HOUSTON – A lawsuit filed against Second Baptist Church claims the Houston congregation unlawfully altered its governing documents, effectively stripping members of their voting rights on key matters such as budgets and the selection of a senior pastor. This legal action has raised questions about the church’s decision-making structure and its implications for member participation.
The lawsuit, initiated by a group of current and former members known as the Jeremiah Counsel Corporation, alleges that the changes to the church’s bylaws were made to facilitate the succession of Ben Young, son of longtime pastor Ed Young. Ed Young previously served as the president of the Southern Baptist Convention, and Second Baptist is known as one of the largest churches affiliated with the organization, boasting over 90,000 members across six campuses.
According to the lawsuit, the purported rationale for the amendments was to clarify church beliefs and reinforce their stance on social issues. However, plaintiffs argue that the true intent was to significantly alter the church’s established democratic governance processes and eliminate congregants’ influence in church affairs. The suit describes the amendments as a response to what the plaintiffs labeled as the “woke agenda.”
In a statement, a representative from Second Baptist indicated that church leadership and legal counsel are aware of the lawsuit and plan to respond appropriately. The case reflects a broader trend whereby congregationally governed churches are moving toward governance models that consolidate decision-making power typically in the hands of a select few, such as an elder board or a leadership team. This shift is linked to a reported increase in legal disputes surrounding church governance.
Among the Southern Baptists, deviating from a congregational governance model could spark discussions about biblical church polity. The Southern Baptist Convention’s guiding document, the Baptist Faith and Message, emphasizes democratic processes within each congregation.
The lawsuit acknowledges that a vote regarding the revised bylaws occurred in May 2023, but claims that the proper procedures leading up to that vote were not adequately followed. According to the plaintiffs, notices related to the meeting were “legally insufficient,” which meant that proper notifications were not given, potentially minimizing awareness among congregation members about the significant changes proposed.
Moreover, the suit asserts that committee reviews of the proposed bylaws were bypassed and that the information disseminated regarding the May meeting was misleading. Only about 200 members attended the meeting, with many not receiving access to the proposed amended bylaws or amendments to the articles of incorporation.
At the gathered meeting, church leaders reportedly stated that the purpose of the updates did not entail any changes in governance. The former bylaws mandated congregational votes on key decisions, such as the annual budget and senior pastor selection. However, under the new bylaws, such decisions will now be controlled by a Ministry Leadership Team composed of the Senior Pastor and appointed individuals, eliminating member voting entirely.
This change, according to the lawsuit, reflects an intention by church leaders to control pastor succession and finances. The plaintiffs are seeking a court ruling to revert to the church’s previous bylaws.
Erika Cole, an attorney with expertise in churches and faith-based organizations, noted that governance issues and leadership succession are emerging as significant legal topics. As church leadership ages and fewer individuals enter the ministry, it is expected that such challenges will become increasingly common.
Cole cautioned that church governance changes should be approached with transparency and careful adherence to legal standards, as state laws and other legal requirements may impose restrictions on bylaw amendments. Courts might not engage in theological disputes but can rule against a church if bylaw changes are determined to be unlawful.
The legal proceedings are officially titled Jeremiah Counsel Corporation v. Ben Young, Homer Edwin Young, et al.
This article was automatically generated by OpenAI, and the people, facts, circumstances, and storyline may be inaccurate. Any article may be requested for removal, retraction, or correction by emailing contact@publiclawlibrary.org.