Should A Pastor, Ministry Leader, Or Non-Profit Leader Also Be The Chairman Of The Board Of Directors Of The Organization?

I voted yes ...but ...there are some cases I think yes and some cases no. When God gives a person a vision to start a work or a church, then yes, they should head the board.

But in a elder-led church, or a work that has continued past the founder, a board should choose the leader. It may or may not be the pastor. In any case there needs to be accountability to protect everyone and the good name of the Church.

In principle I say no. Without checks and balances within an organization, through the separation of powers there can be abuse or the appearance of abuse.

Of course, that can happen in either scenario. The structure is not so much the issue in the end than the integrity of the people holding the positions.

Generally, no ... for the same reason that savvy contributors are hesitant to make significant donations to any organization's endowment fund (for example) that is not held in trust by a reputable and accountable third party fiduciary, such as an area foundation or bank trust department. Sadly, there are too many cases where seemingly trustworthy preachers/directors/chairmen, with free-wheeling check-signing authority, vanish in the night with all the funds -- a contributor's nightmare!

Phil, you forgot to include the "Yes and No" option. I voted Yes because to me the scale is tipped against accountability in favor of dedicated vision.

Would Joel or Joyce be making the impact they are today with a board telling them what to do. "Joel, you need to change your message because some other Christian leaders are not happy." "Joyce, were a television ministry so why are we spending so much on missions?"

Bill Hybels at Willowcreek called their attempt at growing larger as an Elder led church "The Great Train Wreck." Bill Easum points out that most (not all but a great majority) large churches are Pastor led.

Are there major failures? Yes. But too many cooks in the kitchen . . .

The article in the Conde Nast on JO shows a perfect reason why. I can't think of the word that is used for that. One other word that comes to mind is Monopoly.

God, please make us accountable to others!

Few things should be scarier to a Christian than having no one to hold us in check from time to time.

Those people who dodge accountability, they're the ones who need it most.

The personalities that lead ministries are usually remarkable. Sometimes the self-confidence and strong will that sustains them through the hard work of building a ministry borders on narcissism. Better for them, better for everyone, if someone is present to prevent them from hurting themselves and others.

We all need other people for something. There's no shame in this.

I voted "no" Allowing the ministry leader serve as chairman of the Board defeats the purpose and principle behind the nonprofit sector and their tax-exempt status. Being a nonprofit is a privilege in this country, a privilege gained with the responsibility of fiduciary accountability towards donors, the organization and the government. It is not a right.

When the independent Board and the ministry leader are working together, the results are powerful. If the Board and the ministry leader are in conflict, then perhaps the ministry would be better served as a for-profit entity. Ministries where the ministry leader is the chairman are playing loosely with the nonprofit concept, and not in line with Paul's command to submit to government authorities and their laws.