“We won’t grow until we get a parking lot,” I insisted.
No one on the board claimed that the present situation sufficed. Two hundred fifty people competed for curbside space. But soon the arguments began: “Exercise is good for them.” “Encourage them to car pool.”
“Listen,” I said with slight agitation, “if we can’t offer visitors a pleasant, quick entrance into the church, what’s to keep them coming?”
That’s when Bob Stanton spoke. “I remember back in ’41. We discussed this same question. Somehow we’ve managed to get by all these years. Now, I do agree with the Reverend, it would be nice to have more elbow room for the cars. But, where would we put such a lot? We’re surrounded by homes and businesses.”
“The furniture store across the street’s up for sale,” I hastened to announce.
“But they don’t have any parking space either,” Bob pointed out.
“We could sell the buildings and have them carried off.”
“What’s the asking price?” responded another elder.
“$400,000.”
That’s when Bob Stanton gasped and jumped to his feet. “An outrage! I could have purchased that whole block five years ago for $65,000. And how big is it? Couldn’t be over two and a half city lots. Why, that’s enough room for twenty-five cars, if we’re lucky. Figure it out. $15,000 per car!”
My head began to pound. “That’s not the point,” I continued. “Any way you slice it, we’ve got a major limitation problem. What are we doing about it?”
The clerk made a suggestion. “Give the problem to the operations committee to chew over. They can make a thorough investigation and . . .”
The body that Christ bought with his blood sometimes sees other kinds of red. Christians who should be recognized for their love of one another can too often be spotted by their splits.
This need not be. Local-church problems can be greatly minimized by a few simple ground rules. But they need to be spelled out before the contest begins, hashed out with pastoral candidates, presented as a crash course to each newly appointed governing leader, and included in new-member classes.
My elders and I have adopted these for our own code of conduct.
1. The relative attention given to any issue will be in direct proportion to its prominence in Scripture. We ask ourselves: How often does the Bible deal with this? Could we postpone this issue a month without harm to our total ministry? Minor problems need solutions, too, but not at the cost of major confrontations.
2. We will encourage church members to spend an hour’s time each month in prayer for the pastor and board members. A person who seeks the Lord on my behalf will find my listening ear when he or she wants to change my mind. This one wants God’s best for my life.
An hour per month can be rearranged into two-minute segments each day. Another good suggestion includes praying for the pastor and board at least as much time as one talks about them.
3. The members understand that having their say is more important than having their way.
I teach and preach that every opinion matters. Family members need the opportunity to express their views. That doesn’t mean we jump every time someone hollers. But we do listen. Then we watch for God’s wisdom and God’s timing.
The two most destructive times in a church fellowship are when (a) no one listens or (b) we listen to someone and act without careful evaluation.
4. We withhold financial support only when the Lord stops blessing. Some say, “But keeping my offering is my only form of protest!” But this also forfeits any platform from which to speak.
I advise my congregation, “If tempted to stop giving, take a two-by-three foot poster and color, in three-inch letters, ‘I, _________ have stopped giving money to my church because _________.’ Be honest.
“Then, imagine posting this sign where all your Christian friends could see it. Try to envision taking it to your job. If such a sign would hamper your ministry and witness, so would holding back funds.”
5. We will stay in the nitty-gritty of church life while serving on leadership boards. Once we’ve been elected, we try not to remove ourselves from the creative tension of ministry with people. This helps our decisions lean toward the practical rather than the speculative.
The one who dashes into the church office a half hour before Sunday school to run the old mimeograph votes with more understanding the next time office equipment is discussed.
6. A majority vote is a strong indication of God’s will for us at this time. If the board has been called by the Lord to serve, then logic presumes he will express his voice through each of the members. The minority may still be right, but the timing may be wrong.
I hold very high respect for opponents who freely express their view, then fully give themselves to carrying out my idea. They earn my undivided attention to their opinions next time. I ask myself: Do they have more facts than I do? Do they have more experience? Could it be that I’m right, but the timing’s wrong? Is there a scriptural reason why I can’t fully support this suggestion?
7. Never keep silent in a meeting on an issue that won’t be kept silent at home. Some of the best logic is saved for the wife and the walls. While it’s unrealistic to expect anyone to struggle through an important, fervent argument behind closed doors and never mention a word at home, the problem develops when opinions expressed clearly outside the meeting never get voiced within.
We attempt never to make notable verdicts on an idea the first time it’s introduced. That way, the members can jot down feedback as it comes over the next month. They can present their information to the major parties involved before the next meeting, too.
8. Every dissenting vote symbolizes a possible word of caution from the Lord. No sincere pastor wants a rubber-stamp committee. The objective should be well-reasoned, enthusiastic unanimity. But the road toward that goal produces more than a few gray hairs.
I assume the Lord’s caution can be delivered through improper grammar, trite phrases, wrong motives, and even misquoted Scripture at times. I try to solicit comments from those who haven’t vocalized any. I look for nonverbal signs, too. In order to encourage feedback from the hesitant, I’ll initiate drawbacks to my own ideas. This presents an easy in for expressing doubts. When a whole board welcomes alternate views as a strength rather than an irritating intrusion, hostilities are minimized.
9. People can still love/respect one another while rejecting individual ideas. I strive for personal relationships with all on my board. I try to affirm the commitment to a long-term relationship, with the highest good of the individual in mind.
If possible, I visit each member on the job to get a feel for daily struggles. Getting acquainted with the whole family, perhaps through a meal in my home, can go a long way in effective communication. Occasional social events with the entire board and spouses, where no business is discussed, have proved to be a healthy exercise.
10. Spiritual authority or knowledge will not be used as a club to force passage of an issue or program. The pastor, Bible teacher, or seminary student isn’t necessarily right all the time. Some of us allow the presumption to grow unchecked that to oppose us is to oppose God. A vote against a spiritual leader does not necessarily infer a lack of spiritual commitment or maturity.
Whatever happened to our parking problem? We ended up signing options on four older homes behind the church, so we could purchase the property a lot at a time. In the meantime, we established a fund to prepare for those events.
Many a church disaster has sprung from lesser issues than parking lots. How did we avoid hard feelings? By following our guidelines for good church board conduct.
-Stephen A. Bly
Fillmore (California) Bible Church
Copyright © 1983 by the author or Christianity Today/Leadership Journal. Click here for reprint information on Leadership Journal.
