From Joel Meeker, Milford OH
I must apologize for my EF post of Wednesday last week. In my message I put the reputation of the organization before the honor of God, when I know that God owns the world and "those who dwell therein" as David said in Psalm 24. I allowed my feelings and communication to be harsh, when in reality I do have confidence that He will “complete a good work” in us as Paul said to the Philippians. His honor is always more important than our organizational concerns of the moment, and I trust He will accomplish what we cannot seem to do ourselves.I want to apologize to the elders who submitted their ballots in all honesty, knowing that I don't have insight into the prayer, fasting, and sincerity with which you fulfilled your privilege at the GCE.
I want to apologize for posting a negative judgment of "another man's servant." I am reminded in the cool of the day that God tells us not to do so. He reserves the right to judge His servants according to His perfect justice and in His time.
As apologies go I suppose it does the job, but it's hardly fulsome is it? In fact, it almost seems to be what in this neck of the woods (Australia/New Zealand) might even be termed a "Clayton's" apology. It's certainly extremely "preachy."
Special thanks to the sender.
39 comments:
Reminds me of Hillary Clinton's non-apology apology for mentioning RFK's assassination as reason for her staying in the Democratic race against Barak Obama. Not only was her comment creepy (and fodder for conspiracy theorists) it was in plain bad taste since many people consider Obama to be very much like the Kennedy brothers.
Her apology came out something like "...to those that were offended, I'm sorry you mistook what I meant to say...." (my paraphrase)
Whenever you hear a non-apology apology, its never heart felt.
But its clear Joel's decided which side is signing his paycheck.
JM said:
"I must apologize..."
They told me to
"I want to apologize...'
But it's difficult
However, an apology is what it is for the person at the moment however it came about. If he "had" to do it, he loses a bit of his soul. He'll repress his anger and forced embarassment and get a bit depressed.
I wonder if the Jerusalem Apostles ever got an apology out of Paul for his bravado over learning nothing from Peter, James and John in his Galatians rant.
Gal 2:6 "As for those who seemed to be important—whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not judge by external appearance—those men added nothing to my message.... 9 James, Peter[c] and John, those reputed to be pillars..."
Apology Paul:
"I want to apologize (snicker) to James the brother of Jesus, along with Peter (the jerk) and John (Mr. Kiss up Bosom Buddy) who spent three years at his side learning from Jesus personally.
I have learned a lot from these men (is this what you want me to say?) about the Gospel (mine is better however) and I deeply respect (churtle..) these men.
These men are pillars in the Church (or so they say..) and even though I was called from my mothers womb like Jeremiah and Jesus..I yield to the good men of Jerusalem.
I also apologize for appearing to go along with the general council in Jerusalem but then returning to Corinth to tell the church not to worry about what James said Gentiles needed to be concerned about. In all men is not my knowledge, but I yield..
Yield?...oh churtle, snort.. ha ha ha ha ha,,,did I say that?"
:) Ok, I repent. I'm not the best yielder myself...
dd
oh oh..PS
I just remembered what my "wow...you got fired by God." counselor told me.
"You tend to not go along with things you don't agree with."
I asked what's wrong with that.
He said that we often have to go along with things we don't agree with.
I said why?
He said "because that's how we keep an orderly society and keep a job."
I said I disagreed.
He said.."see.."
I said "yep.."
He said my humor was passive aggressive..
I said.."well excuse me for livin'"
He said..."see"
I said..."yup.."
Of course we were playing off each other at the moment, but it's pretty accurate... He used to be a pastor as well so we understood each other.
It's tough when you have to sit down on the outside while standing up only on the inside...
"You worked 60 hours last week and then moderate the forum in your spare time? How do you do it?"
"It's my Clayton's life. The life you have when you're not having a life."
Gavin, can we certain you are not the one who wrote this?
Now that the non apology apology has been issued [say, isn't the first part of the sentence in passive tense?], all the participants should do what detergent companies do: Advertise the NEW IMPROVED VERSION (!) without much changing anything.
We can see it now: United used to be... well.. DIFFERENT! But the administration has changed all that and are now offering better services than ever before. It's amazing what a Reformation can do.
It's also amazing what a little advertising spin can do for damage control.
And best of all, you don't have to mean a single word of it!
Tired Skeptic said...
“And best of all, you don't have to mean a single word of it!”
Isn’t ‘Tired Skeptic” making exactly the kind of judgement call that Joel Meeker is apologising for making.
JM claimed to know the motives of others, and now apologises for making this claim.
I will be the lone dissenting voice here. I know what it's like to believe one was correct, but still acted wrongly and needs to apologize for the methods one employed.
To be clear
Mr. Meeker is just another revelation of the crude social skills of all of the UCG ministers that were brainwashed at the AC Herb worshiping retreat.
The thug behavior of sneaky Clyde and his cabal in addition with the childish arguments within the COE makes one realize that the UCG ministry is staffed with hirelings and self aggrandized losers.
He apologized to Aaron in private.
"I will be the lone dissenting voice here. I know what it's like to believe one was correct, but still acted wrongly and needs to apologize for the methods one employed."
Mom's do that all the time to keep peace in the family. :)
Sometimes one ( a mom in this case) does have to get the attention of the family first....before the correct solution is employed.
( don't know what Joel's excuse is)
"all the participants should do what detergent companies do: Advertise the NEW IMPROVED VERSION (!) without much changing anything."
They change the product all right.
Fewer ounces to the container, with a higher price.
It 'do' make a difference in one's pocket book.
You must not go grocery shopping very often "tired skeptic" ;) :)
Soooo....
Since the UCG apology ice cream truck is giving away free apologies so liberally, and everyone is playing together all so nice...
So Mommy, Can I have an apology from the UCG too??!!
Bill Lussenheide, Menifee, CA USA
B
Hey Bill, get in line!!!
Sue
How about "I was wrong." How about "I am sorry." How about "Please forgive me." How about "I will not do it again."
I've seen enough of these "apologies" from COG leaders to know they are not from the heart.
Rod Meredith: "Mistakes have happened." "I'm not perfect."
These men want the appearance of humility and contriteness but are afraid to really humble themselves in front of others.
This shows why Mr. Meeker directs the French-language work of UCG.
Isn't Reuben as "unstable as water"? (Gen. 49:3-4) :-->
I had no idea ACOG leaders knew what apology was. This is kind of interesting from that standpoint.
BB
Richard said...
This shows why Mr. Meeker directs the French-language work of UCG.
Isn't Reuben as "unstable as water"? (Gen. 49:3-4) :--)
The French aren't afraid to give a really good insult, and they aren't likely to apologize for it. And oh my...the insults a French woman can hurl when angry.....yikes!
But if they like you, you never had better friends on earth!
I'd rather be insulted by a French person, than apologized to be by xCG minister.
At least I know which one is sincere.
Give the boy a break. Being waterboarded for an public apology is very very scary!
Sacre bleu..urp, glug..blech..gulp...gaaaaaahhh... !
Dennis quoted...
>>>Gal 2:6 "As for those who seemed to be important—whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not judge by external appearance—those men added nothing to my message.... 9 James, Peter[c] and John, those reputed to be pillars..."<<<
For the record, Paul was not referring to Peter, James or John. He was referring to the false ministers who had entered the church by stealth. Note what he said, "And that because of FALSE brethren unawares brought in, who came in PRIVILY", that is, by stealth, "to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage"(Gals.2:4). Peter, James and John could never be accused by anyone of bringing the brethren into bondage.
The false ministers had got in "unawares" because the porter felt asleep on the job. Jesus commanded the porter to watch and guard the entrance to his church, and only allow those that are holy to enter in(John 10:3). This principle was established during the reign of David thus: "This is the thing that ye shall do; A third part of you entering on the Sabbath, of the priests and of the Levites, shall be porters of the doors"(11 Chron.23:4). And verse 6 says, "but let none come into the house of the Lord, save the priest, and they that minister of the Levites; they shall go in, for they are holy."
Yet Jesus, in a celebrated parable, foresaw that some porters would fall asleep on the job, and false ministers would enter in "unawares" to the porter, but not to God. The the narrative says, "Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto man which sowed good seed in his field: But while men SLEPT, his enemies came and sowed tares among the wheat and went his way"(Matt.13:24-25). The men who fell asleep were the porters, who should have been watching to ensure that no unclean entered into the ministry or the house of God.
Sadly, all the ministers that resigned or walked away with a financial package, which Jeremiah calls a bribe, were unclean men who crept into the church while the porter was asleep. That is why there is so much infighting in among the so-called churches of God, for they are all unclean hirelings.
As long as your still here Tom. I asked you previously what Armstrong group you affiliated with and where you went to church on Sabbath? Is that a difficult question to answer?
Are you forsaking the assembing of yourselves together as is the custom of some?
And your idea as to who Paul was speaking about is inaccurate. But this is an endless topic. Peter, James and John most certainly, to Paul, would be those who quite capable of bringing others into bondage being the Jewish church leaders and opposed to his own view of the Gospel which he chided the Gentiles from departing from.
But please just answer what group loyal to HWA your endorse and if you attend somewhere with them. Simple request. I still can't figure out which brand of HWA you expected me to stick with for the brethren found therein.
You owe me an answer
You also have me confused here on your Exitjesus of the text.
Tom said:
"The men who fell asleep were the porters, who should have been watching to ensure that no unclean entered into the ministry or the house of God."
So here, the sleeping men are the porters who are the ministers who should have kept better watch over the field.
Tom said:
"Sadly, all the ministers that resigned or walked away with a financial package, which Jeremiah calls a bribe, were unclean men who crept into the church while the porter was asleep."
But now the sneakers are the ministers who snuck up on the sleeping ministers who were supposed to catch the ministers who had financial packages and keep them out.
I'm confused over who snuck and who slept in their sneakers while they got snookered. I'm also still waiting for my financial package for sneaking out as a hireling and very very confused, because you won't tell me, which field of sleeping porters I am supposed to protect from sneaking finanacial package bribed ones, as spoken of by Jeremiah.
As long as were at it...
Tom noted:
"Jesus commanded the porter to watch and guard the entrance to his church, and only allow those that are holy to enter."
You need to understand Tom that if I only allowed the holy to enter the church, there would be no church to enter. You aren't a real practical fellow in real life are you Tom? I bet you're hard to live around. Is the church you attend and will be telling me about soon really filled with only the holy people? I would dearly love to meet an entire church full of people who only got in because they were holy according to the true ministers judgement.
Anxiously awaiting the group you endorse, your pastors name and please throw in his email. I might want to write him. I might even know him.
Your friend
Den
Dennis said, "Anxiously awaiting the group you endorse, your pastors name and please throw in his email. I might want to write him. I might even know him".
MY COMMENT - Don't hold your breathe. We are still waiting for Tom to post his picture on the internet as he promised. The last response from Tom on this subject about two months ago was that he had just gotten a hair cut so his picture could be taken.
But, to date, no picture of Tom has surfaced.
Tom isn't very reliable in following up his words, or responding to direct questions.
Tom's Barber....
Sadly and of course, I agree. I have given this some more thought and want to make this as simple for Thomas as possible. I predict his next posting might have something on failed ministers and hirelings, but nothing on the questions that seem so simple to me to answer.
Therefore: Thomas....
Cut and paste this into the "Leave Your Comment" section. It is easy to find on this page.
"I Thomas Mahon am a Holy member of of the _______________
Church of God (Organizational name please--don't say "true") which represents the most accurate teachings of Herbert W. Armstrong and the Bible. My human, non-hireling, pastor, under whose care I have placed myself is____________________ and we meet every Sabbath at__________________.
That's it. Simple and thank you in advance for your sincere response.
I do have to say that I hold in my posession a genuine parchment of ordination signed personally by Herbert w. Armstrong, Garner Ted Armstrong and David Antion. It has no time limit and clearly says I am a minister and the word hireling is not to be found.
If you fail to answer my questions about your true church affiliation, which I need to know because I still don't know what church on earth I should have stayed with to not be a hireling, I will have to disfellowship you with the authority of Herbert W. Armstrong whose signature is affixed to this parchment.
Of course, should that happen, I would wish you no ill will but rather that you would repent.
Better hurry. I am going to sell the parchment with the signatures on E-Bay and see if I can break Ron Kelly's record sale to Gerald Flurry, for $5000, his HWA autographed gold leafed evangelists copy of Mystery of the Ages, or so I heard.
Come on! A GENUINE HWA signed parchment, decopaged in the '70 and tolle (not Eckhart) painted to a nice board with MY name clearly in the center has got to be worth a fortune!
:)
Cut and paste! It's easy.
ANYTHING GOES IN THE UCG,
EXCEPT THE PLAIN TRUTH.
Is Joel Meeker now a meeker Meeker or just a sneakier Meeker?
In the UCG, any deliberate, malicious SIN goes on freely and never even stops, much less ever has to be apologized for. The only unpardonable sin or social blunder in the UCG is for any innocent victim to simply tell the plain truth about what really goes on there. Joel tried to use this sort of dirty, unjust, man-made "no talk" rule against Aaron Dean. Looks like it did not work out so well.
Will Joel also apologize to any innocent people who have been kicked out of the UCG for simply saying what some old sex perverts and liars there were up to? Of course not! And that is why they should have Joel Meeker bend over. Then, they should kick his unsorry, unethical ass clear out of sight.
Hopefully, the bum won't come back (pun fully intended).
I always found it strange that Armstrongism never had enough faith in the French speaking people to appoint one of their own. Instead we had Apartian (non French) and Meeker (non French) lording themselves over the French speaking members. The Belgians despised Apartian with a passion as did many other areas. Meeker is in the same boat. His is greatly disliked. I guess the French, Belgians, and other French regions are too stupid to have one of their own leading the church. Just one more sign of how degenerate the British Israel/fake Manasseh mentality really is. mentality is.
Dennis said, "I do have to say that I hold in my posession a genuine parchment of ordination signed personally by Herbert w. Armstrong, Garner Ted Armstrong and David Antion. It has no time limit and clearly says I am a minister and the word hireling is not to be found".
MY COMMENT - The parchment is a "keep sake" for the Diehl family heirloom.
My question, however, is yes Dennis, you received the Armstrong credentials....But did you ever receive the keys that unlocked the door to the Garner Ted Armstrong Corporate Church collection of women?
Tom Mahon's Barber said...
MY COMMENT - Don't hold your breathe. We are still waiting for Tom to post his picture on the internet as he promised. The last response from Tom on this subject about two months ago was that he had just gotten a hair cut so his picture could be taken.
But, to date, no picture of Tom has surfaced.
I thought I saw a picture of him in his links to South Africa...or am I confusing him with another blogger?
I wonder why he was not banned from speaking as Aaron Dean was.
Can you compare the two? Aaron Dean, setting an example by visiting another COG group, has been banned from speaking, while Meeker is slandering the very organization he draws a paycheck from, slandering his peers, all the while giving permission for his post to be past throughout the church. Will Meeker’s punishment only be to submit an apology and only on the EF forum? Should it not be to the whole church?
This should be addressed to the many church members who read his horrible post with his permission. It was one thing to fume on the EF, which ministers should be allowed to vent on a private forum, with respect, but to give permission for his post to be sent to anyone in the church puts another light on it. A divisive light!
If Aaron Dean had done such a thing, well I think he would have been “tarred and feathered,” then put out of the church. Oh yes, and a letter would have been sent out from the President, to all the elders of the actions that the President and council took in this situation.
Has Mr. Meeker in the past, shown mercy to others as he seems to be asking for in his apology?
What do you think would happen if a church member sent out a post like that? Many church members saw this defiant post from Mr. Meeker, because Mr. Meeker wanted all to see, in his step to divide. Why else would he give permission for this to be past along.
It depends on who you are in how you are dealt with.
Can you trust someone who is hot tempered like this to continue in the position that he holds especially since it seems to be a recurring situation with him?
If a church member spoke out against the Texas move or any other decisions made by the leadership, they would be labeled as causing discord.
What made this a more serious issue is that this did not end with just venting on the EF but Mr. Meeker gave permission for his post to be passed for all to see throughout the church. In other organizations he would have been fired because of the position that he holds.
An apology is just not enough when you went as far as Mr. Meeker did to divide the church or an organization. He should be fired!
"Is Joel Meeker now a meeker Meeker or just a sneakier Meeker?"
Now that was good. He fits right in with sneaky Clyde.
More to the point is the fact that Meeker's original post, questioning Dean's actions and the subsequent vote to keep Dean on the council, was done publicly on the Internet.
That's what has changed everything. It's not a matter of whether a minister would have done that in the old days when HWA was around. It's that they couldn't have; they didn't have such options available to them. Neither did members. Neither did non-member family members, or friends, or neighbors, or scholars, or critics, or....
Information and ideas were once tightly controlled. They no longer can be. The legitimacy and veracity of statements are constantly called into question and up for debate. People with tendencies like Meeker are now required not only to make judgments unlike before (should I click "send," or just delete it?), but their choices based on those tendencies are subsequently out in the open -- often prompting vigorous debate.
It leads to a de-centralization of discussion and even worship -- which is the way it should be. "Belief" is based on an individual choice. A believer must be free to think through and act on his own belief, and must develop his own basis for it. Otherwise, it's not belief at all, but rather, conformity.
This whole episode of Dean being censured, then voted onto the council for another term, and Meeker choosing to comment on it publicly, has been as instructive on these points as it has been entertaining.
When I first posted and revealed about Aaron being censured...and that post was sent to AW, some UCG folks posted personal attacks on AW about me. Even though what I posted was true, I was accused of spreading lies and causing division. and that I should not be posting about internal UCG affairs. I mentioned at the time, that is what we had come to expect from some (not all) UCG folks. This past weekend we were at a gathering where the majority were UCG folks. I was not intending to say anything about UCG or Joel at all to anyone. Surprisingly, several brought it up with us. One older lady came over and said, so what do think about Joel's EF post. And then was more than wanting to discuss it. Others also knew about it. I considered that good...they should know what someone in Joel's position of being "over the French work" and as a former COE member is REALLY like. They seemed surprised by it, but we were not as we had seen Joel's EF posts for several years in UCG. Not as hateful as that one, but enough to see what he was like. While I didn't like his posts, I thought it was good for him to reveal what he was like and how he thought. But I am sure many thought the posts were wonderful. But in private emails a lot of people didn't think too much of his posts and his ideas.
Now that Joel has also revealed via internet that it WAS true about Aaron, where are those UCG folks in posting about how hateful and divisive Joel's post was? Do they agree with Joel's assessment of the situation. As has been pointed out, Aaron was trying to win people to UCG and was censured because of "policy". Joel's vitriol certainly wouldn't win anyone to UCG. Yet as has been mentioned, Aaron is punished, Joel has earned his right to continue to post on EF and has not been censured in any way.
It is true that in UCG how you are treated depends on who you are and if you are liked. Paid employees for the most part are protected, but there are exceptions to that also. Some paid employees who don't hold the "correct views" on some issues are often demoted and marginalized. Doesn't have to do with their job performance, but if you are a pastor who likes having input and boards and such in your congregation you are on the list of those being suspect. And there are all kinds of ways they can be retaliated against. Like not letting a pastor transfer for the Feast to be with family. Or transferring him to a congregation that doesn't have a board, and away from family...sometimes even elderly parents who are being watched after. If they refuse to transfer they lose their job. Now I don't know why they want a job with UCG in the first place, but just trying to look at it from their point of view.
I know because some of them have told me and also what has happened to them because of their "congregationalist" views.
This whole dynamic of Aaron and Joel just kinda epitomizes one of the big problems in UCG...but of course a lot of the leadership just won't see it that way...
Sue
Ripley said, "This whole episode of Dean being censured, then voted onto the council for another term, and Meeker choosing to comment on it publicly, has been as instructive on these points as it has been entertaining".
MY COMMENT - Isn't everything and anything from WCG and its many splinters entertaining? Surely, no one, other than perhaps Terry Ratzmann, takes Armstrongism seriously?
"I want to apologize for posting a negative judgment of "another man's servant." I am reminded in the cool of the day that God tells us not to do so. He reserves the right to judge His servants according to His perfect justice and in His time."
Is this another swipe at Aaron Dean-"another man's servant?" What does that mean? I would think that Aaron is God’s servant just like the rest of us as we all strive to be. That statement is an insult to Aaron.
Not an apology as far as I am concerned. This is just another self-righteous post, hiding behind a form of an apology.
Sue is so right. Where are those nay-sayers who condemned her? Why aren't they condemning Joel’s actions?
Give me a break! Sure hope his private apology was a lot more sincere and less judgmental.
Read the whole thing again and see if you really think this was an apology.
Yes, that phrase "another man's servant" caught my attention and struck me in the exact same way. Was it said because Aaron isn't employed by UCG or anyone in UCG?
Guess Joel wouldn't want to explain that one...but God knows what he was REALLY thinking and meaning when he wrote those words, SO....I guess Joel is right...God will judge His servants according to His perfect justice and in His time."
If in his apology he was still underhandedly slamming Aaron as does seem to be the case...Joel is still being Joel.
Sue
And Sue is still being hateful, nasty Sue......
And, everything and anything from WCG and its many splinters are merely for entertainment purposes only.
Does anybody really take the Armstrong COGs seriously?
Anonymous said...
"And Sue is still being hateful, nasty Sue......"
Now wasn't that special...and loving...just like the love I felt in our local UCG congregation....Sue
"Anonymous said...
He apologized to Aaron in private."
Don't know where anonymous got their info....but he did no such thing. The only apology that Aaron saw was the one on the EF.
If Meeker meant the apology or not in the long run doen`t matter but Meekers post has blown a major hole in the United front of everthing being ok.
Ministers can ignore mere mortal brethren exposing things but when someone well known like Meeker has a wobble with such heart felt fever the can be no going back.
It doesn`t matter who anyone agrees with or disagrees, we all now know for sure the is trouble brewing in United.
The UCG is arguing again about relocating its headquarters??? I guess you don't need a new reason to cause division if the same reason works everytime. They removed a president once for this if I recall.......
Post a Comment