Church voting

[Anon]

Which do you believe in? This includes any church business such as membership, baptism, deacons, budgets, discipline, etc.

[5dumplings@home]

Everything is show of hands in our church. When voting on deacons, they all go out of the auditorium.

[Psalms18_28]

Ay and Nay and we raise our hands... That how it was done when we were deciding if our church should closed it's door or not. I felt it would have been better if it was done in a secret ballot. Then no one would look behind them and see if they should join the "bandwagon", feeling that their personal feelings would not matter anyway.

[Anon]

Our church used to be secret ballot before we came and now we mostly do raise of hands. However a few people are upset because, I guess some people want to vote "no" and are too embarrassed to do that in public. That's the only explanation I can figure out.

My husband said if it was a deacon election (which we don't have yet, don't have anyone to be a deacon) or something like that it would be secret ballot but he doesn't see the need to have it for more basic church things like agreeing to take a missionary on for support or raising money for a project.

[kevinmiller]

I believe in secret ballot, though I've never been in a church that used it. In my opinion, saying "amen" or raising your hand basically is a confirmation of whatever the pastor wants to do. There isn't really any honest congregation input. It has been proven scientifically that those who believe something different, even if it's right, will prefer to go along with everyone else than to say something different and have everyone know it.

[Anon]

I believe in secret ballot' date=' though I've never been in a church that used it. In my opinion, saying "amen" or raising your hand basically is a confirmation of whatever the pastor wants to do. There isn't really any honest congregation input. It has been proven scientifically that those who believe something different, even if it's right, will prefer to go along with everyone else than to say something different and have everyone know it.[/quote']

How can you have unity in a church if there are people who always want to disagree? Not that its wrong...but secret ballot opens the door for people to say "No I don't like that missionary...no I don't want to give the pastor a raise... no I don't think we should start a bus route...." etc. I'm not saying its wrong to do...but I don't think raise of hands is a bad idea either in a church that is unified and trying to follow God. If God leads the pastor to do something and the congregation feels the man is led of God, nothing wrong with agreeing.

BTW I voted that we do both...raise of hands for general stuff, secret ballot for sensitive stuff.

I guess our church has a long history of people causing strife and disagreeing and distrusting their pastor, so there are some ways of doing things that we do specifically to reverse this long history of "people vs. pastor". We want the church to do things because its right, not because some logically don't like change and some do.

[HappyChristian]

I voted to raise hands generally and secret ballot for things like voting for deacons, etc. In fact, we just voted last night on deacons - secret ballot.

I believe in secret ballot, though I've never been in a church that used it. In my opinion, saying "amen" or raising your hand basically is a confirmation of whatever the pastor wants to do. There isn't really any honest congregation input. It has been proven scientifically that those who believe something different, even if it's right, will prefer to go along with everyone else than to say something different and have everyone know it.

Kevin, in many cases raising the hand may just be a confirmation of what the pastor wants, but not in out church. Everything that we vote on has been discussed thoroughly by the deacons and they present the motion to vote on it. Someone seconds, and we vote aye or nay. There is always time for questions, and believe me there have been times there have been lots of questions! I have heard about the scientific tests that prove people will go along regardless (I think our present mess in this country is good proof of that!) but I know for a fact that if something were presented in our church that my hubby and I disagreed with strongly enough, we would vote against. And I know a good majority of the people in our church would do that as well. I think many times it depends on how the pastor teaches the people. Does he teach them to be mindless or does he teach them to be in the Word and discerning...if they are mindless, they are simply rubber stamps. Otherwise, they will raise their voices when needed.

[zealyouthguy]

I am not stating either way which I believe yet... I will do that in a different post...

But do you prefer to just get the vote that you prefer and deal with the undertones of disagreement and non-participation after you get the desired outcome, or are you actually looking for what the people are voting for?

If it's just to mimic autonomy, why do it?

If enough people vote against a missionary, or whatever, wouldn't there be more wisdom for the pastor to say(if he feels thusly): I feel God wants us to support so and so... let's declare a fast and prayer on "X" day and we will vote again on this issue.

It IS possible for the pastor to be wrong and the congregation to be right on occasion...

at least according to a few godly pastors I've spoken to.

[zealyouthguy]

In general my answer to the question is that "it depends".

We don't vote on issues like: What color is the bulletin going to be. The church would be paralyzed to do much if everything came down to being run by popular decision.

Some things are deemed to be important enough to warrant congregational decisions.

Selecting out deacons, calling a pastor, major purchases (each church would deem what is major to them and should set forth that amount constitutionally). I've seen people almost split a church over a copy machine before. It was handled poorly by everyone around.

I believe reading Acts and seeing the apostles vote in a replacement that it was a secret ballot... but it was between only two choices.

The scripture had been clear that SOMEONE had needed to take the 12th spot.

And that, seems to me, is where we go awry. We need to make sure it something with scriptural backing before we make it a voting issue.

Example: (in a modern church)
What is the purpose of the church: To equip the saints to fulfill the great commission, for edification of the saints, and to be salt and light. (my short answer)
Does the church need "x" to equip fulfill it's purpose: (maybe yes or no, maybe some debate, let's assume a yes answer)
How much money/time/effort does this need demand of us?:
Has God provided said money/time/effort?: (assume a yes)
Here are a few options to do it: (vote on the options)

as far as secret or public, there are good things about both and bad things about both... I think it all depends on the pastor/leadership as to how either one are handled and processed.

If the pastor is just having public votes because he wants to ramrod something through, I would challenge THAT pastor to reaccess the issue and pray about it more and if he feels called of God to do it, tell the people that, and ask them to pray about it more.

Every hill isn't worth dying on, and sometimes God uses the congregation to tell us "no" or "wait".

[Guest Guest]

I believe reading Acts and seeing the apostles vote in a replacement that it was a secret ballot... but it was between only two choices.The scripture had been clear that SOMEONE had needed to take the 12th spot.

If I may briefly go of topic on this thread I would like to ask a question that I have no definite opinion on. Is it indeed clear that that the apostles were supposed to pick a "replacement" for Judas? If they were that would give at least a degree of support to those that claim that there should still be apostles today. I wonder though if perhaps they might not have been supposed to do that. From the context it rather looks as if they decided they needed a replacement, picked two men, and asked God to let the lot fall on the one he wanted. It is interesting to note that this happend before pentecost athough they had been instructed to "wait" for the Holy Ghost to come. So at this point it would appear that they were not indwelt by the Holy Spirit. If they were indeed supposed to pick a "replacement" why does Revelation say this:

"Revelation 21:14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb."

It only mentions twelve, but we know Paul was an apostle handpicked by Christ as all the other apostles but the "replacement" were. Who is it leaving out? :loco

[Psalms18_28]

If they really want people to vote, then there will be disagreement. Otherwise asking people to vote and still expect no disagreement is pointless, and they should not be asking for a vote in the first place. Just make your decision, and move on. Of course, After you make your decision, you can always ask, "Is everyone comfortable with this" and they can shake their head in an agreement.

[JerryNumbers]

By hand on all important decisions.

Rightly the only thing I call on to vote on by amen is our nightly reading of our minutes from last Sunday's service on Sunday night.

I have never seen a church use secret ballots and on this board is the first time I ever head of secret ballots use in a church.

Why would they? Are they ashamed of how they vote? Fear of someone holding a grudge for not voting for them?

I might add. That all churches that I have been a part of, the pastor is the moderator. Years gone by down here in the south a pastor was called one year at a time. On election morning, when we were taking care of that portion, the pastor would hand it over to a deacon and he and family would step out of the church until that part was taken care of. I don't know of any Baptist Church around these parts that does that anymore.

Recently I asked for a vote of confidence to be held on a Sunday night. I did not attend service that evening.

[Chelle]

If they really want people to vote, then there will be disagreement. Otherwise asking people to vote and still expect no disagreement is pointless, and they should not be asking for a vote in the first place.

:amen:

[Anon]

Jerry you guys vote on something every Sunday?

[JerryNumbers]

Ever Sunday night we do, but usually its just to approve the minutes from the previous Sundays service.

We do not have regular business meeting. I know most churches do. At the end of each service I always ask if anyone has any comments or anything that needs to be discussed.

If anything is brought up, we will take care of it right them, and or let every one know what it is where they can think about it and set a time to make a decision on the matter.

On the 1st Sunday night of the month, our treasure give us the treasury report.

Seems this keeps things simple and things get take care of as they come up. Plus it has never caused any problems.

I must say, 99 % of every thing we vote on, everyone stands on the same side.