Dear Doctor Don

(HT to Gary on the Banned blog)

Dear Doctor Don

Re. your sermon of September 1.

An important message doesn't have to be an hour long - let alone nearly 80 minutes. If you can't say it effectively in 20 you're a very poor speaker.

A sermon doesn't need to have highly selective proof texts - piled up in a steaming heap and read aloud in full every time - as if the congregation are congenitally challenged illiterate dummies.

Nice admission that WCG at one stage embraced a version of the traditional Roman Catholic Petrine document. You seem pleased that's all past history, but do you recollect who it came from? Clue: his initials were HWA. Don, a question: did you speak up against this nonsense at that time?

Rambling and over-explanation are cheap fillers, not matters of substance.

It helps to actually get to the point sooner rather than laying out a long trail of breadcrumbs. Who has an 80 minute attention span? It amazes me you didn't start yawning yourself half-way through. Even Ron Dart in his prime would have found that difficult.

"Gainsayers" (your word) often bear a prophetic word to established structures. You're supposed to be a smart dude (18 hours of graduate theology at Southern Methodist... though that's a bit underwhelming); surely you know about the tension between prophets and priests in the Old Testament. Question: which of these two groups do we remember and value today?

What do we take from the fact that you're preaching an authoritarian message and currently hold the office of chairman of the UCG Council of Elders? Speaking "ex cathedra" are we?

You and I were both "on deck" back in the day (you in an important role, most of the rest of us in total lay obscurity) when it became a survival skill to "read between the lines" in the GN and Worldwide News. They were used to soften-up the membership for potentially upsetting developments. Gary and others suspect there's a subtext to your sermon about ministerial authority. So let's ask directly... are there storm clouds on the horizon? An impending putsch? You and the rest of COGdom know there's plenty of precedent for that. Don't you think it's dumb not to be open and honest about such things, and to let in some sunlight and fresh air by allowing threat-free debate and discussion?

Rhetorical questions don't need to be answered immediately after you ask them.

"If one of the ministers ceased to be faithful..." (around 54m). Finally getting to the point Don? "You better look before you leap." The "H word" appears more often - heresy.

Hmm.

You seem to think that you've provided a "sound expository sermon." Well, you might get some debate there, especially on grounds of "sound."

Dredging up 1974 and the Associated Churches of God? Talk about living in the past. What happened to those reportedly 10,000 folk? Most of them transitioned to freedom and autonomy.

Your real take-away message comes around 1.12. Those aren't just clouds on the horizon, that could well be a twister. You sound defeatist already. "Hold fast." Translation: batten down the hatches brethren!

There must have been a lot of depressed people walking out of services that day.

In New Zealand sheep farming is fairly common. You use the sheep analogy early in your message. I don't know how it's done in East Texas, but here sheep are herded by sheep dogs. It's quite an art form, controlled by whistles and verbal commands. The most common one is "Get in Behind!"

Which I think would have made a far better title for your sermon.

Beyond Belief

The latest issue of Beyond Today, published by the United Church of God, has been released. For a religious magazine, the cover seems incongruous, pimped as a current events magazine.

Inside:

Scott Ashley with an editorial on the Feast of Tabs.

Scott Ashley again with the lead article on "real leadership" (fitting in with the scary cover art). Alas, I'm not convinced Scott is much of an expert on this subject.

Tom Robinson stirring the pot on "The Immigration Threat."

Darris McNeely posturing as an instant expert on Brexit. Oh how exciting, Darris has it all tied in with prophecy. How unique!

Jerold Aust with a inspirational piece on "God's Greatest Miracle". Somehow he works his way from photosynthesis to the God Family.

Steve Myers on the Feast of Tabernacles.

Dear old Mario Seiglie with another festival article. Who'd have thought this was a festival issue with a cover like that!

Darris is back with a few thoughts about wise and foolish virgins in the parable.

Robin Webber on the holy spirit.

Some anonymous dude writing on "Amazing Examples of Prophecies Already Fulfilled". I wouldn't want my name on that article either.

Peter Eddington on low fuel in the gas tank. I couldn't be bothered to even skim this one, but I'll put a dollar on it being some kind of cheap metaphor.

Now brethren, do we notice anything here? Where are the articles by women? None. Not even a token women writing about something fluffy like the joy of flower arrangement for Sabbath services. Just when you thought the old fellows in the UCG were catching up with the 1980s (obviously the 2010s are way beyond them) they pull out a 100% chest-pounding old boy issue. Guys, guys, guys, time to retire. And to make it worse, still no women listed in the staff box.

Can we all say "misogynist" together?

Available online.

Beyond Today... Neanderthal Apologetics

If you were expecting a dedicated Brexit issue of Beyond Today (formerly The Good News) for July/August, you're going to be disappointed. Instead its the tired old sawhorse, evolution. It seems the lads, all keen and bushy-tailed prophecy pundits, were asleep at the wheel, or - just like the Brits - didn't see it coming in time for the mag's release. Who'd have thunked they'd drop the ball on the biggest story of the year thus far?

In fact there's an anti-science whine throughout the issue. Even editor Scott Ashley manages to take a swipe at "the futility of Darwin's theory of evolution" while pouting about the parlous state of public "bathroom" signs. He's talking about toilets of course (why a euphemism like "bathroom" is used so commonly in the US is beyond me).

Mike Kelley kicks off in earnest with Evolution: An Article of Faith. What brilliant qualifications does Mike bring to this topic - other than being an in-house hack? No, I don't know either. Mike is immediately followed by Mario Seiglie who has a track record for writing this kind of guff with Answers from a Famous ex-Atheist about God. The person he's referring to is Anthony Flew who, at a ripe old age, did indeed change his mind. That's notable mainly because it's so unusual.

Then - holy guacamole Batman! - there's an article by a female writer. Scott, are you trying to make a point here? Anyway, Kayleen Schreiber is working on her PhD in neuroscience. Other than that we don't know much about Kayleen. Where is she studying? Is she a UCG member or some kind of generic fundamentalist? Scott clearly thinks you don't need to know. If you're expecting hard science here, think again. Snippet: "God made the physical world so wonderfully complicated that we will be studying it until Jesus Christ returns!"

Just when you thought you might escape from all this creationist drivel, along comes Dan Dowd with An Evolutionary Fantasy: Useless Body Parts.

Now you can relax and let out a short sigh of relief. But not for long as the next article up is Darris McNeely's Is the Bible True? Just what do you mean "true" Darris? As expected Darris takes a broad brush to the question and ends up painting the carpet. "Proof 1", in case you're in any doubt, is "fulfilled prophecy."

Next up it's the World News and Prophecy section. Brexit? What's that? To be fair, there are a couple of dumb references to BoJo the Clown (in an piece about German Leopard tanks):

Britain's next PM?

“The European Union is pursuing a similar goal to Hitler in trying to create a powerful superstate, Boris Johnson says . . . He warns that while bureaucrats in Brussels are using ‘different methods’ from the Nazi dictator, they share the aim of unifying Europe under one ‘authority.’ . . . “The former mayor of London, who is a keen classical scholar, argues that the past 2,000 years of European history have been characterized by repeated attempts to unify Europe under a single government in order to recover the continent’s lost ‘golden age’ under the Romans” (Tim Ross, “Boris Johnson: The EU Wants a Superstate, Just as Hitler Did,” May 15, 2016).

Beyond Today lapped it up. The authors (in the original Telegraph article) also mention that the reference to Hitler is "potentially inflammatory". You think?

Back to the toilet bowl with Tom Robinson sticking his head as far down as he can with an article entitled What's Behind the Transgender Movement? (You'll be as alarmed to know as I am that "bathrooms are just the beginning".) Behind? Movement? Sorry, just my scatological sense of the bizarre.

But wait. Tucked away toward the back of the mag is an article by Milan Bizic (that doesn't sound a very British name does it?) called What Made Britain Great? I looked to see if he mentioned the East India Company or colonial adventurism... but no.

On to a cherry-picked assortment of letters, then John LaBissoniere wrenches out as much significance as he can from the daily chore of washing the dishes.

Egad! Can our eyes be deceiving us? Another article by a female writer. Janet Treadway on Visiting Widows and Widowers in their Affliction. Obviously the drought has broken, even if it's left Scott a gibbering mess in the editorial room.

Robin Webber burbles on about something or other in A Promise is a Promise, and then somebody - perhaps Robin or maybe someone who isn't high-up enough on the totem pole to merit a byline - gets to write a feature entitled How Can You Correctly Understand God's Prophecies and Promises? Quote: "One awesome proof that the Bible is divinely inspired is its perfect harmony and consistency all the way through..." Has this guy actually ever read the Bible?

TV log, back page. Collapse over a coffee and take a moment to feel thankful that this is all a nightmare from the fundamentalist past. Once you've polished off the coffee and peanut brownies, take a drive down the newsstand and pick up copies of National Geographic and New Scientist. You're going to want to flush (ahem) this stuff out of your head as quickly as possible.

Available to download now.

Orlando - and the COG predicament

Forty-nine innocent lives lost in a Florida nightclub. Young people in their twenties and thirties. Shades of the Paris concert that was targeted by Islamic terrorists at the Bataclan last November. It's ideal fodder for the usual anti-foreign discourse that energises the conservative COG ministry. The fact that it happened on American soil could only add to the paranoia that groups like the PCG seek to exploit.

But there's a problem isn't there? Those victims were overwhelmingly part of the Gay and Lesbian community. The nightclub was a well-known gay venue. The alternate COG meme is that God is punishing countries like America - perhaps especially America - for its moral failings. In the fundamentalist mindset, which the COGs share, there's no moral failing worse than same-sex relationships.

So what to do about Pulse?

It was with great interest that I read Melvin Rhodes' take on the events. Mel is COG to the core, conservative to the core, a respected commentator within the UCG. You can read his piece here.

Clearly Mel is treading on eggshells. He doesn't want to appear unsympathetic, but on the other hand, the victims were gay, practicing a lifestyle that Mel abhors and - in his mind - God abhors.

His blog entry is called "HATE WILL NEVER WIN". It's a good start.

But Mel launches a backhander. Hate is winning. Next, he slaps down a BBC correspondent who tries to put the focus on the problem of hatred of gay people. No, Mel isn't buying that. The problem must be Islam.

Bedtime reading for Mel

I'm guessing Mel has never read the unexpurgated text of The Arabian Nights (that'd curl his toes). I'm guessing he wouldn't know about the poet Rumi, the 13th-century Persian jurist, Islamic scholar, theologian, and Sufi mystic (and his male lover Shams). Islamic culture has always found a place for gay people, just as Catholic culture in the Middle Ages did. Fundamentalists and fanatics are the problem, fearful, threatened and feral, they've undeniably been in the ascendancy in Islam for the past century. I wonder if Mel has ever considered the reasons for that regression within this time frame. Probably not.

Next Mel launches into his "Islamic scholar" impersonation by citing some Quranic proof texts. This is, of course, how Mel reads his Bible, so I suppose we'll have to simply smile tolerantly. The Quran has as many interpretations as the Torah, and we know how the rabbis argued over interpretations and minutiae. Islam breathes a similar atmosphere. You can certainly proof text horror out of the Quran, but that's hardly unique to this holy book.

Then we're off on an anti "liberal media", I-hate-the-BBC rant. Could this tragic event be in significant part a gun control issue? Oh goodness no!

"Predictably, the liberal media, including the BBC, said that the attack once again raised the issue of gun control. This may be the case in Washington, DC, but the only “gun control” discussed in America’s heartland is the need for everybody to be opposed – increasing fear means there is a greater need for guns! A few hours after the mass shooting, somebody came up to me before a church service and asked what I thought about people bringing guns to church. The attack on the gay nightclub could just as easily have taken place at a Christian church – dozens of churches have been attacked by Islamists in the Middle East and Pakistan."

Does Mel remember a tragic church shooting in 2005? The killer was Terry Ratzmann, a member of the Living Church of God. The venue was an LCG Sabbath service. It made news around the world. And now he thinks it's an okay thing for COG members to bring their guns to services? Ratzmann wasn't Muslim, he was one of LCG's own, even known and liked as far away as New Zealand where he'd previously kept the Feast of Tabernacles.

Back to the old "liberal media" chestnut. They're all apparently in denial about the real issues. Then again, Mel, maybe they're just a damn sight more analytical and less prone to jumping to conclusions and running off after red herrings and glib talking points.

And on we go. Mel relates listening to a youth-oriented sermon with his granddaughters in which the preacher (and we're almost certainly talking about an accredited UCG pastor) stated that "Jesus would never have mixed with gay people".

To his credit, Mel disagrees... "Rather, the gospels show us that Jesus mixed with “publicans and sinners,” including prostitutes. Jesus said: “They that are whole need not a physician, but they that are sick.” (Matthew 9:12)."

Next Mel notes that homosexuality is listed along with adultery and idolatry in 1Cor. 6:9-10. He writes: "It should be noted, here, that the Apostle Paul treated all three sexual sins equally. The Greek shows that the three sins listed all involve penetration."

Leaving aside the claim that "the Greek shows" (sounds impressive, but does Mel really read Koine?), let's think this through. Two guys cuddling up in a nightclub is okay - no penetration. Oral sex in whatever combination is okay, no penetration. Wasn't that the Clinton defense? Is this what Mel means? No, I didn't think so either.

And to state the obvious, if every UCG minister with a history of adultery were to resign tomorrow, there'd be an awful lot of empty pulpits this upcoming Sabbath.

Finally, Obama is compared unfavorably with Trump. No political cheap shots here.

I don't want to even go near the issue of what the Bible says - and doesn't say - about gay people. I do wonder, though, if Mel has any gay relatives (hey, I do, and they're "just folks"). I do wonder if Mel is aware of the struggle (in some cases leading to suicide) young gay and lesbian people have who have been raised in the COGs - including children of high-ranking ministers and at least one evangelist. I also wonder if he's ever bothered to visit Troy Fitzgerald's Secular Safe House (Troy is the son of a WCG minister).

Anti-gay rhetoric is a familiar theme in the COGs, particularly exemplified by the spiteful prose of Roderick Meredith. A half-hearted, on-the-fence response to the shootings in Orlando, fused with the usual conservative "talking points", misses an opportunity to actually say something meaningful.

The irony is that Mel's response will probably be one of the less unbalanced ones to come from COG sources.

(Two further takes on the COGs and the Orlando killings can be found on Living Armstrongism and Lonnie Hendrix's blog.)

NOTE: Melvin Rhodes has posted a follow-up to the blog column discussed above in which he responds to some of my comments. You can read it here. He states that he does not support gun carrying in churches, nor support Trump over Clinton. It's good to get the clarification. I'd only note that these positions could be easily implied from his earlier blog piece. Mel is too experienced as a journo, surely, not to know that.

Thirty Years On

It's been thirty years since Herbert Armstrong departed the land of the living - now ticking on for 31. After three decades we're beginning to see a major die-back among those groups that loudly claimed his mantle.

The Church of God, an International Community is one of them. Splintering from UCG and led by former World Tomorrow presenter (and later founding UCG president) David Hulme, it struggled on for years, never reaching a critical mass. COG-AIC haemorrhaged prominent ministers. Rumour has it that Hulme thought he could get away with dumping the deeply flawed British-Israel doctrine, but Peter Nathan et al had other ideas. It no longer publishes its journal, Vision. In fact, the energy levels were so low that subscribers weren't even informed of its demise. COG-AIC has been downsized, scaled back to the point of irrelevance.

There are also reports that the Philadelphia Church of God has been hit in the pocketbook to the tune of a 25% reduction in income. PCG continues to throw money at its British Bricket Wood clone, Edstone Hall, and Gary is reporting that founder Gerry Flurry is set to purchase a personal jet to wing him - and members of his inner circle - across the Atlantic and beyond, just like his long-dead idol. Apparently flying commercial (and we're clearly talking first class here) is just too much for the great man to endure. How can he afford it? Perhaps it's all those bequests that have accumulated over the years, the gift that keeps on giving. Reason enough to check that your current will is up to date and that the parasites don't get a red shekel.

The United Church of God, an International Association is treading water at best. It's not that they're not trying to recruit new blood, it's just that they're not very good at it. UCG is still operating with a 1980s mentality, despite having paid out big bucks to bring its websites and media facades up to scratch. The message, however, is firmly targeted at old white males of the grumpier variety. Alas, lads, not only are the times a-changin' but so is the demographic.

The Living Church of God is facing a challenging time. Meredith won't be around forever, his successor is probably not up to the job, and there's widespread disillusionment in the ranks. Meredith predictably blames it on Satan. Anyone with a functioning brain can apportion responsibility closer to home than that.

And out beyond the barriers and borders that each of these "major" bodies has erected? "Here be dragons." With a couple of honourable exceptions, there you'll find Thiel, Weinland, Dankenbring and their ilk. Hardly a pretty picture.

The Churches of God will battle on in an increasingly diminished capacity for some time to come, but they have about as much chance of making a comeback as Christian Science or the Christadelphians.

Women in UCG

Compulsory reading over at Gary's Banned blog. It seems the lads gathered back in March to discuss whether women should be allowed to write substantive articles for church publications. The fact that there's any doubt on the matter is a real indictment. Gary hits the nail firmly on the head when he uses the "p-word", patriarchy.

The lads apparently haven't taken on board the evidence that a woman, Junia, is listed as an apostle in Romans 16:7 (for a fascinating discussion of this passage, how it has been misrepresented in many modern translations, and the implications, you could do worse than to hunt down a copy of Rena Pederson's The Lost Apostle: Searching for the Truth About Junia).

Not that we expect UCG to ordain women any time soon, or allow them speaking rights in worship services, more's the pity. To be fair, it might not be that the lads on the media committee are entirely averse to greater participation by women in writing and editorial content (though their hand-wringing hardly sounds enthusiastic!), but apparently there are grumblings from the Luddite fringe at the very prospect. It seems they didn't all pack their bags and migrate to COGWA. UCG seems to have simply continued muddling along the path of least resistance on this issue as if it's 1956, not 2016. The current unofficial policy seems to be that women can write an occasional bit of reflective fluff, but when it comes to important stuff (reader alert: another "p-word" follows) a penis is definitely required

Great to see Beverly Kubik speaking up on this issue.

Beverly Kubik asked if there was a well done study paper on the verses brought up today about women not speaking at church, because if you take these verses literally then women have to put gags in their mouth when they enter the building. She asked if there was a study paper and said we should have that when addressing this topic. Robin Webber agreed that there are many commentaries on this, and they could be put together. Mrs. Kubik said she would like to see an unbiased study into those scriptures.  

She went on to comment that we encourage discussion of the sermon after service and, if we take those verses literally then women can’t talk about the sermon after services. She didn’t feel that interpretation of those verses make sense with the context of rest of the entire Bible. When Christ came He showed more respect to women than had been in the culture prior to that. She asked why that was. She asked why some women are called “prominent women.” Why were they prominent, and what were they doing in the churches there? She feels we are so fearful of anything that comes near preaching for women, yet we have no problem with women singing scriptural words. She would like to understand why these lines are being drawn, and she wants to know what is right or isn’t right. She isn’t trying to promote any idea over another. 

The full COE report is online.

More United than usual

The United Church of God is enjoying a "breather" from the disruptions and discord that have characterised its development thus far. At least, that's what Vic Kubik seems to be saying in the May-June issue of United News.

"We value the current period of peace in the Church and need to constantly remind ourselves it is only in this environment we can have the growth and forward movement we all desire."

Growth, one suspects, needs more than peace in the ranks (though that certainly helps). It requires engagement with the issues that concern an up and coming generation. Forward movement requires the ditching of reactionary thinking. UCG isn't doing so well there. Beyond Today is becoming an increasingly shrill right-wing publication fixated on discredited prophetic speculation. The same might be said for the approach behind the spectacularly unproductive America: The Time Is Now! tour. No future in that.

For those who might miss the Good News moniker and logo, it has been absorbed into the UN as a section heading.

Included in this issue is an obituary for former WCG South African Regional Director Bob Fahey.

It's interesting to compare UN with its LCG opposite number, Living Church News. UN seems the more balanced of the two, containing more actual 'news' and not talking down - perhaps it's better to say talking down less - to the membership than its counterpart. It's notable that Meredith dominates LCN pages, whereas there is no real cult of personality apparent in the UCG publication. Credit where credit is due.

The PDF is available to download.

Beyond Today - Clinging to the mold

(This is the first in the current series reviewing various COG publications)

The May-June issue of Beyond Today is out. If you thought the lads in UCG were interested in breaking the mouldy old mold by rebranding their flagship magazine, you must be hugely disappointed.

BI is back (not that it ever left) with a major back cover ad for the awful booklet some of us hoped UCG was quietly trying to drop.

Misogyny reigneth again. Not even one token woman listed in the staff box. There is an article by Janet Treadway though. Just a one-page reflection on the birth of a grandchild (congratulations Janet, lovely photo). But it still seems clear the lads wouldn't be happy having a female byline accompanying a big-boy-type article (you know, prophecy, tithing...)

The rest of the issue is pretty predictable. Scott Ashley editorialises his literal reading of the magic millennium. A "final crescendo" is building. The end-times armies will gather to Jerusalem to be wiped out by the armies of heaven. Happy days!

That well-known expert on the Middle East, Darris McNeely, pontificates on why Jerusalem is so very important. Darris was involved in "the big dig" in 1971, so he's clearly a pundit without peer.

Scott Ashley is back with an imperious bit of American exceptionalism, a flag-draped article about "The Global Power Vacuum". Let me get this straight, Scott doesn't vote, belongs to a supposedly apolitical sect, and yet races around his office on a mobility scooter chanting U.S.A.! U.S.A.!? The reason is - should there be any doubt - "Bible prophecy", which Scott naturally understands in great detail. The article concludes:

America is heading down a dark and dangerous path, and so is the rest of the world. Bible prophecy reveals where this path will lead—to a terrifying conclusion where, if not for God’s direct intervention, human life would be exterminated from all the earth (Matthew 24:21-22). 

You don’t need to tread this same path. You’re offered a much different way, a far better way, revealed in the pages of this magazine and your Bible. Instead of a vacuum of purpose in your life, you can fill your life with the understanding and real power that comes only from God. 

We hope and pray that you’ll choose wisely!

Then there's a nice little ad for their BI booklet to help make it all clear.

Apparently the US is heading toward some kind of election - who would have guessed it? - so Mike Kelley has radically rewritten the old chestnut article on voting. Mike assures us that "God doesn't oppose wealth", which is comforting given all the counterindications in the New Testament about eyes of needles and suchlike. But no, be ye reassured.

Helping those in poverty is often viewed as a hallmark of liberalism. But genuine concern for the poor seeks to alleviate their plight permanently through different means—by encouraging private charity and reducing wasteful human government programs and regulations to allow economic freedom leading to wealth creation and greater prosperity for all, including the poor.

Moreover, Jesus compared himself to a wealthy man. So there! The Koch brothers must love this guy.

The Bible does make a case for a liberty-oriented economy — what we would today call true capitalism or, perhaps better put, private property and free exchange.

Really? Can't wait for that booklet.

A number of readers may share Mike's weltanschauung, but it's hardly unbiased and is arguably inappropriate for a denominational publication. It does demonstrate the ongoing narrowing of COG engagement with the wider world, and a departure from the usual call for readers to disengage from the electoral process. I'm guessing - and I may be going out on a limb here - that Mike doesn't "feel the Bern".

Steve Myers writes about the Sabbath, "a precious place in time". Indeed, he describes it as "God's Sabbath benefit plan". Apparently it's the best thing since well before sliced bread.

Scott Ashley returns - obviously, he's been earning his salary this month - with an article on the Holy Spirit. Perhaps someone can explain why COG writers capitalize Holy Spirit when they believe it is a force not a person? Briefly, in the distant past, the WCG style guide seemed to flip on this issue and, for a very short time in the 1970s, it was holy spirit. Barely time to blink and it was back to capital letters "unto this very day".

Not to be outdone, Darris McNeely grabs his violin and pays a tithing sonata. Less said the better.

Someone who doesn't want to be identified by name has contributed an article called "The Valuable Benefits and Purpose of Bible Prophecy." As we say in this part of the world, "yeah, right!" Vince Szymkowiak writes about Pentecost and there's another anonymous bit of waffle about decision making.

This thing reads more like the Philadelphia Trumpet each month.

The PDF is available to download.

(Coming up next: Discern)

Melvin Rhodes in Trump mode

Melvin Rhodes is the United Church of God resident expert on world affairs. A couple of excerpts from his most recent blog post, which you can read for yourself here.

Well, I'm grizzled enough to be classified as 'old' but sure as hades know no such thing. I for one am delighted to rub shoulders on a daily basis with people from very different backgrounds. What does he mean by "mixed race"? Is Mel still fettered by the nonsense taught by Herb Armstrong about interracial marriage? Mixed religions? What does that even mean when we're dealing with a guy who believes Roman Catholicism is the great false church and Protestants are her whoring daughters.

The mellifluous Mel continues.

Dear, sweet lord, is this guy serious?

If you want a reason why UCG isn't connecting in its efforts to reach the public, here you have one. They are simply incapable of moving beyond a version of Tea Party rhetoric - based, one expects, in the exceptionalist fantasies they regard as "prophecy". Multiculturalism is bad, liberals and leftists are to blame, the current pope's emphasis on compassion and mercy is somehow less Christian, in the Rhodesian world-view, than the lunacy that unleashed the crusades.

For a long time, I've maintained that UCG is a more benign form of COGism. I suppose that's still true, but it still has venom in its bite.

Mel would, I imagine, get along famously with Mark Armstrong.

Odds & Ends

Rush hour in Ngatea

UCG Down Under: Victor Kubik has returned to the States after a trip to Australia and New Zealand. The New Zealand leg of the presidential visit was firmly focused on what remains of the church in this country following the late 2010 defection of ministers Jeff Caudle, Art Verschoor and Andre van Belkum. Holding down the fort now is Daniel Porteous. The visitors eschewed the sulphurous delights of Rotovegas (Rotorua) and the high life in Queenstown, choosing instead to "tiki-tour" around Auckland before carpooling on Saturday to a blip on the map called Ngatea, chosen because the location is equally inconvenient for members from both Auckland and the Tron (Hamilton) to travel to. The attendance was about forty.

LCG suit: Gary's site has published a letter from Patrick and Elizabeth Scarborough announcing that they have taken down their GoFundMe page because of "untrue statements which have been made to paint us in a negative light". They add.

I would also like to take this opportunity to let people know that we had our lawyer write Mr. Meredith and Rod McNair a letter last summer stating that we had no desire to take this matter to court. We beseeched them to contact us within 7 business days to schedule a meeting to talk things out but they let the deadline come and go. We have made it clear that we do not desire to be reinstated as LCG members but that we just wanted to walk in peace, have our names cleared, and be able to openly love our few remaining LCG friends without them risking getting in trouble themselves.

Beyond Today - Issue 2

The lads at the United Church of God have just released the second issue of their relaunched flagship magazine Beyond Today.

A major theme is the UCG's position on Passover (vs. Easter); "The Biblical Alternative to Easter" and an untitled follow-on by Jerold Aust. There's a hurry-up article encouraging the waverers to get baptised ("Are You Putting Off Your Salvation?"), and Peter Eddington asks "Was Jesus Really Resurrected?" The quality of Eddington's discourse might be judged by this quote: "Some of the New Testament books were written by eyewitnesses only a couple [of] decades after the purported events. If the whole story was made up, how credible would that have been?"

Defying any speculation about UCG's abandonment of British-Israelism, Darris McNeely has a predictable rant based on American exceptionalism. He asks (rhetorically) "Will America Be Great Again?", with an accompanying plug for the BI booklet. (Any old timers out there remember GTA pontificating on how, after Korea, "America has won its last war!"?)

How's this for a jingoistically myopic introduction?

I have on my desk a copy of Andrew Roberts’ A History of the English-Speaking Peoples Since 1900. The 2008 book shows the positive impact of America and Great Britain and others in the world since the turn of the 20th century. From the defeat of communism and Nazi aggression to the invention of vaccines and new crop strains that saved millions of lives, the story is one of the most remarkable in history.

The author states at the book’s conclusion that the English-speaking nations are “the last, best hope for mankind.” He goes on to say that, according to the lessons of history, the time of dominance of these peoples will fade and other powers like China or one yet to appear will rise and exert a “global sway.” Roberts concludes with a note of prophetic inevitability in saying that when the time of the English-speaking peoples fades, “the human race will come to mourn the passing of this most decent, honest, generous, fairminded and self-sacrificing imperium” (pp. 647-648). 

Should go down well with the BI brigade. Later he states:

America and the English-speaking nations have forgotten who made them great. These nations created the greatest expansion of wealth in the history of the world. But how? Because the God of Abraham was faithful in His promise to bless that patriarch’s descendants in the modern age. Yes, America and Britain are the foremost nations among them. Sadly, we don’t know this—as Isaiah said, we “do not consider.” Because we do not know this, we have turned to false religion and moral sin.

A nation like America cannot be replicated in this world. If it could, it would’ve already happened through all the foreign aid, intervention and nation-building. There is only one America. God placed this land and its people here for a divine purpose. It has grown large and great and free because the God of heaven made a promise to a man named Abraham. God has fulfilled that promise in history, and because He has, He will fulfill the spiritual promise of the offer of eternal salvation to all peoples. 

Where are the women?

Sounds to me like BI is alive, well and pulsing through the veins in UCG.

Scooping the unintended irony award is the anonymous writer of "False Predictions: How to Separate Truth from Counterfeits." There's also heavy promotion of the "America the Time is Now" presentations which, from all reports, have been wildly unsuccessful so far.

A closing observation. When the lads at UCG are referred to as "the lads", that's pretty much the literal truth. Women staff members, writers, even copy editors? Nope. Might as well be the 1950s.

The PDF is available to download.

UCG letter, harbinger of a difficult year ahead

The following letter has been sent to elders in the United Church of God. While it's very long, it is reproduced here in its entirety.

Dec. 28, 2009

Dear Fellow Elders,

We would ask that you take this letter as a personal message of deepest spiritual concern. It is vital that each of you take time to read the entirety of its contents.

When the United Church of God began in 1995, we were all very humbled but guardedly optimistic about the future. We had the privilege and opportunity to carry on the legacy of preaching the gospel to the world and strengthening members within the Body of Christ.

It has been challenging as we strive to move forward in a form of church governance that has not been “the norm” for the Church of God community as a whole. But it was the approach, based upon biblical principles, that the General Conference of Elders ratified in 1995. At that time we were prompted to focus on the foundation of our organizational relationships and decision-making processes. Our collective attention became focused on the biblical principle spelled out in Proverbs 11:14, that “…in the multitude of counselors there is safety.” Most importantly, we made a collective decision that, rather than simply looking to a man, we would focus on Jesus Christ being the Head of the Church; and we were determined to sense the guidance of God’s Holy Spirit in us as our guide.

God has never left us or forsaken us even though at times we all have fallen short of His perfect guidance. As the Council of Elders of the United Church of God, we believe the Spirit of God is once again guiding and stirring us up to share certain basic words that must be said and understood by each of us. The time for decisive actions has come.

Over the past few months many accusations have been leveled against the leadership of the United Church of God. The Council, which is the senior governing body of the Church, has especially come under attack and been accused of lying, deceit, covering up and unethical behavior. While we are all only men, and have made our share of mistakes along the way, we reject such accusations as being without evidence, slanderous in some cases, and effectively harming the preaching of the gospel by diverting the focus of the duly elected board members of the Church. The time has come for straight talk from our hearts to yours, as brothers in Christ.

Rather than condemning and accusing what we see around us with our human perceptions, let’s consider where God places His focus. Ephesians 6:11-12 states that our real enemies are not one another but wicked or evil spirits in high places: “Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.”

We are wrestling with an angry evil spirit that never rests in his focused attempt to destroy and scatter members of the Body of Christ. He tried to deliver a death blow in the 1990s, and now he is subtly striving to slowly but surely squeeze the life energy out of those who remain true to the gospel. We all realize that Satan knows he has but a short time left. Make no mistake about it: He hates, loathes and despises what we are called to stand for and perform by God’s grace, and this spiritual adversary will do anything and use anyone to frustrate our mission of preaching the gospel and preparing a people.

Much of our current situation goes back to 2007 through 2008 when a new makeup of membership began to emerge on the Council of Elders. A number of people have voiced the opinion that these men, all ministers with multiple decades of long-term service to the Church, could not have obtained a seat on the Council unless there had been “bloc voting” for nominees or candidates for the Council. (“Bloc voting” here means the formation of a group of individuals to support, promote or lobby for certain candidates for the Council in an effort to influence the ballot.) The suspected vehicle used to engineer such alleged bloc voting was an “alternate forum” (i.e., a private discussion group) comprised of a very small minority of members within the General Conference. Although no evidence of bloc voting has ever been produced for any candidate on any side of the issues, the opinion was expressed, and is still held by some elders today, that these are illegitimate Council members.

The Council’s position regarding private discussion groups involving elders is that they are not forbidden and violate no bylaw, resolution or scriptural principle. The Council has no oversight responsibility over such groups. Since they are private, unless there is proof that there is ministerial misconduct on such sites, it is not the Council’s (or the Church’s) responsibility. The Council will only act on substantiated reports of unchristian behavior by elders, whatever the context.

The detailed report on the alternate forum was officially approved by the Council as not only a statement regarding private forums (of which one or more likely exist at any given time), but was also created as a statement of what kind of fellowship we will be in respecting the rights of others while expecting the highest spiritual standard of all who hold the office of elder. The Council report included a statement from the forum’s administrator telling participants that it was not to be used for bloc voting or discussion of candidates, and the Council has since then received unequivocal statements from participants that it was not used for bloc voting. While some may not accept these statements or the conclusions of the Council in its report or its spiritual and philosophical thrust, the fact is that no actual evidence to the contrary has been forthcoming from anyone else.

The resolution to rescind the move to Texas was also passed in 2008 and created strong feelings on both sides of the debate that arose.

As a result of these differences and others, we have allowed Satan, as well as ourselves and our human nature that so easily besets us, to divide us into rigid camps. We have trouble accepting that others can have strong opinions contrary to our own and still have the best interests of the Church at heart. Satan has created an atmosphere of distrust. There has been a pattern now for some time of members of the same body demonizing (and we don’t use that term lightly) one another.

This spiritual malady of cancerous proportions has now seeped into our general membership with individuals (both within the ministry and membership) who now feel they have some mission to cleanse the Church and who have fallen prey to a spirit that desires to “reject authority, and speak evil of dignitaries” (Jude 8). They openly feel they have a godly duty to send out mass-circulated letters to undermine the Council of Elders and overturn determinations of the General Conference of Elders as to whom they chose to place on the Council. Knowingly or unknowingly, “confidential” or seditious information is being spread like wildfire. Such individuals have assumed a mantle of judge and jury in matters in which they have neither the full facts, nor the total context, nor the collective benefit of wide counsel. Rather, they have chosen to reject the sound principle found in Proverbs 18:17: “The first one to plead his cause seems right, until his neighbor comes and examines him.”

Can we learn to work together without vilifying one another? This is an ageless proposition that confronts every generation of the Church as to how we will relate with one another. The apostle Paul in Galatians 5:15 states, “But if you bite and devour one another, beware lest you be consumed by one another!” The New Century Version translates this verse as, “If you go on hurting each other and tearing each other apart, be careful, or you will completely destroy each other.”

Paul’s heartfelt concern and admonition is needed more than ever! The reputations of ministers who have served God and the Church faithfully for 30, 40 or 50 years are being undermined and destroyed—whisper by whisper, phone call by phone call, e-mail by e-mail, private meeting by private meeting by members and ministry. We seem free to “bite and devour one another” without talking to the parties involved, but based only on comments from others. Case in point: We have had ministers, called to be stewards of the gospel, who have posted messages on the Elder’s Forum, at one time or another that have lacked the basic Christian civility of knowing how to speak directly with grace or with full knowledge and context of matters on a forum designed to edify their fellow ministers.

Why do ministers who should know better sow discord? We have been granted the high calling of preparing and guiding others in spiritual preparation to be “kings and priests to our God” (Revelation 5:10). Why do some reject the clear admonition of Proverbs 6:16-19? “These six things the LORD hates, yes, seven are an abomination to Him,” we read. Then seven activities are listed that God hates. Verse 19 states that two of these are “a false witness who speaks lies, and one who sows discord among brethren.”

Due to this negative spiritual incursion into our fellowship, for more than two years we have been forced to focus our Church’s time, energy and resources inwardly, rather than focus outwardly to a dying world and the very real needs of God’s flock. When the Council states that it would like to see increased emphasis placed on preaching the gospel, an outward focus that has always been a driving force in the mission of the Church founded by Jesus Christ, the Council is accused of neglecting the local congregations, the youth in the Church or the responsibility of preparing the next generation of pastors.

While the Council strives to move forward with collective boldness and optimism, there has emerged a not-so-subtle negative spin or counter opinion on many actions of the Council. Allow us to speak plainly: This has been expressed in communications by some elders and members alike. Thus, the Church, notably in the United States, has not been allowed to move beyond the alternate forum, fears (not facts) about bloc voting, the rescind resolution and alleged ethical problems on the Council.

For example, the chairman of the Council has been unjustly and falsely accused of lying about the reasons for the replacement of the previous Council reporter and, then again, when a mistake made by the new Council reporter was not corrected before a particular report was distributed. Please understand, a Council reporter does not have a defined term of service. The replacement of our last reporter was based on financial savings and convenience as the new reporter is an employee at the home office (with long experience working with the Council as corporate secretary). Other supposed inappropriate reasons for doing so are simply not true.

The Council even gets criticized for conducting some meetings in “closed session,” a practice that is recommended by experts on nonprofit governance and which has been used by the Council since 1996 to discuss important issues of a private and confidential nature in a more candid manner. No law or bylaw bars this long-standing practice, but it is now being given a sinister spin.

These accusations against the leadership have taken on a life of their own and are spreading rapidly. Do we realize that this approach is destabilizing the ministry and beginning to destabilize the Church? We have a toxic atmosphere in the Church where innuendos (“it looks like...”) and whispers are creating an unrestrained chorus of misinformation put forth by minds and hearts lacking sound judgment. Some in the ministry appear to be getting together and “roasting” the Council based upon second- third- or fourth-hand hearsay or rumors. Some claim their “information” came from confidential executive session information that they feel they have the “right” to place in the public domain. Such “information” is biased, imputes evil motives and is often completely wrong and not designed to help or bring peace to the Church of God, but is spread by those who presume they are “in the know.” We constantly hear that information comes from a reliable source, but no one is willing to reveal that source. Is this because the source may have an agenda? Why are some willing to risk their all and the well-being of a Church dedicated to God’s service simply on anonymous accusations?

We would never have allowed this in our former association! We would never allow it in the congregations that we pastor. In what some of our members like to call the “real world” in which they work, such breaches of confidentiality, slander and lack of organizational cohesiveness would be dealt with immediately by appropriate disciplinary action for those responsible. Why should we be different and why should the unity once a hallmark of God’s people be different now?

Please consider these scriptures that focus on this topic.

Proverbs 26:20-21: “Where there is no wood, the fire goes out; and where there is no talebearer, strife ceases. As charcoal is to burning coals, and wood to fire, so is a contentious man to kindle strife.”

Proverbs 16:27: “An ungodly man digs up evil, and it is on his lips like a burning fire.”

What is the solution that has been suggested to the Council by more than one individual? For the Council to resign en masse and hold a new election for all Council seats! Such a solution is not even possible under our governing documents! The real solution is that, accompanied by much prayer and fasting, we all individually need to turn the mirror around and look at ourselves. As the book of James explains, “If anyone among you thinks he is religious, and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this one’s religion is useless” (James 1:26).

Allow the following statement to be clear and understood by each of you who read it. This letter is designed and designated for the specific purpose of being a direct intervention action by the Council of Elders for the spiritual well-being and organizational stability of the United Church of God. In 1995 the United Church of God established a system of governance that gave the Council of Elders the responsibility to provide direction, oversight and guidance within the Church. Allow us to be blunt and to the point. The present atmosphere among some in the ministry, and now increasingly filtering into our general membership, is spiritually damaging. Such conditions impede our ability to spiritually and organizationally function. The situation is neither worthy of the high calling by God the Father nor the devotion of His Son, our Savior.

In 1995 the United Church of God established a system of governance that gave the Council the responsibility to provide oversight and guidance within the Church. In 1995, as a duly constituted General Conference of Elders, we all approved the following:

1) The General Conference of Elders would have the ultimate authority in the sense that it can select new Council members, approve amendments and responsibly guard the doctrinal integrity of the Church.

2) The Council of Elders would have authority as a collective body to govern the Church.

3) The administration headed by a president would carry out the daily operations of the Church, based on the directives and guidelines of the Council.

Apparently many do not understand or have forgotten or chosen to ignore this constitutional reality, but this is the binding agreement of our organizational form of governance. The Council is the primary governing body of United, and we all must learn to work together. How can we expect to be kings and priests if we cannot deliberately decide to walk and work together? Shouldn’t we expect the ministry of the Church to set an example of how to work together? Do we expect God to bless an organization in which even the leaders cannot walk together?

Many have said, as has the Council in public and private deliberations, that what separates us is not doctrine, but philosophical and administrational perspectives. We all validate the oneness expressed by Paul in Ephesians 4:4-6: “There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.” Beyond this, we all agree on the scriptural revelations regarding the Ten Commandments, God’s plan as revealed through the Holy Days, the approach of the literal Kingdom of God and so much more.

What divides us are not matters of biblical information and truth, but spiritual application of some of the most basic of Christian principles. Jesus Christ implored those who would follow Him to worship in “spirit and truth” (John 4:24). The reality is, even though we have been strong in the truth of what we know, we have been weak in those matters of “the spirit”—of who and what we are to be.

Yes, matters of “the spirit”—like going to your brother (Matthew 18:15-16), evaluating your own spiritual moorings before correcting another (Galatians 6:1-2), avoiding following people and saying “I am of” this man or that man (1 Corinthians 1:12-13), focusing on the positive (Philippians 4:8), leaving our worries with God in prayer and fasting (Philippians 4:6-8) and, yes, forgiveness! How can we effectively preach a message of repentance, forgiveness and reconciliation of our fellow human beings to our Heavenly Father if we cannot be reconciled ourselves? Such talk is cheap and falls on shallow ground if we do not show proof of Christ living in us.

The Council of Elders is concerned for the preservation of the United Church of God.

This is not simply another letter to merely encourage us to consider “getting along.” This is not only a new day, but a new way of moving forward. There is a collective need and responsibility for every officer of the Church, every level of management, every employee and every minister to support the direction and resolutions of the Council and the General Conference of Elders. Some of those resolutions you may not personally agree with, but they will have been arrived at within the governance structure that we have all accepted. All should support them in a manner consistent with Christian principles and communication, while at the same time exercising our privilege as individuals to contribute to the ongoing discussion concerning the welfare of the Church. Those matters that have been formally reviewed over an extended period of time and approved by the Council (for example, the Council’s conclusion that no evidence has been presented that “bloc voting” for candidates via an “alternate” discussion group occurred) will not be revisited unless new and extraordinary circumstances dictate otherwise. We must move on from here with those who desire to move forward.

The Council will rely upon all employees, elders and members to act upon this basis of assurance and Christian goodwill.

With this resolve established, are we saying that Church leadership should simply be followed and never questioned? Absolutely not! There are a number of responsible communication and governance mechanisms in place to assure a wide level of input. But once a decision is made, we need to move forward and quit rehashing the same issues, objections or opinions of detractors over and over again.

We fully understand that every Council, past, present and future, will not be perfect. The members of this Council have been diligent and merciful, knowing we have men with strong feelings on opposite sides of issues such as relocation. In attending to Council responsibilities, we accept that actions on issues of the past three years may have not been as well considered as they might have been. But they have been mistakes of procedure, not of the heart. Beyond that we eagerly look forward to working with a duly appointed administration that works and serves at the pleasure of the Council on behalf of the General Conference of Elders.

As an organization, United has so much going for it. We are on the cusp of so many dynamic dynamicopportunities. Our ways and means of preaching the gospel via the Internet, commercial television and publishing are just now crystallizing in a way that will hopefully merit God’s blessing and be used toward His glory. We are seriously looking at remodeling our home office facility in a way that will facilitate the needs for an expanded effort by a growing Church. Always behind this are the faithful members, trained and dedicated pastors, elders who go above and beyond the call of duty, skilled and experienced employees carrying out important functions, and numerous volunteers serving in our Church youth and educational programs. Yes, good things are happening that should allow us to move forward with great confidence that the work God has given us to do will be done well.

We have laid out where we have been, where we are, what we expect and where we are headed. It is our eager hope that you will desire to be a part of a unified effort based on these shared heartfelt words. We realize this letter will be received by different individuals in different ways. One individual might describe these words as long overdue, while at the same time another might be challenged by its implications. Please know that we are all being challenged at this time to move forward in a godly manner. It is our deepest desire that you will continue to support the efforts of the Council as it guides the United Church of God toward fulfilling God’s purposes.

As we move forward, we are going to advance by not only focusing on the word “united,” but focusing on a key attribute of the Head of the Church, Jesus Christ, who is the Prince of Peace (Isaiah 9:6) and whose Spirit brings us peace (John 14:27). Beyond that, “united” does not mean merely external conformity to rules, bylaws and policies. True unity comes from God’s Spirit working in us. It is your personal gift to God and to others that your life’s confession and its fruit by word of mouth and deed is “not my will, but Your will be done.”

With these stated goals in mind, we are encouraging the entire ministry to devote time during the month of January specifically for prayer and fasting in seeking God’s guidance and perfect will toward us as individuals and as a collective body of believers.

Dear friends and fellow servants of the Living God, we need to work together with a common purpose—not divided by our differences, but strengthened by our commitment to the far greater things that unite us.

In deep respect,
Council of Elders

A Missive From Meeker

Joel Meeker racks petulance up to a new level. Remember Meeker, the guy who laid into Aaron Dean in 2008, then offered a sullen apology? Here's the kind of thing that presses Meeker's righteous indignation button.

Subject: EF: Alternative Forum findings

From Joel Meeker, Milford OH

Following the Council’s communiqué, in the ministerial newsletter, concerning its retreat discussions and its finding that there was nothing wrong with the alternative internet forum, I thought it might be useful to give a description of what it was, so that we can clearly understand what was and is being discussed. Some don’t read longer posts, so the most salient points have been bolded so you can skim and find them quickly.

The Rules of the Elders Forum state “The PURPOSE of Elders Forum will be to use a vehicle by which we can communicate in a professional manner on issues facing the General Conference of Elders and Church.” I believe these ethical concerns about the alternative forum are grave issues facing the GCE now. I shall do my best to respect the EF rules while attempting to deal with a sensitive and somewhat emotionally charged issue.

The Council communiqué last Thursday defended the rescission resolution by referring to a “legal opinion that to have concerns and not to do so would be unethical.” According to that legal opinion, we are bound to speak up and try to change things if we have ethical concerns. We have such issues before us now.

After conducting a personal investigation, outside of any work done on or for the Council, and without using any information that came from executive sessions of the Council, I was eventually able to get input from several men who were on the alternative forum and decided to leave it, or were dropped from it. I will do my best to present the findings as dispassionately as possible, not to undermine anyone’s reputation as the EF rules and Christianity forbid, and will limit my personal opinion to the last paragraphs of this post.

These alternative forums have existed for several years, until the latest one was closed shortly before the ballot last May, when elders started asking pointed questions about it. One could ask why, if there was nothing wrong with this forum, it would be shut down once its existence became more widely known and questions were being asked about it. It would have had time to affect the balloting of the elders participating.

Elders entered the forum circle only by invitation, that is, the gatekeeper contacted individual elders who might fit the profile being sought. The elders apparently had to be vetted by an authority of the forum who then decided if the prospective participant’s outlook fit. This was not just a group of old friends talking things over. Men were solicited who hardly knew the gatekeeper. Before being admitted, elders had to give their word that they would never divulge the names of the elders on the forum or the comments that were made – including if they chose to leave the forum later on. Apparently, elders who didn’t display the desired attitude in their comments could be and sometimes were dropped.

According to the information given to me, the forum was mostly a platform for criticizing our administration, and members of previous Councils who supported the administration in a traditional, conservative view of how the Church should operate and who were in favor of the relocation. One elder who left the forum when he discovered what it was like described it as “very offensive.” Since the following information was discussed openly at the Council retreat, since the Council found that there was nothing wrong with the alternative forum, and since permission was given to share non-executive-session information, there’s no reason we shouldn’t all know that Paul Kieffer set up the forum and was the gatekeeper. At least one other presently-serving Council member was also part of it.

The Council communiqué reads in part: “It [the Council] acknowledges that forums have existed in the past, but there was little merit to the descriptions given as to size or negative intent…. The Council is sufficiently convinced that there was no block voting or attempt to bloc vote” (emphasis mine).

Since these conclusions are very much at odds with what I learned from several former participants, it would be helpful to know how the Council reached these conclusions:

· Did the Council read all, or some, or any, of the posts from the alternative forum/s?

· How many former participants were interviewed?

· On whose testimony did the Council base its findings?

· Is the Council “sufficiently convinced” there was no negative intent based solely on the statements of the man or men on the Council itself who set up the forum and/or participated in it?

· If so, should that be considered unbiased testimony?

· Should the Council recuse itself from this matter to avoid what appears to be an obvious and serious conflict of interest?

· Should the GCE set up its own independent committee of inquiry?

I suppose depending on our personal outlooks, some might not be shocked by such a situation and such conduct in the ministry. It is very sad to me that fellow elders have defended, even on this forum, such behavior, which I find completely unethical and unacceptable. If this is considered acceptable ethical behavior by some elders in United, I can only wonder how much common ground we will be able to find in matters of ethics and moral principles. We must be in agreement on those principles if we are to trust one another and to work together.

Nice guy!

The Waddle Factor

Despite Paul Kieffer having fallen on his sword, word is that the hounds are still baying. How did it all happen? AW has received copies of tedious and lengthy missives sent to the COE by Houston South UCG members Brian and Rhonda Waddle, who seem to have precipitated this situation by "much importunity." There is also a somewhat testy reply by Scott Ashley (and hey, I think he showed admirable restraint!) If you're a UCG member, and not yet sufficiently depressed, ask your pastor to email you copies - he almost certainly has them.

Frankly, viewed from an outsider perspective, the whole thing has been a circus; giving the lie to the "united" descriptor in UCG's name. Would the Waddle's complaints have been treated differently without behind-the-scenes barracking from leading ministers who are out of step with the new COE?

Holladay on the Kieffer resignation

December 14, 2009

Dear fellow elders,

On Wednesday, December 9^th Paul Kieffer voluntarily resigned from his position on the Council of Elders. Paul’s statement concerning his resignation is copied for your information below. Paul’s sincere desire is to do what is best for the United Church of God. I know that both he and Monica will appreciate your prayers.

“Since my election to the Council of Elders in May 2008, various allegations people have made about me have made me a lightning rod among some in the ministry and membership. Due to the concern this has caused for some, I have decided it is best for me to voluntarily resign from the Council of Elders in the hope that this will lay these issues to rest. It is my sincere hope that this will lead to greater unity in the Church, help all of us focus on our mission of preaching the gospel and preparing a people, and move forward together.” Paul Kieffer

Paul was one of the three international council members. David Baker was the runner-up of the International candidates in the 2009 balloting. David Baker has accepted the responsibility of replacing Paul on the Council. We welcome David to the Council of Elders and will look forward to working closely with him in the future. David and Dorrie will likewise solicit your prayers for these additional duties.

In Christ's service,

Roy Holladay

On Behalf of the Council of Elders

Is No News "Good News"?

What's up with UCG's Council of Elders? The lads have gathered in holy conclave, then dispersed to the winds. Only the first AM session of their deliberations has so far been posted on the Web, however. What burning issues came up? Patience, it seems, is a virtue.

Die Meistersinger von Bonn

(Erster tiel)


Paul Kieffer is highly regarded by his elder-colleagues in UCG, and has been elected as an international member of the COE (check out his profile.) Paul is also a keen contributor to the Elders' Forum, and not exactly stand-offish about putting radical ideas up for debate. Consider this example...

Paul Kieffer (Bonn, Germany)

This message may be shared.

I appreciated the positive comments made re: the Living Church of God's media efforts. My father-in-law John Burquist is an elder in LCG. On several occasions my wife Monica and I have attended LCG services as guests, accompanying Mr. Burquist. Other than one time when brief mention was made in the sermon on LCG's understanding of New Testament governance, everything I heard was pretty much identical to what UCG teaches. The atmosphere at services was -- well, like at UCG services. :-)

"Chicago Bill" Bradford mentioned the potential synergy effect between our two organizations.

This topic may be especially interesting in the non-English language areas where there is considerable duplication of effort in producing materal [sic] with basically the same message. Via my good contacts in LCG, some years ago I inquired informally about the possibility of "joint publishing" a booklet in German where UCG's and LCG's beliefs are practically identical. For various reasons the idea went nowhere.

Personally I prefer the proactive approach, rather than inertia. I take comments seriously relayed to me from a fellow elder about what some young people say who fellowship across organizational boundaries. "Wait till the older generation dies off, then we'll get this impasse resolved," is what some of those young people think.

The recently revised guidelines for accepting an invitation to speak outside UCG have no effect on the policy re: required approval for non-UCG speakers being invited to speak at UCG.

I don't know how it could be worded, but I think a revision of that policy to exempt or to "soften" the required highest level approval for an LCG elder to speak at UCG would be a very positive signal toward LCG (without UCG expecting any reciprocal action being taken by LCG in return).

Is UCG "big" enough to take this first small step for CoG mankind? :-)

I think we are.

This is the bold new step... or at least one of the bold new steps (yes Mildred, there are others) that the UCG's leading lights are tossing around.

Of course, after years of "reading between the lines" in order to make sense of the machinations of the lads in Pasadena, it is possible to be just a tad cynical about this particular suggestion...

(Zweiter tiel to follow)

UCG's new brooms

Things are changing in the United Church of God. Remember the brouhaha when Aaron Dean spoke to a non-UCG group? The "powers that be" censured him severely, only to then have their noses rubbed in it when Dean was elected to the Council of Elders. Now, with more new faces added to the governing body, changes are in the air. Here is the preamble to the new guidelines on speaking to outsiders.

The United Church of God, an International Association (hereafter UCGIA), acknowledges that the Body of Christ is a spiritual organism transcending corporate boundaries. We do not claim that all Christians are among our fellowship, neither do we claim to be the only organization through which God may be working. UCGIA desires, therefore, to promote unity and cooperation and to share our beliefs and teachings within the broader Church of God community.

UCGIA also believes that a Christian teacher, in following the examples of Jesus Christ and the apostles, is to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the Kingdom of God with other individuals and religious organizations, whenever granted opportunity. This responsibility encompasses professing believers and non-believers.

But wait, are those storm clouds gathering on the horizon? There are some very unhappy campers, in particular those who championed the old ways. The new force is also pushing several items on their agenda that have the potential to be highly divisive. It seems the generational change is not going to go unchallenged.

Poor old Clyde Kilough!

UCG - in transition?

A thoughtful commentary on the changed composition of the Council of Elders comes in private correspondence from someone who is closer to both the personalities and the issues than most of us. The points made:

(1) The new board members are fairly "free thinkers" in the UCG context.

(2) For the first time younger individuals are in the majority on the council. While this won't mean a change in doctrine, it could well mean changes in policies and administration.

(3) Many of these individuals lean towards greater accountability in United's operations.

(4) Many of these individuals want to see a change in the way the ministry treat the members (including supporting the right of members to express themselves freely.)

(5) Many of these individuals want to see the lack of unity that exists among the ministry addressed.

(6) Most of these observations can be documented from their bios which were issued prior to voting.

Putting aside cynicism, this sounds like a positive step as UCG appears to move closer to the principles which it started out with. The precedent here may be unparalleled in the Church of God tradition - excluding the exemplary record of the Church of God (Seventh Day) - and is a forceful reminder that the Tkach WCG/GCI continues to lag far behind its biggest splinter in establishing mechanisms for accountable governance. The real litmus test may be whether rapprochement will eventually be possible with some of the congregations (one thinks immediately of COG-Big Sandy) that left UCG under previous administrations.

Meanwhile, at the fulcrum of God's Work

Forget the Packophiles, the Flurridians and Rodomites. The True Work of God is being carried out today by the (honey, would you please pass me the baloney?) United Church of God, an International Association. And wouldn't you know it, the lads are currently meeting in holy convocation. The Word of the Lord may not be going forth from Zion exactly, but it is being trumpeted abroad via Twitter. This update from David Myers:

UCG's new Council of Elders members are William Eddington (Int'l), Richard Thompson (returning), Scott Ashley, Melvin Rhodes.

Eddington hails from Oz (but, hey, noone's perfect!), Melvin writes the goofy right-wing-nut GN articles on world events and prophecy, while Scott paddles the flagship as editor of the GN.

So what does this mean? Can we read the future direction of UCG in these chicken entrails? Who is Richard Thompson? Is the Old Guard on the way out? Does anyone care?

Well, Russell apparently does, and so does Aggie. How about this comment:

The sermon yesterday was given by Bob Dick, a minister from Portland. I don’t know all of the details of what he said, but it’s my understanding that they said that the truth can be found anywhere, that HWA is no longer unique, and that they need to change how they relate to the people around them.

If that's the case, may I respond with a modest burst of politely subdued clapping from the cheap seats.

(Thanks to Aggie for the nod.)