ARTICLE V - MEMBERSHIP
Membership at Riverside Community Church shall be established by individuals and families through the active participation in the church’s membership class, coupled with an interview with two or more members of the Steering Committee.
this is okay, but it could use more fleshing out: would we like to list responsibilities or expectations of members here? What about voting? Should we connect that to membership? Is there a formal procedure or legal designation that might apply--for example, should there be any mention of a "roll" to which names might be added?
ReplyDeleteLastly, what about our policies regarding "transfers of letters"--should we stipulate that we do NOT want our members to hold dual-membership with another congregation? Or should we lay out the procedures for leaving our congregation via a LoI (letter of intent)? For example, letters transferring membership between bodies are written only at the personal request of the existing member and only upon confirmation of active attendance and participation in the church to which the member will be transferred?
I'm thinking specifically of the Keith situation: when he left, I remember we tried to make an extra effort to ensure he found somewhere else (and that we talked to them about him). Should this behavior or responsibility be legislated in the bylaws?
yes, i think decisions put to a churchwide vote should be for members.
ReplyDeleteand it'd be good to say something re: no dual membership just to encourage full participation in one local body.
an LoI seems like a good way to encourage potential members re: the commitment they'd be making to riverside. and as for a transfer letter, kenny's idea works for me (that it be at the request of the person wanting to transfer to another congregation)
I would like us to consider joining a small group as a prerequisite for church membership.
ReplyDeleteOh, and the wording needs to be changed from Steering Committee (obviously) if that is being disbanded. Then that leaves the question, "Do the two people need to be members of the LT? or the Church Council?
ReplyDeletei think it'd be good to consider the SG participation as a membership pre-req., but there are things that might make some unable to be in one, or attend one, consistently... ie., working nites..
ReplyDeleteAs our church grows, I expect that we may have some groups that meet at alternative times for just that reason. And until then I think we could still have SG membership as a pre req for church membership, but just leave room for the occasional exception like the ones you mentioned.
ReplyDeleteFor me, this seems a very important point if we are really wanting our church to be a church OF small groups rather than just a church WITH small groups. And if we are serious about having the small groups as the primary avenue for pastoral care and body life, etc.
I think Kenny's LoI idea and exclusivity of one church membership is good to add here.
ReplyDeleteMJ's pre-req for SG membership is also necessary I feel. Even if someone can't attend regularly, they still need to be under the umbrella of one of the SGs for pastoral issues, and also to make sure we have everyone "spoken for" in the sense that we don't leave anyone out of oversight and pastoring and plugging in.
Don't know if the voting should be here or it's own category???