Bylaws Q&A
Here you'll find the answers to all the questions related to the bylaws that were submitted before August 3.
It is a lot of text. Please know that the Transitional Leadership Team did not publish these because they expect anyone to read every word. Instead, the purpose of sharing all questions and all answers is simply for the sake of transparency.
You'll also notice that the formatting and language for some of the answers look different. This is because the answers were written by various members of the Transitional Leadership Team.
For further questions, please reach out to Ina, our church administrator, at admin@rccdenver.org.
Questions about Article I: Doctrinal Statement
Question 1: Bylaws. Article 10. Consummation. Add--"believers escorted to heaven, but lost will be assigned to hell. (Consummation is biblical but soft on judgment).
Transitional Leadership Team response: The doctrinal focus of article 10 is the second coming of Jesus, where he will come to make all things new. Among the many things Jesus will do at this time, RCC does acknowledge that he will judge all of the living and the dead. We believe that these beliefs are adequately captured in article 5 and in the Apostles’ Creed.
Update to the Bylaws: The opening paragraph to the doctrine statement, Article 1, was rewritten, expressing affirmation of the Apostles’ Creed. Additionally, but unrelated to this particular question, the language of Article 5 was edited to make it gender neutral.
Question 2: Article 1, #9, description of church. Anyone, VIPs, those that have decided to attend our church, be it out of curiosity, or to give church a try, or the wayward trying to come back, attends regularly, participates in group activities, helps with church needs, but have not publicly stated their faith in Christ, are they regarded as Members of our true church? Throwing out an idea. When we announce congregational meetings, instead of spelling out that "real members" are those that have taken the class and such, maybe we have "ordained members" for those having completed requirements, and everyone else attending fairly regularly are members of RCC. Or whatever way we describe members that have completed requirements.
RCC strives to be a welcoming place where we welcome everyone who walks through our doors—whether they are exploring faith, returning after time away, or actively involved in the life of the church. For the purpose of deciding on church matters, however, it is important to draw a clear line between official members and non members. According to our current bylaws, official membership in the church is reserved for those who have publicly professed their faith in Christ and taken the membership class. We encourage all RCC attendees to get involved in our church but only those who have met these criteria are considered members for the purposes of congregational meetings and decision-making. Designating different types of membership may be worth exploring in the future as we continue to consider all of the different people God brings to our church, their varying needs, and how we might best serve them as a body of Christ. For now, though, our bylaws and voting rights remain applicable only to official members.
Questions about Article II: Membership
Question 3: Article II: what happens if someone agrees with almost everything? For example, what if someone has the "infallible but not inerrant" view of Scripture?
RCC, being a non-denominational church, has formulated its faith statement to be generally agreeable to most Christian traditions. The church also recognizes that on some finer points of Christian doctrine there may be disagreement among the members. In these cases, the church allows members to disagree, as long as the disagreement does not compromise, or hinder, the member’s commitment to RCC and its ministries.
Question 4: Article II: (Eligibility: “baptism in a Christian Church”) What counts as a "Christian" church? Does paedobaptism without confirmation count?
Baptism in a Christian church is a term that is explained in the new members class, we explain it in this way:
RCC recognizes any baptism that is given in the name of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. This basically covers most generally recognized churches, and also includes baptism in the Roman Catholic Church as well as the Eastern Orthodox Church. Infant baptism is also included. In the case that a new member was baptized as an infant but was never confirmed, RCC asks that they pursue confirmation as part of their process of becoming a member.
Question 5: Article II (removal): I'd suggest adding by consent at the request of the RCC Council. This helps to clear the rolls when there is a known departure.
Added the following bullet to Article II: “At any time with member consent at the request of the RCC Council.“
Question 6: Article 2, Termination from Membership: "RCC Council may revoke membership due to matters related to unrepentant sin and violation of the membership covenant" - what are examples of unrepentant sin?
It is the church’s ongoing responsibility to its members to gently correct and guide its members away from all that the Bible clearly defines as sin. It is assumed that this will ongoingly be happening through the various ministries of the church. Removal from membership due to unrepentant sin is a serious matter that is understood to be the following: Pursuit of that which the Bible clearly identifies as sin that persists through all reasonable efforts to correct and guide.
Bylaws Edit
The line in article 3 (formerly article 2), which this question is referring to was edited to include a reference to Matthew 18, which describes the spirit in which removal from a church should be handled.
Question 7: Who is currently on the RCC Council? - also a suggestion that RCC Council might be want to be defined earlier b/c it is mentioned in Article 2 before it is defined in Article 3.
The TLT agreed with this suggestion and reordered the sections accordingly.
Bylaws Edit
Articles 2 and 3 were swapped.
Question 8: Congregational voting. What percentage of abstains/blanks will be allowed in order for the vote to be valid? In a 2/3's vote, if 90 are present, 30 abstain, then of the remaining 60, only 40 yes' are needed to pass the vote, correct?
The RCC TLT has decided to count abstaining votes in the denominator alongside “no” votes. This encourages proposals to be passed only with the strong, affirmative consensus of the congregation.
Here’s an example of how abstaining votes are counted:
-
90 voting members present
-
30 abstaining votes
-
60 votes cast (either “yes” or “no”)
Since abstaining votes are counted in the denominator, we need at least 60 “yes” votes to pass the proposal.
We’ve updated voting guidelines in the bylaws in Congregation Meetings > Voting.
Question 9: Have we in the past only required a quorum of 25%? It seems so low to me, but I cannot recall if that is what we have done in the past.
Why is the quorum for congregational meetings set at only 25% when higher participation seems more appropriate for building consensus?
The RCC Transitional Leadership Team believes that engagement, participation, and consensus among our church body are foundational for fostering church unity. As such, we understand the desire for a higher quorum to reflect broader participation. As stated in the July 13, 2025 congregational meeting, the current threshold of 25% was set based on experienced guidance and common practice in similar congregational contexts. It positions RCC to move important decisions forward without being hindered by inconsistent attendance, especially in seasons when engagement may fluctuate. The 25% quorum also takes into account the continued membership growth we anticipate for our church, helping to maintain a manageable and realistic threshold as our numbers increase.
As noted in our prior discussions, raising the quorum to a higher percentage like 40% or 50% could risk stalling important church business due to the difficulty of meeting the minimum required percentage. While interest is currently strong, there is no guarantee that this will always be the case. Indeed, if we assume we had a steady number of members for our last three congregational meetings, the number of members in attendance has gradually decreased from 70 (61%) in November of 2024, 57 in March of 2025 (50%) to 48 in July of 2025 (42%).
The TLT has wrestled with the quorum percentage question from when we started writing the RCC bylaws and did so even more after congregation feedback. After discussing a proposal to raise quorum to 40%, the TLT conducted a vote and a majority voted to keep quorum at the 25% as it would allow RCC to conduct church governance responsibly and efficiently while encouraging ongoing engagement from the wider body.
Question 10: If the congregation fails to reach quorum for (X) number of times, should the council have the right to progress and vote on behalf of the congregation with 2/3's approval?
There are currently no provisions in the bylaws that allow the RCC council to make decisions on behalf of the congregation when quorum is consistently unmet. Major decisions, especially those that impact the direction and governance of the church require the active voice and participation of the congregation as a whole. Allowing the council to make decisions on behalf of the congregation without quorum risks weakening church unity, eroding accountability of church leadership and setting bad precedents where the voice of the congregation is diminished. This is also the main reason our quorum requirement was set at 25%, to make it easier to gather enough participation to move forward while still ensuring the voice of the congregation is heard.
Question 11: Should the congregation also have veto rights on subjects that are voted on and what may that look like? Should they need (X) number of signatures from the council and congregation in order to proceed in bringing the subject matter up?
There is no mechanism where the congregation may veto a decision made by Council. The reason for this is that we believe the spirit of the congregation-Council relationship is one of invested authority. By voting for members of Council, the congregation is saying that we believe God has set this person apart to lead the church, and so we will trust and follow to the best of our ability. However, if there is disagreement with a decision made by council, we believe that council has a responsibility to listen with a spirit of humility.
Question 12 What if a member is unable to make the congregational meeting? Do votes count only if you are physically present?
Our current bylaws do not allow absentee voting, as we have not yet identified a reliable and secure method for conducting anonymous voting online. Requiring physical presence helps ensure the process remains fair, transparent, and accountable. Our bylaws also do not allow voting by proxy (one person casting votes for someone else) for the same reason. We are open to revisiting this policy in the future if we’re able to find a trustworthy system for anonymous remote voting, but for now, in-person voting is the best way to keep our decision-making fair and straightforward.
Question 13: When you say ballot, does that mean that we will from now on always be taking a paper ballot instead of raised hands? Can we make the votes electronic? rather than counting papers and hands-- the most efficient and anonymous way to vote would be through the phone or app. There's many out there that is super fast and efficient
The TLT has chosen to use paper ballots for congregational voting because they offer a simple and trustworthy way to ensure clarity, accountability and integrity in our decision-making. While raised-hand voting might seem quicker, it can be unclear who is a voting member–especially with non-members often present–and can also make some feel pressured or uncomfortable. And while electronic voting might feel modern and efficient, the platforms that maintain secure, anonymous and verifiable voting often come with significant costs or complexity. For our size and needs, paper ballots strike the best balance of professionalism, transparency and accessibility.
Question 14: Article II: I might include "joining a denomination" or "moving the location of the church" as requiring congregational votes. You can move the location of the church without having to sign a lease of real property as when, for example, you rent week-to-week from a school.
Added to the Congregation Meetings section under Article III
Question 15: Article 2, Congregation Meetings: in addition to approving the budget, I'd like to know what actuals were spent on. It would be helpful to have an aggregate budget vs. actuals (BvA) to know where the needs were and where we should be giving (for understanding where the budget should go in the future and encourage the church to tithe more).
It is the intention of the RCC Council to share detailed budget-to-actuals for the Congregation Meetings on an annual basis that will be included in the annual report. In this specific Article of the bylaws, it is addressing what decisions require a congregational vote. The budget (including the other items listed) will be up for approval by the congregation but not the actual financials. The financials will be included in an annual report.
Question 16: As we have steps of how a member may be removed, should we also have similar bylaws for the removal of an individual/entire council?
The TLT fully agrees that leaders and members are all together in the same boat as redeemed sinners. It is certainly possible for leaders to fail in many different ways. At the same time, we need to keep in mind that the bible calls us to be very careful when dealing with a situation of disciplinary action against a leader (1 Timothy 5:19). This is not to say that can’t happen, but that it must be handled sensitively and carefully. TLT is recommending that specific grievances against one or more members of council be handled through Pastor Andrew. And, specific grievances against Pastor Andrew be handled through the current RCC Elder.
The TLT also realizes that it may be necessary to codify guidelines for how to officially remove a Council member from office. We were in agreement on this matter in that we believed a congregational vote would be necessary to remove a Council member from office, as it was a congregational vote that put them in. As to the specific procedure on how to do this, the TLT chose to respectfully defer this question to the first official Council to detail a policy.
Bylaws Change
Items were added to Article 4, both elders and deacons, stating that they may be removed from office by a ⅔ congregation vote.
Questions about Article III: Leadership
Question 17: Article III: If ⅔ of the council = quorum and only a majority of votes cast, then potentially, if there are 9 council members, 6 present at a meeting, then at the minimum, only 4 council member votes can make something pass. This feels low.
The TLT agrees with the sentiment and wants to make sure a larger portion of the RCC Council agrees with the passing votes. We plan to increase both the RCC Council quorum to ¾ and a super majority (¾) of RCC Council votes will determine issues.
Question 18: Article III: For special council meetings, it would be great to have some language about how notice (for example, email 2 weeks in advance) is required to protect against secret meetings and secret votes.
The TLT agreed with this suggestion and edited the bylaws accordingly.
Bylaws change: A line was added to Article 2 stating that Council members must be given 7 days notice for a special meeting
Question 19: Article III: “A majority of the votes cast shall determine any issue, unless an RCC Council member explicitly requests a higher vote requirement.” Without any guardrails around this provision to request a higher vote requirement, I feel like this can be problematic.
This question touches on a number of other quorum related questions for Council. TLT decided to change the quorum requirement for Council to be ¾ of members. We also increased the required percentage of votes required to decide a matter in Council to be ¾. The clause that allows council members to request a higher percentage was removed in favor of standardizing and simplifying the voting process.
Bylaws change: Article 3 was amended, we changed the required votes to decide a matter in Council to be ¾. We also removed the clause allowing Council members to request a higher vote percentage to decide a matter.
Question 20: Article III: I would remove the provision indicating that the maximum number [of RCC Council members] could be adjusted with the Council's approval. This seems like something that ought to be an amendment to the bylaws.
After some consideration, we felt that the clearer way forward is to explicitly define the minimum number required to comprise a valid Council, which would be 3 (lead pastor, 1 elder, 1 deacon). As to the maximum number of Council members, we clarified that the size of council is determined by the number of actively serving elders and deacons. Each elder and deacon must be voted on by the church, so it would functionally accomplish the same thing as requiring an amendment to change the max number allowed on council.
Bylaws update: Article 2 was amended to define the minimum number for council is 3, Lead pastor, 1 elder, 1 deacon. Also clarified that the number of people serving on council is determined by the number of active elders and deacons.
Question 21: Article III: I would either make non-lead pastors special status or go through nomination like everyone else rather than making this discretionary. One thing I've seen is for non-lead pastors to be non-voting council members. Or perhaps just one of them, like an associate pastor.
TLT agrees that, on occasion, a non-leading pastor or an individual not on the RCC Council may be invited to participate in council meetings (ex: administrator, pastors/directors). In such cases, they would not hold voting privileges. TLT has decided to update the bylaws accordingly to reflect this.
Bylaw changes:
-
Under RCC council 1st paragraph add: “Others may be invited to attend Council meetings and participate in discussions. While their insights and counsel are welcome, voting privileges are reserved solely for the Lead Pastor and elected council members.”
-
Removing bullet point: “Additional pastors serving at RCC may be appointed to the RCC Council, subject to the Council’s approval”
Question 22: Article III (voting): letting a Council member explicitly request a higher vote requirement has the potential to send you into a death spiral of decision-making. For example, if the decision is about submitting a vote of dissolution to the congregation, one council member who is recalcitrant could stall the vote by insisting on unanimity.
This question was addressed above. In short, the ability to request a higher vote percentage was removed.
Question 23: Article III (voting): what happens if there's a tie?
A tie would not be a significant concern in a Council vote if the required votes to decide an issue is ¾, which the bylaws were changed to reflect.
Question 24: Article III (voting): can quorum exist without the senior pastor?
Yes, quorum for a members meeting is determined solely by the percentage of voting members present, as defined in Article III. The presence of the senior pastor is not required to establish quorum. If the senior pastor is absent, the RCC council may appoint an elder or deacon to preside over the meeting.
Question 25: RCC council: "Recommend council to have a minimum of 3 elders/and or deacons." (Otherwise the pastor and 2 elders or 2 deacons could make all the decisions for the church).
TLT felt that it would be good to explicitly define what constitutes the minimum for a valid Council. We defined it as 3 people, lead pastor, 1 elder, 1 deacon.
Question 26: Article 3, Leadership: how were the terms for deacons and elders decided? Is 3 or 4 years too long?
After research into other churches and denominational practices, the TLT believes that 3 or 4 year terms would be appropriate. The goal is to have a long enough time to establish, serve, and grow specific areas of the church while also preventing elder and deacon burnout. The requirement for renomination will also help the congregation affirm each Council member for each term.
Questions about Article IV: Church Officials
Question 27: Are there no sabbatical guidelines for pastors? No required sabbatical or limit on the maximum time a pastor would take a sabbatical? Does a pastor continue to receive their partial or full salary when on sabbatical?
There is a sabbatical policy for pastors, but it is not part of the bylaws. In short, it is currently 3 months of fully paid rest, after 6 years served. It should be noted that over the course of RCC’s history, there has not been a pastor that stayed long enough to receive a sabbatical other than Pastor Andrew.
On a related note, we also determined that the required 1 year break after serving their term, for elders and deacons, could be misunderstood to be a sabbatical. The difference between a sabbatical and a break is that when taking a sabbatical, there is a clear expectation that the person will return to service immediately after the break is over. There is no such requirement for elders and deacons. In order to further clarify, we decided to remove the 1 year mandatory break for elders and deacons. We felt that requiring this would be unnecessarily restrictive, as a person can simply decline to be renominated if they want to take a break, and, a person who is doing a great job and desires to continue to serve would be forced to stop.
Bylaws update: Article 4 was edited, we removed the mandatory 1 year break from elders and deacons after they serve their terms.
Question 28: Article IV (senior pastor): I prefer the term lead pastor over senior - the latter term evokes hierarchy, which is why Korean churches still stick with it, but it's generally falling out of favor.
Based on this suggestion and discussions by the TLT, we agreed to update the title from “Senior Pastor” to “Lead Pastor.”
Bylaws Update: Updated the bylaws to replace “senior” to “lead” pastor.
Question 29: Meaning of Pastor, bullet 3, and Duties of Pastor, bullet 5. I disagree that the Pastor should be the sole person to "govern" the church, and possess the power to "dismiss" paid church staff. I believe church governance and dismissal of members should be performed at least in consultation with elders. It should not be a singular person. Perhaps it needs to be reworded that the Pastor alone cannot make immediate and exact decisions solely on their own regarding dismissing or disciplining members, or church governing rules.
After careful consideration, TLT agreed to remove “hire, mentor, and dismiss paid church staff” from the list of duties of a lead pastor. Instead, it’s been replaced with “mentor all paid church staff.”
Bylaws Update: duties of pastor - updated the bylaws to remove “hire” and “dismissal." Removed hire and dismissal and replaced with “Mentor all paid church staff.”
Question 30: Article IV (duties): I do not think the senior pastor should be in charge of hiring, mentoring, and dismissing church staff. Korean churches tend to be too pastor-centric as it is, and this leads to an even more senior pastor-centric model and one that could fall apart once the senior pastor leaves. A more council-centric approach may be better for long-term sustainability. In addition, the "hiring and dismissing associate pastors" section conflicts with the hiring being part of the senior pastor responsibilities.
After careful consideration, TLT agreed to remove “hire, mentor, and dismiss paid church staff” from the list of duties of a lead pastor. Instead, it’s been replaced with “mentor all paid church staff.”
Bylaws Update: same update as above
Question 31: Article IV: how do you form the search committee? Who forms it? What is the composition of it? Can the departing senior pastor be part of it? (I'd recommend no on the last question.)
TLT determined that it would be good to add some language to the bylaws providing basic guidelines for how the lead pastor search committee should be formed.
Added a few lines to Article 4, giving basic guidelines for how to form the lead pastor search committee. The council nominates the members of the committee, it must be made up of a mixture of council and non-council. The committee is voted on, as a whole, by the congregation.
Question 32: For the nominations of Deacons and Elders, if a person happens to be a member for 1 year, he/she is able to be a Deacon meaning they are of 19 years old. Then proceeding after, he/she must take a 1 year sabbatical and then be eligible to be an Elder which would make that person 23 years old. Though I am unfamiliar with the biblical backing and cannot say a 23 year old may not be wise enough, this is more of a gut reaction, I am not sure if I have seen or know of Elders being 23 years old. Typically, Elders in the word itself implies older and though it is debatable on what “older” means. I would ask, does it feel right to have a 23 year old Elder and if not, should we restrict the age on that role, also as to not give false hope that this is possible?
Thank you for your thoughtful question.
While Scripture does not specify a minimum age for eldership, a 23-year-old could, in theory, meet the biblical qualifications. However, this would be quite rare. At Redeemer Community Church (RCC), the core criteria for eldership are spiritual maturity, sound doctrine, and demonstrated leadership within the life of the congregation.
Regardless of age, any potential elder must undergo a thorough evaluation by the RCC Council. If affirmed, the candidate would then be presented to the congregation for final approval through a congregational vote.
Question 33: Article IV (elders): does a previously ordained elder have to be ordained again if he comes back into office?
We clarified in the bylaws that previously ordained elders and deacons do not need to be re-ordained, but they do need to be renominated and voted on to serve again in office.
Bylaws update: Article 4 was amended, adding lines that state the above.
Question 34: It also seems that initial selection of the Council ought to be according to the bylaws, but it's been told to me that this exists in a separate, non-bylaw document. That might be another reason not to have the nominations come through the Council.
The TLT has put together a set of guidelines that we are planning on following in order to find and elect the members of the first official council of RCC. We have published the guidelines (here). Future Councils are encouraged to adopt a similar policy when electing future elders and deacons. We decided that the specific process to follow in electing elders and deacons could potentially change as the needs and situation of the church changes, so we felt this would be better to be publicized as a general policy rather than codified in the bylaws.
Question 35: There is no mention of HC shepherds in this document however there has been a lot of talk about having shepherds lead our church. Please clarify how shepherds will fit in with the elders and deacon model.
We’re recognizing that there has been some talk about having HC shepherds leading the church. We’d like to clarify here that Shepherds will lead their respective house churches in all the ways in which we are used to seeing them lead. When it comes to the church as a whole, this leadership role will be held by the RCC council. The TLT is fully expecting that future councils will regularly solicit the feedback of Shepherds as an important part of their leadership process.
Question 36: Deacon eligibility. I have stated this in the past. One year is very short. Anyone who can be part of governance that makes decisions for the church should really have been attending RCC for two years, regularly, without large gaps. Even when it's stated one year, should something be said about gaps of considerable time.
While we understand the concern over a one-year membership being too short, the TLT team felt there are many young servants who have joined RCC in the past few years who have demonstrated commitment, passion, and maturity to be a deacon. Therefore, we decided to keep it at 1 year. On a side note, we reworded the eligibility to state “Must have been an RCC member for at least one year with consistent attendance.” We also updated the eligibility for the elder to state “Must have been an RCC member for at least three consecutive years.”
Question 37: Can a deacon only be a deacon if they are serving as a committee lead, and/or sit in the RCC Council? Can one be nominated and ordained as a deacon without leading a committee? Especially with Article VI, if a mature person can lead a committee, can then a Deacon be a Deacon without leading a committee?
A person cannot serve as deacon without leading a committee. The way we are envisioning the office of deacon is that they lead the church in acts of service. Committees represent major areas of service in our ministry. Currently we have identified, Worship, House Church, Education, Missions, Finance. The clause in article VI which states that a mature non-deacon may lead a committee should be understood as a fall back plan, not the norm. Ordinarily, committees should be led by deacons, a non-deacon may lead a committee only in the case where one cannot be found.
Question 38: Will deacons be chosen based off of what committees are already formed? Or should committees not have any sort of bearing on who should be appointed as deacons? Mix of both?
As much as possible, we would like the number of deacons to be the same as the number of committees, as committees represent major areas of ministry, and Deacons are understood as leading our church in acts of service. Please see the above question for additional background.
Question 39: Article 4, Church Officials: I wonder if there is something missing about prayer. Is that a given/understood that our church officials will be praying for our church and the congregation?
We believe all church members should be praying for the church and the congregation. As such, we expect it is a given that church officials will be praying for the church and congregation.
Question 40: Article 4, Church Officials: Hiring for RCC Senior Pastor, who selects who is in the Search Committee? Is this the RCC Council?
This is answered in a previous question. (Question 31)
Question 41: Article 4, Elder/Deacon: "Good reputation among RCC members" this seems subjective and almost based on likability/popularity. What is this point really trying to address/get to the bottom of?
At a basic level, this requirement comes from 1 Timothy 3:7. Rather than understanding this to be about popularity, we take this to mean that a candidate for elder and deacon has demonstrated a history of relational excellence. They seek to do their best to love all church members, not leaving interpersonal conflicts unresolved.
Questions about Article V: Officers
Question 42: Article V: can the senior pastor be one of the officers? Or is the senior pastor one of the officers ex officio? The worst case scenario under the current bylaws are that the senior pastor appoints himself chair, and the vice-chair, secretary, and financial officer are all hand-picked staff members who were hired by the senior pastor, which defeats transparency.
This question and the next question are answered here. Additional details have been added to the descriptions of these officers. The Bylaws have also been updated accordingly. The Chair and Vice-Chair and Secretary will be selected by Council from among its active elders and deacons to serve for 1 year. The Financial officer role will ordinarily be held by the Deacon over finance committee, if this is not possible then the financial officer may also be selected from among the active elders and deacons.
Question 43: Officers, particularly Secretary and Financial Officer. Will they be help by a single person? I'd recommend either other chair persons being able flex different positions, or have 2 or three in the officer role.
See above.
Questions about Article VI: Committees
Question 44: Article VI: I don't think that this article is necessary, and having it will tend to handicap the future flexibility of the church. Having it in the bylaws means that committees must exist, but the reality of the situation is that they may or may not depending on future ministry needs.
Is Article VI regarding church committees really essential to RCC’s bylaws.
Response:
No it is not. This whole article has been removed in the latest version of the bylaws and the idea of council members serving in the different offices of RCC are outlined in the following policy document: Process for electing new elders and deacons
Questions about Article VII: Amendments
Question 45: For amendments, it is mentioned that the council may make proposals but how can the congregation also have the ability to propose amendments as well?
Great question! We’ve clarified how the congregation can make amendment proposals in Article 6: Amendments section of the bylaws. Key changes are how congregation members can submit proposals to the RCC Council and when proposals will be voted upon.
Bylaw changes: made edits to bylaws 4.0 in Article 6: Amendments
Questions about Article VIII: Dissolution
No questions about Article VIII.
What was Article VIII in the previous draft of the bylaws is now Article VII in the bylaw update.
Miscellaneous questions
Question 46: Administrative Notes:
• Article 1, Section 6: Should the "h" in His be capitalized to remain consistent with the rest of the bylaws?
• Article 2, Termination from Membership: should this instead be "Termination of Membership" I don't think the correct preposition is being used.
Thank you for catching these mistakes. We’ve updated them in the Bylaws document.
Question 47: It is also referenced in the bylaws, the membership covenant, can we provide a link to the membership covenant too?
Here is the link to the membership covenant.
Question 48: Can we see the minutes from the TLT’s meetings so we as a congregation can view what decisions have been made and what may have prompted those decisions? I believe that will help the congregation in terms of transparency but also keep them informed with what’s to come.
The TLT are committed to being more transparent and communicating more frequently moving forward, and we feel that publishing the notes from our leaders meetings is a great step towards doing this. We will be working with our RCC admin to publish these for our future leaders meetings.
Question 49: Other than congregation meetings, would having office hours be possible? It’s tough to have large conversations and it’s also difficult for the congregation to see and understand the progress of what the TLT team is doing. There may also be contextual conversations that could be had for members so they can further understand decisions and reasons instead of the feeling of waiting for an outcome instead of walking with the TLT team during this important moment for the church.
The TLT has been doing its best to be as transparent as possible with the work we have been doing. We are also recognizing that there may be conversations that need to be had on a smaller scale to address issues and concerns. To that end Pastor Andrew is readily available to meet with people when needed, and the other TLT members are available to talk when needed. If more is needed, the TLT is also willing to consider other options.
Question 50: Policies and procedures below general bylaws. Will there be a vote for them, to approve? If not, will it be used as a reference if there differences in direction, opinions, actions, to show and persuade disagree'ers what is set at RCC?
Policies at RCC are created and carried out by council members elected by the congregation. Policies themselves are not voted on by the congregation and they must always align with both the letter and the spirit of the RCC bylaws which hold higher authority. While the policies created by elected council members are meant to guide the church’s operations, we recognize they may sometimes cause disagreement. Our hope is that such differences can be addressed among believers in a mature, Christ-like way. If enough members disagree with a certain policy, the congregation can wait for the regular nomination periods (every four years for elders and every three years for deacons) to nominate and elect new council members that may update or change the policies in question.
Question 51: The bylaws make no mention of maintaining a symbiotic relationship and support of KM. Please make sure to include it in the bylaws to ensure subsequent leaders and generations honor it, and that it is never forgotten.
As part of our consulting season with Pastor Steve Chang, it was recommended to us to pursue a common agreement about the nature of RCC and KCC’s relationship. He recommended a formal document that is signed by both the leadership of RCC and KCC. Furthermore, he also recommended this route over putting it in the bylaws because of the fact that such language in our bylaws does not carry much weight without parallel language added to KCC’s bylaws.
Question 52: I am not sure if the by laws are where this needs to be laid out but are we going to continue requiring backgrounds checks and have disqualifiers for volunteering in certain capacities? Some other boards i've sat on have by-laws that disqualify people from holding a position of power (especially I er children) for certain flags of a background check.
All individuals serving in education are required to undergo background checks and adhere to mandatory reporting protocols. Currently, the Education Committee Chair is responsible for conducting background checks on all volunteers. Teachers are required to complete an application form that includes consent for a background check. Those who do not provide consent are not eligible to serve. At the start of each school year, during our annual training, all teachers receive an Education Manual. This manual outlines the background check process, specifies offenses that would disqualify someone from serving, and details the procedures for mandatory reporting.