Calling all Southern Baptists! What's up with Trustees?

[ALAYMAN]

I have seen trustees in non-SBC churches, and they are generally tasked with taking care of maintenance activities and such, but it seems that trustees (and deacons) are viewed as some sort of counter-balance or a check-and-balance system to offset an autocratic or tyrannical one-man rule.  I have little understanding of the inner-workings of SBC churches, so a little educational request for you. 

What role do trustees play?  Are deacons generally looked at as having authority, rather than servants of the pastor and church?

 

[ChuckBob]

I have seen trustees in non-SBC churches, and they are generally tasked with taking care of maintenance activities and such, but it seems that trustees (and deacons) are viewed as some sort of counter-balance or a check-and-balance system to offset an autocratic or tyrannical one-man rule.  I have little understanding of the inner-workings of SBC churches, so a little educational request for you. 

What role do trustees play?  Are deacons generally looked at as having authority, rather than servants of the pastor and church?

If an SBC church has trustees (ours doesn't) they are responsible for the church's finances. Many times they will be personally liable if the church defaults on a loan or doesn't pay other bills. As to the authority of deacons it varies from church to church but most of the time they are considered servants of the church. They will meet once a month and vote to give their assent to  to particular matters. These votes are symbolic only and actual approval is achieved by a vote of the the church at the quarterly business meeting which occurs on a Wed. night. There are usually a number of committees  consisting of members and at least one deacon that oversee missions, personnel, house and grounds, bennevolence, finance, etc. The chairmen of  these various committees, as well as any member of the church, may bring a motion to the floor for discussion and vote. Understand that these proceedures may vary slsomewhat from church to church. There are no directives from the SBC as to how churches must be governed. Of course we've all heard stories about the deacon's hot tub and humidor located in the upper portion of the steeple.

ChuckBob

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

I have seen trustees in non-SBC churches, and they are generally tasked with taking care of maintenance activities and such, but it seems that trustees (and deacons) are viewed as some sort of counter-balance or a check-and-balance system to offset an autocratic or tyrannical one-man rule.  I have little understanding of the inner-workings of SBC churches, so a little educational request for you. 

What role do trustees play?  Are deacons generally looked at as having authority, rather than servants of the pastor and church?

Many IFB churches also have trustees....it is a legal technicality in some states....the trustees hold the church property 'in trust'. In such cases, the Trustees usually operate as a building committee, responsible for the physical church plant or buildings and grounds.

Now, most churches I'm familiar with are incorporated, thus eliminating the need for trustees.
Our church has never had them, we do have a building committee.....responsible for maintained e and upkeep.

Deacons in SBC churches are like deacons in IFB churches, their responsibilities and roles vary from church to church...in my experience, at least.

 

[ALAYMAN]

If an SBC church has trustees (ours doesn't) they are responsible for the church's finances. Many times they will be personally liable if the church defaults on a loan or doesn't pay other bills. As to the authority of deacons it varies from church to church but most of the time they are considered servants of the church. They will meet once a month and vote to give their assent to  to particular matters. These votes are symbolic only and actual approval is achieved by a vote of the the church at the quarterly business meeting which occurs on a Wed. night. There are usually a number of committees  consisting of members and at least one deacon that oversee missions, personnel, house and grounds, bennevolence, finance, etc. The chairmen of  these various committees, as well as any member of the church, may bring a motion to the floor for discussion and vote. Understand that these proceedures may vary slsomewhat from church to church. There are no directives from the SBC as to how churches must be governed. Of course we've all heard stories about the deacon's hot tub and humidor located in the upper portion of the steeple.

ChuckBob

and

Many IFB churches also have trustees....it is a legal technicality in some states....the trustees hold the church property 'in trust'. In such cases, the Trustees usually operate as a building committee, responsible for the physical church plant or buildings and grounds.

Now, most churches I'm familiar with are incorporated, thus eliminating the need for trustees.
Our church has never had them, we do have a building committee.....responsible for maintained e and upkeep.

Deacons in SBC churches are like deacons in IFB churches, their responsibilities and roles vary from church to church...in my experience, at least.

Thanks fellas.

In the matter of these areas of oversight, like building and grounds (which always involves decisions, preferences, and budgets $$$$) do they generally have unilateral ability to make decisions on matters, or is their authority to act in these matters in any way tethered to the pastor's vision (and even subject to veto)?

In addition, I understand there's a lot of similarity between many IFB and SBC governance issues, and that deacons often fulfill similar roles as their IFB counterpart, but I've heard in some SBC churches that the deacons wield great authority (as do trustees  in some cases), even to the point of withstanding any "meddlin" by the preacher in "their" area of operation/administration/governance.  Have you heard of or seen this?

 

[T-Bone]

As a SBC pastor for over 30 years I believe I can answer your question simply...

Trustees are the legal signers and representatives for the local church.  They sign deeds and any legal document under the direction and decisions of the church.  They don't act unilaterally.

Our deacons are what the Scripture say they are servants.  They serve the needs of the body and assist the pastor in ministering to the people.  They have no power over the body or the pastor...other than what the body assigns them and approves.

 

[ChuckBob]

If an SBC church has trustees (ours doesn't) they are responsible for the church's finances. Many times they will be personally liable if the church defaults on a loan or doesn't pay other bills. As to the authority of deacons it varies from church to church but most of the time they are considered servants of the church. They will meet once a month and vote to give their assent to  to particular matters. These votes are symbolic only and actual approval is achieved by a vote of the the church at the quarterly business meeting which occurs on a Wed. night. There are usually a number of committees  consisting of members and at least one deacon that oversee missions, personnel, house and grounds, bennevolence, finance, etc. The chairmen of  these various committees, as well as any member of the church, may bring a motion to the floor for discussion and vote. Understand that these proceedures may vary slsomewhat from church to church. There are no directives from the SBC as to how churches must be governed. Of course we've all heard stories about the deacon's hot tub and humidor located in the upper portion of the steeple.

ChuckBob

and

Many IFB churches also have trustees....it is a legal technicality in some states....the trustees hold the church property 'in trust'. In such cases, the Trustees usually operate as a building committee, responsible for the physical church plant or buildings and grounds.

Now, most churches I'm familiar with are incorporated, thus eliminating the need for trustees.
Our church has never had them, we do have a building committee.....responsible for maintained e and upkeep.

Deacons in SBC churches are like deacons in IFB churches, their responsibilities and roles vary from church to church...in my experience, at least.

Thanks fellas.

In the matter of these areas of oversight, like building and grounds (which always involves decisions, preferences, and budgets $$$$) do they generally have unilateral ability to make decisions on matters, or is their authority to act in these matters in any way tethered to the pastor's vision (and even subject to veto)?

In addition, I understand there's a lot of similarity between many IFB and SBC governance issues, and that deacons often fulfill similar roles as their IFB counterpart, but I've heard in some SBC churches that the deacons wield great authority (as do trustees  in some cases), even to the point of withstanding any "meddlin" by the preacher in "their" area of operation/administration/governance.  Have you heard of or seen this?

Ouir church is very large so building and grounds issues are contracted out. In my old SBC church there was a house& grounds committee that oversaw building and grounds issues. At least half of the members werer required to be involved in the building trades. They had a budget and an account at ACE and Nervous Charlie's Shell. They could buy nails screwdirvers, toilet floats, gas, etc. without a vote by the church. If the building needed painting or a new mower was needed a vote of the church was needed for that type of expenditure.

I can only speak for the SBC churches where I have gone. In them things were very transparent and the finances were an open book, including salaries, allowances and operating expenses.  Most money issues had to be brought before the congregation for a vote. The deacons functioned as servants meeting the needs of the church, the widows and orphans. I've heard horror stories of how a few deacons (and usually their wives) have run churches with an iron fist. I'm sure it happens.


ChuckBob

 

[JrChurch]

Excerpts from our State Code:

 

[JrChurch]

And the state tends to get picky about trustees:

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

If an SBC church has trustees (ours doesn't) they are responsible for the church's finances. Many times they will be personally liable if the church defaults on a loan or doesn't pay other bills. As to the authority of deacons it varies from church to church but most of the time they are considered servants of the church. They will meet once a month and vote to give their assent to  to particular matters. These votes are symbolic only and actual approval is achieved by a vote of the the church at the quarterly business meeting which occurs on a Wed. night. There are usually a number of committees  consisting of members and at least one deacon that oversee missions, personnel, house and grounds, bennevolence, finance, etc. The chairmen of  these various committees, as well as any member of the church, may bring a motion to the floor for discussion and vote. Understand that these proceedures may vary slsomewhat from church to church. There are no directives from the SBC as to how churches must be governed. Of course we've all heard stories about the deacon's hot tub and humidor located in the upper portion of the steeple.

ChuckBob

and

Many IFB churches also have trustees....it is a legal technicality in some states....the trustees hold the church property 'in trust'. In such cases, the Trustees usually operate as a building committee, responsible for the physical church plant or buildings and grounds.

Now, most churches I'm familiar with are incorporated, thus eliminating the need for trustees.
Our church has never had them, we do have a building committee.....responsible for maintained e and upkeep.

Deacons in SBC churches are like deacons in IFB churches, their responsibilities and roles vary from church to church...in my experience, at least.

Thanks fellas.

In the matter of these areas of oversight, like building and grounds (which always involves decisions, preferences, and budgets $$$$) do they generally have unilateral ability to make decisions on matters, or is their authority to act in these matters in any way tethered to the pastor's vision (and even subject to veto)?

In addition, I understand there's a lot of similarity between many IFB and SBC governance issues, and that deacons often fulfill similar roles as their IFB counterpart, but I've heard in some SBC churches that the deacons wield great authority (as do trustees  in some cases), even to the point of withstanding any "meddlin" by the preacher in "their" area of operation/administration/governance.  Have you heard of or seen this?

Our building  committee has a budget, but it is usually handled by our maintainence dept. a staff of three who keep the buildings and grounds in shape. Most of their budget is pretty cut and dry...if its broken, fix it. A major project would have to go thru certain channels, but they basically are in charge of upkeep.

As to Deacons....that varies in SBC as well as IFB circles. The most controlling Deacons I ever worked with were in an IFB church in the 70s. Down here, there are many small SBC churches controlled by Deacons...thats mainly why they stay small.
Our Deacons serve the congregation. They staff the Welcome Center on Sundays and oversee our Missions Program to name a couple of their responsibilities.

 

[ALAYMAN]

Thanks again for the responses.

I understand that there are some legal issues with why people elect trustees, and I've got no more issues with that rationale than I do of the pragmatic reason we ought to employ proper lighting and exit signs to keep up with local regulatory requirements for building codes.  What I am probing is something different than the legal and pragmatic reasons for such practices. 

How/why do churches justify the compartmentalization of such things in such a manner to exclude pastoral oversight of those activities?

The only answer that makes any sense to me is political posturing and power struggling. 

 

[ChuckBob]

How/why do churches justify the compartmentalization of such things in such a manner to exclude pastoral oversight of those activities?

The only answer that makes any sense to me is political posturing and power struggling.

Why does the pastor need oversight of such activities? He's got a job to do. That ain't it.


ChuckBob

 

[ALAYMAN]

Why does the pastor need oversight of such activities? He's got a job to do. That ain't it.

You don't think it is right for a pastor have oversight of any church functionality except preaching and spiritual matters?

 

[rsc2a]

Why does the pastor need oversight of such activities? He's got a job to do. That ain't it.

You don't think it is right for a pastor have oversight of any church functionality except preaching and spiritual matters?

Is it right for a board of elders to have oversight of any church functionality? Sure. Is it necessary? No.

If someone is truly a pastor (as opposed to just having a title), they have a gift...pastoring. They may be gifted in administrative tasks too, but again, not necessarily.

 

[ChuckBob]

Why does the pastor need oversight of such activities? He's got a job to do. That ain't it.

You don't think it is right for a pastor have oversight of any church functionality except preaching and spiritual matters?

You have a church of any size and the pastor hasn't got time to have his finger in everything nor is it an efficient way to manage. His main job is study, preaching and visiting the sick and shut ins.  It's just not the highest and best use of his time to be decing on whether to buy a John Deere or a Club Cadet.

ChuckBob

 

[ALAYMAN]

You have a church of any size and the pastor hasn't got time to have his finger in everything nor is it an efficient way to manage. His main job is study, preaching and visiting the sick and shut ins.  It's just not the highest and best use of his time to be decing on whether to buy a John Deere or a Club Cadet.

ChuckBob

I'm with you that micromanagement is often a death blow to proper exercise of the administration of the church.

Having agreed in general principle, that's a different beast than the attitude of those folk to declare "butt out, it ain't none of your business", wouldn't ya say?  After all, it's just as easy to have a dictatorial ("family ran", for instance) trustee/deacon board as it is a mannagawd pastor.  And such unilateral unchecked adminstration in either circle is not healthy, right?

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Why does the pastor need oversight of such activities? He's got a job to do. That ain't it.

You don't think it is right for a pastor have oversight of any church functionality except preaching and spiritual matters?

Is it right for a board of elders to have oversight of any church functionality? Sure. Is it necessary? No.

If someone is truly a pastor (as opposed to just having a title), they have a gift...pastoring. They may be gifted in administrative tasks too, but again, not necessarily.

I agree.
I do not have the gift of administration and appreciate those who do and am happy to let them do it....whatever it is!

I've found that the older I get, the less I want to be responsible for....

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Why does the pastor need oversight of such activities? He's got a job to do. That ain't it.

You don't think it is right for a pastor have oversight of any church functionality except preaching and spiritual matters?

I think the Pastor certainly has oversight over aspects of the ministry other than so called spiritual matters.
In the early days of our church, I found that if I didn't instigate and do it...the it didn't get done.
I have come to appreciate those who do the more mundane tasks that need to be done and let them do it.

But, I know that in the church body, not every surface issue is the issue.

 

[ALAYMAN]

...But, I know that in the church body, not every surface issue is the issue.

Persactly.


If a man has been called of God by the body of people and subsequently has shown wisdom in prudence in leadership, it only seems natural to show deference to his leadership and oversight of the church.  In my estimation, though he may not have expertise in carpentry, or backhoe operation, all areas of the church are some sort of ministry, and as such, he has the right temperature/pulse for the calling.  I've known lots of people who were good at crafts and trades, and utilizing them in the ministry of the church is wise, but all too often they mistake their profession for some sort of de facto right to spend church money without any regard to any spiritual wisdom for the expenses.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=ALAYMAN]If a man has been called of God by the body of people and subsequently has shown wisdom in prudence in leadership....

....some sort of de facto right to spend church money...[/quote]

No one person should have a de facto right to spend church money without some type of oversight.


[quote author=ALAYMAN]...without any regard to any spiritual wisdom for the expenses.[/quote]

And sometimes you just need to call a plumber, no wisdom necessary.

 

[ALAYMAN]

No one person should have a de facto right to spend church money without some type of oversight.

I agree,  but sometimes in small churches the people who finance things like to act unilaterally, sometimes via trustee positions and using "the constitution" for leverage.

And sometimes you just need to call a plumber, no wisdom necessary.

Right, but that's a bit reductionistic for the considerations of the OP.  Think in terms of building projects and more expansive business decisions for grounds and improvement.