either, as long as it is not going to harm the church. I may then try and persuade them to follow my advice. So far, its worked just fine.

Also, this post make me the 10,000 mark.

BBob,