Grandfathering Members

[Tom Coronite]

I am looking for advice to quell some concerns of members.

We have formed a bylaws revision committee. The current bylaws have language along the lines of "the church shall consist of those persons that are currently members. Persons may become members by..."

That first quoted sentence goes back many decades and many bylaws versions. The notion is that if we approve a new version of the bylaws the current members will somehow drop out if that phrase isn't in there. There is nothing of the sort in the sample bylaws in RONR, and I don't believe it's needed as current members became members in the past by the methods that have been and will continue to be described in the bylaws (confession or reaffirmation of faith, letter of transfer).

Would it be appropriate (at the meeting when we adopt the new bylaws) to move that all current members continue to be members? or can anyone point me to references showing their fears are unfounded?

[Kim Goldsworthy]

My answer: "Fears are unfounded."

You don't ex-communicate members automatically upon adoption of a bylaws revision. That's not how bylaws revisions work.

 

[Tom Coronite]

I hear you. The actual language is "The church shall consist of such persons as whom are: now members, and of such persons as shall make application..."

[Gary Novosielski]

Well, it should be who, not whom, and the colon is inexplicable.  Otherwise, the language is unnecessary but harmless.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

9 hours ago, 1stChurch said:

The actual language is

"The church shall consist of such persons as whom are: now members, and of such persons as shall make application..."

It is plain to me that this language was inserted at the very beginning of the church, so as to include

(a.) the existing members who were there prior to the bylaws being drafted/approved, i.e., "grand-fathered-in"; plus

(b.) any new members (who would be joining using the bylaws' method of joining).

So, I recommend that you strike out that sentence as archaic.