Selecting Leaders in the Church: Nomination and Election

The Lead Team is the highest decision-making body at First United Methodist Church Cocoa Beach. It is composed of approximately eleven people that give oversight and direction to the administrative ministries of the church, including Trustees, Finance, and Staff-Parish Relations. There is also a Lay Leader on this team that represents the laity and serves as liaison for the various discipleship ministries of the church. The process for nominating and electing leaders is prayerful and deliberate.

NOMINATION

Leaders are prayerfully discerned and nominated by the Committee on Lay Leadership (CLL). This team itself is an elected group whose members are selected using the same process detailed below. Like members of the Lead Team, members of the CLL typically serve three-year terms. So how are potential leaders identified and nominated?

Members of the CLL meditate on the criteria detailed below and enter a season of personal prayer asking God, “Who approximates these criteria, and which of these people do you, Lord, want to serve on the Lead Team in this particular season at our church?” As names come to mind in prayer, they are written in a prayer journal and kept confidential. No one shares their “prayer promptings” with others on the team until we all gather for the next scheduled meeting. This season of prayer typically lasts one to three months. When we gather to discuss our results, everyone on the CLL brings their prayer journal and shares the names that God has placed on their hearts. As one person shares a name, the meeting facilitator writes it on the board and asks, “Did anyone else come up with this name?” Then tick-marks are placed next to that name representing the number of people who independently discerned that person. The higher the number, we assume, the more likely God is moving us to give that person serious consideration. We then enter into deeper conversations around the criteria detailed below, until the group reaches consensus of their top pick and one alternate.

The criteria for nominating potential leaders: Character, Culture, Chemistry, and Competency. (See Bill Hybels)

Character: Members of the Lead Team must demonstrate the highest moral character both inside and outside the church. They must also be vested stakeholders who demonstrate faithfulness to the church membership vows. Below are the criteria provided to the CLL for their season of prayer.

 Criteria for Nominating Leaders in the Church

Since the Lead Team is the highest decision-making body in the church, we are trying to discern leaders that are spiritually and emotionally mature, internally motivated, resourceful, joyful, and committed. As Jim Collins says in his book, Good to Great, the first (and most important) task is getting the right kind of person on the leadership bus. Nominations should be led by the Holy Spirit in persistent prayer and guided by our criteria. One the biggest mistakes churches make is to recruit someone to leadership in hopes of getting them more involved in the church. If you want someone to get more involved, help them connect to a small group.

       Potential leaders should approximate the following criteria:

Must have at least one year of consistent faithfulness to the following membership vows:

Prayers:  Consistent daily devotional life.

Presence: Regular attendance in worship and active participation in a group or class.

Gifts: Percentage giving to the church, and working toward the ideal of the 10% tithe.

Service: Serving as the hands and feet of Jesus through the Engage ministries of the church according to their spiritual gifts and passions.

Witness: When clear opportunities arise, they share what God has done for them and invite people to come to church.

Culture: Potential leaders must understand, embrace, and fully support the church’s mission, vision, disciple-making process, and core values. An important part of their job will be to keep these foundational principles before the church and ensure that Lead Team decisions are aligned with them. They must also possess the ability to make key decisions based on our mission, vision, values, and process and not be unduly influenced by personal preference or a personal agenda. Since decisions are made according to what is in the best interest of the whole church, potential leaders must have the maturity to champion the group decision to the congregation even when they personally disagree.

Chemistry: It is important to consider the make-up of the current Lead Team, so we can nominate new leaders that will get along well with others. Healthy teams have good chemistry. They like and trust each other and work cooperatively to make good decisions and get things done. We also look for good theological chemistry. Does the potential leader embrace the mainline theology of the United Methodist Church and the unique theological emphases that make us who we are?

Competency: We want to recruit potential leaders to serve in their “sweet spot” of ministry, at the intersection of their natural abilities and personality, spiritual gifts, and passions, so they can make a unique contribution in helping us accomplish our mission together.

Often, we have more than one person who meets the criteria for a single leadership opening. Then the question arises, “Of all the qualified candidates, which one is the best choice given the specific season we inhabit in the life of our church? Various considerations can help the CLL make this decision.

Once the CLL develops a slate of nominations, the nominees are individually contacted to see if they will prayerfully consider the nomination. After an initial conversation, they are provided with a job description and a follow-up date is agreed upon. They are contacted on the follow-up date and asked to communicate their decision, which is relayed to the rest of the team. If they agree, the CLL includes his or her name on the nominating form in the Charge or Church Conference paperwork. If they decline, the CLL begins the recruiting process with the alternate. If the alternate declines, the team starts the discernment process over again.

 ELECTION

The Charge Conference is constituted by the Lead Team and an outside Presiding Elder, all of whom have voice and vote. Other church members can attend a Charge Conference and have voice, but only elected members can vote. A Church Conference includes all members in good standing and an outside Presiding Elder, all of whom have voice and vote. Churches are expected to have at least one Charge or Church Conference per year for important church business. Part of the agenda is electing new members of the Lead Team and CLL. The slate of nominated leaders developed by the CLL is printed and distributed to all in attendance. The conference is opened for discussion and then a vote is taken. Once elected, members cannot be removed without cause unless they resign.

If you have questions about this discerning, nominating, and electing process, please contact the Pastor or a member of the Committee on Lay Leadership.

(The same criteria is used when selecting staff)

Advertisements

Fundamentalism and Mainline Christianity

I’ve recently been telling different groups of people that the United Methodist Church is a mainline, not fundamentalist, denomination (although some of our pastors prove to be unfortunate exceptions). I assumed that people knew what I meant, but they didn’t understand the terms I was using. I tried to remedy this problem in an email to a friend, and my wife suggested that others might be interested in my response. What is written below is the beginning of a sketch outlining some main ideas. I know it is limited, but I’m also hoping that it will be helpful.

Fundamentalism is grounded in a specific view of scripture. Adherents typically embrace (usually unwittingly) a theory of divine inspiration developed by a Presbyterian Princeton professor named Charles Hodge in the 1800s. The technical name of the theory is Plenary Verbal Inspiration, and it basically teaches that every word of the Bible is historically, scientifically, and factually infallible or inerrant. In the imaginations of some, it’s as if God dictated the Bible and human beings served merely as passive secretaries. This view erases the humanity of the biblical authors and focuses almost exclusively on God giving us a perfect and divine book. Furthermore, according to fundamentalists, a strict literal reading is the only correct way to interpret the Bible (and some would say that they are not even interpreting but simply reciting the Word of God). In this way, the Bible is pitted against modern science and historiography, and being a “real” Christian means rejecting what science teaches about cosmology, evolutionary biology, archaeology, etc.

The final step is to say, “Our way of understanding inspiration and how to interpret the Bible is the truth, and, therefore, the only legitimate way of thinking.” Do you see the subtle shift? They slip from biblical infallibility into assuming that their theory about infallibility is infallible! Furthermore, these truths are to be protected at all costs from any competing theories or interpretations, which are invariably seen as corruptions or heresies. People who hold different views (and there are many) are to be corrected, converted, or excluded. Fear of false teaching leads fundamentalists to study apologetics from other fundamentalists so they can mount what they believe to be incontrovertible arguments, and the only proper response to these arguments is, “I have seen the light and you are right!” Any push back leads to more forceful arguments, sometimes buttressed by the threat of eternal hell, in a last attempt at conversion. If the person with a different view does not convert, then they are excluded from the community of true Christians (if not physically then theologically and/or socially). So the key elements are:

1. We have the only true understanding of the inspiration of scripture and the only proper way of interpreting the Bible. All other views are necessarily wrong.

2. If you don’t agree then you must be corrected with arguments, converted with threats of hell, or excluded as a corruptor of the true faith.

In stark contrast, mainline Christians believe that God inspired human beings to record the words of scripture, but didn’t erase or bypass their humanity in the process. God worked in, through, and with their humanity to communicate what is necessary for our salvation. This means that the divine message of the Bible is communicated through the human words of the authors, and these words emerged from their own personal and corporate experiences of God. In short, God does not need a perfect, inerrant, infallible book to effectively communicate with us.

Mainline Christians often point out that the Bible is not the Word of God—Jesus is the Word of God (John 1), and the reason the Bible is important is because through its words (in the power of the Holy Spirit) we encounter the risen Christ. Given the ways that fundamentalists erase the humanity of the Bible, some mainline and liberal Christians accuse fundamentalists of “bibliolatry” (turning the Bible into an idol).

Once you acknowledge the humanity of the biblical authors and the Bible itself, you can also see that it is not a single author book. It is a library of books written by many people, living in different cultures, who spoke different languages, and wrote in different genres over the course of 100s of years. Instead of insisting that every letter of every word of the Bible is literal and factual (in terms of history and science), we can begin to discern different genres, and different genres warrant different interpretive methods. So we read the historical parts differently than the poetic parts (e.g. the Psalms), and we read the poetic parts differently than the gospels, and we read gospels differently than letters, and we read letters differently than apocalyptic, etc. In all of this, we realize that the Bible is a religious text, not a modern historiography or science book. A fortunate consequence is that Christianity does not have to be an enemy of the natural and social sciences, but can engage them as conversation partners from whom we have much to learn.

Finally, another significant difference between fundamentalists and mainline Christians is that mainline Christians uphold intellectual humility as a virtue. We insist that we are not saved by our interpretation of scripture or by having the right theory of inspiration. We are saved because God loves us and offers the gift of reconciliation through forgiveness. This means that we are not required to have all the answers, that we can hold our theories and interpretations loosely, acknowledging that we could be wrong. At the end of the day, God is greater than anyone can conceive and we are all rendered speechless before the divine mystery. Part of faith is learning to be comfortable with the fact that we don’t have all the answers, which allows us to trust God and relax into God’s mysterious and active presence.

Consequently, we don’t feel compelled to proselytize and convert people. Only God converts people, and this usually happens over a long period of time. All that Christians are called to do is live like Jesus and share their stories, allowing people to draw their own conclusions as the Spirit leads. All of this happens in the awareness that creation is floating in a sea of grace and that God is working with us on God’s own timeline.

For an accessible introduction to a United Methodist view of scripture, see Adam Hamilton’s book, Making Sense of the Bible. For a more academic read, see the articles on my website under the heading, “Course in Understanding the Bible.”

Salvation in the Wesleyan Tradition: Grace Upon Grace

What does it mean to be saved? According to John Wesley, salvation cannot be reduced to an isolated decision to make Jesus your personal savior so you can go to heaven when you die. Rather, it points to a process of real transformation in which God graciously empowers us to participate. This not only includes what God does for us in Jesus, but also what God does in us through the Holy Spirit. It not only includes pardon from sin but also resurrection power to be renewed in the image of Christ and made a new creation. In this teaching video, Pastor Mark explains prevenient grace, justifying grace, sanctifying grace, and glorifying grace to paint a more holistic picture of salvation in the Wesleyan tradition. This video was filmed as Pastor Mark taught Theological Heritage I (Fall 2015) in the Course of Study at Candler School of Theology (Emory University).
_______________________________________________