How This Church’s Bylaws Changes Caused Members to Sue in Court
Location: Houston, TX
Houston’s Second Baptist Church faces a controversial lawsuit after updating Bylaws to remove member voting rights to approve and select future pastors. The church is very large, hosting around 94,000 members that deeply honor the 88-year-old pastor. Before the senior pastor stepped down to allow his son to pastor the congregation, the church took measures to change the structure of member voting. However, the method in which the leadership did so is under attack.
The non-profit filing the lawsuit, Jeremiah Counsel, has outlined the errors of the bylaw updates within their website and the complaint filed in Harris County, TX. The complaint centers around the issues with the new lead pastor, Ed Young, and his nontraditional forms of pastoring and authoring of books. The lawsuit suggests his methods are controversial and may be difficult for some of the congregation to support. However, the method of electing the senior pastor has been the main subject of criticism. Without this, the lawsuit may not have the proper standing to proceed in court.
The weekly newsletter of the church had a post that there would be a meeting for Church Members to vote on amendments to the church Bylaws. The excerpt for notification of the meeting, was “buried” at the bottom of the church bulletin, was as follows:
“Also, on Wednesday night, May 31, [2023 at] 6 p.m. in the Woodway Campus Fellowship Hall, the church will have a called Church Business Meeting to update our Bylaws to protect our ability to continue to operate as a biblical church.”
The lawsuit included this excerpt as evidence of the “legally insufficient” notice of the bylaw change. Read it HERE, on page 13 of the brief. Additionally, the members felt the following bylaw update did not adequately notify the members of the radical change:
(OLD Bylaws) Section 2. Membership Rights and Privileges, Subsection 1. “Every member of the church is entitled to vote at all church business conferences, provided the member is present.”
(NEW Bylaws in totality not released, except this excerpt) “Every member of the church shall comply with all guidelines and regulations as set out in any church policies. . . . Plenary power to manage and govern the Church shall be vested as set forth in Article 5 of these Bylaws. As such, members are not entitled to vote in person, by proxy or otherwise.”
The meeting and notification was seen as “legally insufficient” for this strong change in church governance, which was evidenced by the small portion of the member population being present at the May 31, 2023 meeting. Out of the 94,000 members losing voting privileges for the future pastors, roughly 200 members were present. This was representative of only 0.22% of the church membership, due to the large size of the congregation. Due to the changes of the church leadership within the family of the senior pastor, many saw this measure as unsatisfactory for the well being of the congregation. This led to congregational distrust, the creation of the Jeremiah Counsel, and the pending litigation.
More information regarding the lawsuit can be found on the Jeremiah Counsel website, which is representing the church members in this litigation. https://www.jeremiahcounsel.org/
Although churches cannot always make every member happy and most are intimately aware of disagreements within the congregation, lawsuits like this are preventable to an extent. Notice of large changes to the bylaws is required in order to provide a forum to the dissenters. Churches of this size may require more care with such decisions considering the length and rights at stake have higher consequences.
Take into consideration the following in regard to the lawsuit mentioned above. Three of the areas of concern in this suit include: #1 the form of notice for the meeting, #2 the size of the congregation, and #3 the method of implementing bylaw changes.
First, making bylaw updates known by church announcements, as most churches have in the middle of services, may be considered more adequate notice of such pivotal change. Also consider repetitive notice, to give various members time to see this notice in case faithful attendees may miss a service or two.
Second, for meetings of great magnitude, consider the percentage of the congregation that is present, and accommodate for attendees. One example would be to include a morning or evening meeting around Sunday morning service where member turnout is more likely.
Finally, the drafting of the new bylaws was done by the new pastor poised to take over the congregation. This was seen in bad taste by the congregation, as his interest and financial gain were at stake in the decision, as indicated by the pending lawsuit. Having an independent counsel of board members and committees for church decisions, this rewriting the Bylaws was seen as “circumvent[ing]” the procedures the constituents were comfortable submitting to. Adhering to independent boards and committees is a necessary step to avoid this type of controversy.
The Bylaw changes at Houston Second Baptist were seen as implementing the desires of the pastoral family. Swift implementation led to controversy within the church members and volunteers that spread like wildfire. Changing the bylaws, although within the power of the board, was seen as changing the articles of incorporation, and led to member distrust. To avoid costly litigation and massive division of a congregation, prompt and timely notice of changes in membership rights can go a long way.
Impact:
Consult bylaws before enacting pastoral changes or implementing pivotal policies.
Adhere to policies in notification and implementation of church leadership to avoid controversy and remain impartial in decisionmaking.
Discuss large changes with the congregation before they happen and open new policies up to criticism as the Church is representation of the congregation.
If certain benefits, like voting, are to be limited, consider changes that allow the congregation to still be involved. Allow members to vote annually on the board of directors which would appoint pastors.