Is United Church of God getting ready to liberalize doctrine? Some believe that is happening. Some believe that a desire on the part of the current leaders of UCG to liberalize doctrine, to water down the truths of the Bible and of the Church of God, has been an important cause of the split. According to this view, now that the current leaders of UCG have strengthened their power, they will move to change doctrine, to move in the direction of traditional, mainstream Christianity as Mr. Tkach did in Worldwide, slowly and gradually perhaps, but in that direction nevertheless.
I personally do not know if this is true. It might be. There have been clues and hints, but so far no smoking gun that I can identify to prove the case. So this is a hard question for me to answer definitively. And I do not advocate any member of UCG leaving that fellowship just because of rumors that they may change doctrine in the future.
But I can answer how to prepare. If you are a member or attendee of UCG and you want to be protected from wrong doctrines, I think I know how you can prepare. The steps you should take are good steps to take even if doctrinal change does not take place, and they will help you see through any errors if change does take place.
If change comes, there will be a great effort to make the changes appear right. Many scriptures will be used to support the changes. That is how it was in Worldwide. There will be some truth and maybe some error mixed in. One point of truth that is likely to be included is the truth that we are to grow in grace and knowledge and be willing to be corrected by the Bible and learn new knowledge from the Bible. And that is a true and valid principle. UCG teachers may say that members should not be afraid of changes in doctrine if those changes are right and needed, and that is true. They may say that changes should not be rejected just because they are changes and sound different but that we should examine what the Bible says on the subject with an open mind, a mind willing to admit error and be corrected.
Nevertheless, the actual changes themselves might not be right.
So how can a member know? And how can a member be protected from deception in such a case?
This applies not just to members of UCG but all of us Church of God members wherever we may fellowship.
We have to know our Bibles. We have draw close to God in an attitude of meekness, humbleness, and willingness to believe God and the Bible more than man. And we have to put in the time to really study the Bible in an attitude of belief, to prove for ourselves what we believe and what we have been taught. This takes time. It takes time away from TV and entertainment. It is a sacrifice we must make if we want to be on solid ground. This kind of study can't be improvised suddenly at the last minute when you have to make a decision.
Prayer, meditation, and fasting can also help one draw closer to God.
Then if changes come, we will have the overall background in Bible knowledge, not based just on Church of God literature, but based on our own study of the Bible, and we will have the attitude and habit, built up over many months or years, of proving what God says and believing Him. With that attitude and background, we can examine any proposed change in doctrine in the Bible itself, and the Bible, which is God speaking, will tell us if the change in doctrine is true or false.
We have to apply the principles of Bible study that God Himself teaches through the scriptures:
"Test all things; hold fast what is good" (1 Thessalonians 5:21).
" 'Listen to Me, you who follow after righteousness, you who seek the Lord: Look to the rock from which you were hewn, and to the hole of the pit from which you were dug. Look to Abraham your father, and to Sarah who bore you; for I called him alone, and blessed him and increased him' " (Isaiah 51:1-2).
"For what does the Scripture say? 'Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness' " (Romans 4:3).
"And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, 'Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness' " (James 2:23).
"...just as Abraham 'believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness' " (Galatians 3:6).
"And he believed in the Lord, and He accounted it to him for righteousness" (Genesis 15:6).
" 'For all those things My hand has made, and all those things exist,' says the LORD. 'But on this one will I look: On him who is poor and of a contrite spirit, and who trembles at My word' " (Isaiah 66:2).
"But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2 Timothy 3:14-16).
"And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who did not obey? So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief" (Hebrews 3:18-19).
"You will say then, 'Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in.' Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear. For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either. Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off" (Romans 11:19-22).
"It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God" (Hebrews 10:31).
Notice that Jesus Christ said that faith is a weightier matter of the law. "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone" (Matthew 23:23). Faith is more than believing God exists (James 2:19). It means believing what God says. And that is a matter of law, as this passage shows. It is a violation of God's law, one of the three weightier matters of the law, to disbelieve what God says, and therefore since sin is the transgression of the law (1 John 3:4), to disbelieve God is sin. Notice that those who do not believe God will not be in the kingdom of God: "But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death" (Revelation 21:8).
It is a serious matter to refuse to believe the Bible in matters of doctrine. If I understand these scriptures correctly, you could lose your salvation if you disbelieve what God says. We all make mistakes, I do not say any of us will lose salvation because of sincere mistakes. But we better have an attitude that trusts God and His word to be true and is willing to believe God more than man.
There is one more point about being protected from deception, and I make this point in my book Preaching the Gospel. If we want to have God's help to have spiritual discernment so we are not deceived, we better be careful that we do not ourselves deceive others in anything. "Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap" (Galatians 6:7). Don't lie to anyone. In any situation, speak the truth or keep silent, but don't lie. If we lie and deceive others, God may let us become the victims of deception, letting us reap the consequences of what we sow. If you study the life of Jacob, you will see that after Jacob lied to his father to obtain a blessing, God let Jacob suffer many things because of how others lied to him. See Genesis 27:1-35, 29:18-25, 31:7, and 37:31-35. God let Jacob learn the hard way the consequences of lying. There may be a lesson in that.
Something to think about.
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
Our Attitude and Approach Towards God's Word, Chapter 1
How to Understand the Bible, Chapter 1
Focusing on the Bible, Chapter 5
The Source of Our Beliefs, Chapter 6
Faith, Chapter 6
How Could Trained and Experienced Ministers Be Deceived?, Chapter 5
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Friday, September 2, 2011
Jim Franks is President of COGWA
The COGWA Ministerial Board of Directors has named Jim Franks as president, David Johnson as secretary, and Jason Lovelady as treasurer of COGWA. Here is a link to the announcement from COGWA:
http://members.cogwa.org/news/september-1-2011-member-letter/
Mr. Franks is a member of the board, and so will have to resign from the board before he takes office as president.
Of all the positions in COGWA, the most powerful is the presidency. The entire board is more powerful in the long run, but no one man of the seven men on the board is as powerful as the president. It is fitting that the most powerful position be filled by one who is judged as most competent and qualified, and since the ministers in electing the seven members of the board presumably voted for those they felt were the most competent and qualified, it is not surprising that the president would be one of the seven board members.
Clyde Kilough, Dave Johnson, Dave Evans, and Jason Lovelady have been named to a task force to research a permanent headquarters location and advise the president.
What still needs to be done is to name five members each of two committees (Doctrine Committee and Moral and Ethics Assessment Committee) and to name operation managers for departments such as ministerial services and media (preaching the gospel). Also, the vacancy on the board that will be created when Mr. Franks resigns to accept the presidency will have to be filled. The board can still operate with six members, but some decisions must be made by a vote of 5 ballots of all board members, so it may be important that the vacancy be filled relatively soon.
Qualifications for membership on the two committees include the requirement of 20 years of service as a minister, and for the Moral and Ethics Committee include the requirements that members be at least 60 years old and not members of the board. Members are nominated by the president and approved by at least five members of the board.
Operations managers are nominated by the president and approved by a simple majority of the board.
The vacancy on the board left when Mr. Franks resigns to become president will be filled by an election by the ministry. There will be two men on the ballot. As I understand it, those two men will be those two who received the most votes in the last election among those who were nominated but were not elected to the board.
To fill all these positions will take a few weeks, so it is understandable if this process goes to around the time of the beginning of the Feast. I would think that Mr. Franks will move quickly to nominate important operation managers and these can be approved by a simple majority vote of the board, which would require four board members voting to approve. Since at least four board members besides Mr. Franks approved his selection as president, it is likely those same board members will approve his recommendations for director of ministerial services, media director, etc. So I think these matters, which may be the most critical for the effective administration of COGWA, will be taken care of quickly.
The requirement that many decisions require approval by five out of seven members of the board will not be a major problem organizationally as long as there is general unity among the ministers in COGWA. Right now, that unity seems to exist. There is an apparent spirit of cooperation. This may be partly because of the recent trial these ministers have gone through together coming out of UCG, as well as a sincere desire on the part of many ministers to behave like Christians. A shared trial can create emotional bonds. But in the long term, if that spirit of unity and cooperation does not continue, it can be a problem. There can be deadlocks.
Suppose that four years from now when new members of the board are elected there is division among those on the new board. Suppose they are divided 4 on one side and 3 on the other on some important issues. How would they appoint a president when his present term expires, either re-electing Mr. Franks or electing a new man? Someone would have to compromise. If the division becomes as sharp as it was in UCG before the split, there could be a deadlock. Probably that won't happen for a long time, but it is a possibility.
But for right now, COGWA seems to be moving ahead with its organization. I expect the next announcements will be about the nomination and approval of the major operation managers or about the election to fill the vacancy on the board left when Mr. Franks resigns to assume the presidency.
More to come...
http://members.cogwa.org/news/september-1-2011-member-letter/
Mr. Franks is a member of the board, and so will have to resign from the board before he takes office as president.
Of all the positions in COGWA, the most powerful is the presidency. The entire board is more powerful in the long run, but no one man of the seven men on the board is as powerful as the president. It is fitting that the most powerful position be filled by one who is judged as most competent and qualified, and since the ministers in electing the seven members of the board presumably voted for those they felt were the most competent and qualified, it is not surprising that the president would be one of the seven board members.
Clyde Kilough, Dave Johnson, Dave Evans, and Jason Lovelady have been named to a task force to research a permanent headquarters location and advise the president.
What still needs to be done is to name five members each of two committees (Doctrine Committee and Moral and Ethics Assessment Committee) and to name operation managers for departments such as ministerial services and media (preaching the gospel). Also, the vacancy on the board that will be created when Mr. Franks resigns to accept the presidency will have to be filled. The board can still operate with six members, but some decisions must be made by a vote of 5 ballots of all board members, so it may be important that the vacancy be filled relatively soon.
Qualifications for membership on the two committees include the requirement of 20 years of service as a minister, and for the Moral and Ethics Committee include the requirements that members be at least 60 years old and not members of the board. Members are nominated by the president and approved by at least five members of the board.
Operations managers are nominated by the president and approved by a simple majority of the board.
The vacancy on the board left when Mr. Franks resigns to become president will be filled by an election by the ministry. There will be two men on the ballot. As I understand it, those two men will be those two who received the most votes in the last election among those who were nominated but were not elected to the board.
To fill all these positions will take a few weeks, so it is understandable if this process goes to around the time of the beginning of the Feast. I would think that Mr. Franks will move quickly to nominate important operation managers and these can be approved by a simple majority vote of the board, which would require four board members voting to approve. Since at least four board members besides Mr. Franks approved his selection as president, it is likely those same board members will approve his recommendations for director of ministerial services, media director, etc. So I think these matters, which may be the most critical for the effective administration of COGWA, will be taken care of quickly.
The requirement that many decisions require approval by five out of seven members of the board will not be a major problem organizationally as long as there is general unity among the ministers in COGWA. Right now, that unity seems to exist. There is an apparent spirit of cooperation. This may be partly because of the recent trial these ministers have gone through together coming out of UCG, as well as a sincere desire on the part of many ministers to behave like Christians. A shared trial can create emotional bonds. But in the long term, if that spirit of unity and cooperation does not continue, it can be a problem. There can be deadlocks.
Suppose that four years from now when new members of the board are elected there is division among those on the new board. Suppose they are divided 4 on one side and 3 on the other on some important issues. How would they appoint a president when his present term expires, either re-electing Mr. Franks or electing a new man? Someone would have to compromise. If the division becomes as sharp as it was in UCG before the split, there could be a deadlock. Probably that won't happen for a long time, but it is a possibility.
But for right now, COGWA seems to be moving ahead with its organization. I expect the next announcements will be about the nomination and approval of the major operation managers or about the election to fill the vacancy on the board left when Mr. Franks resigns to assume the presidency.
More to come...
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Listing of Church of God Blogs Now with Sortable Columns
I have updated the Church of God Blogs website http://www.ptgbook.org/cog-blogs.htm with sortable columns. You can now group together all blogs listed affiliated with a particular Church of God fellowship, or all blogs by a particular author, or all blogs that accept comments, etc.
Currently I list about 24 blogs including two that are inactive but I list so that viewers can browse past posts. I hope to continue to expand the list as I discover more COG blogs. I do not list anti-COG blogs or blogs generally hostile to the teachings of Herbert W. Armstrong, although some blogs may disagree with a few of his teachings. I list each blog name, URL link, the owner or author, which Church of God fellowship the writer is affiliated with (when I know it), whether the blog accepts comments or not, and whether or not the blog is a good source of Church of God news.
I provide this site so that Church of God members can read and exchange views with members and ministers in their blogs in the spirit of "iron sharpens iron" (Proverbs 27:17) and so that members can find sources of news about the Churches of God as well as uplifting messages from bloggers in their own fellowship and in others.
There is a handy link to this site in the sidebar of this blog to the right.
Currently I list about 24 blogs including two that are inactive but I list so that viewers can browse past posts. I hope to continue to expand the list as I discover more COG blogs. I do not list anti-COG blogs or blogs generally hostile to the teachings of Herbert W. Armstrong, although some blogs may disagree with a few of his teachings. I list each blog name, URL link, the owner or author, which Church of God fellowship the writer is affiliated with (when I know it), whether the blog accepts comments or not, and whether or not the blog is a good source of Church of God news.
I provide this site so that Church of God members can read and exchange views with members and ministers in their blogs in the spirit of "iron sharpens iron" (Proverbs 27:17) and so that members can find sources of news about the Churches of God as well as uplifting messages from bloggers in their own fellowship and in others.
There is a handy link to this site in the sidebar of this blog to the right.
Thursday, August 18, 2011
COGWA Election Results
Seven men out of 14 nominated candidates have been selected for Ministerial Board of Directors of Church of God, a Worldwide Association by the balloting of the ministers (including unpaid local elders) of COGWA. Here are the men selected:
Jim Franks
Douglas Horchak
Clyde Kilough
Joel Meeker
Richard Pinelli
Richard Thompson
Leon Walker
The announcement dated August 17 was made in the COGWA website.
The next step includes selection by the board of a president. There will be other positions that will need to be filled in the administration, and members of a doctrine committee and an ethics committee will have to be selected.
The president cannot be a member of the board at the same time as he is president. But the board can choose one of their own members as president and that man then resigns from the board to accept the position of president.
My guess is that either Mr. Franks or Mr. Kilough will be named president, but this is just speculation.
Here is a link to the announcement:
http://members.cogwa.org/news/august-8-2011-ministieral-board-of-directors-results/
Victor Kubik has announced that UCG has appointed three new regional pastors. They are Vern Hargrove, Ken Martin, and Steve Nutzman. Link:
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2011/08/15/new-regional-pastors-appointed/
More to come...
Jim Franks
Douglas Horchak
Clyde Kilough
Joel Meeker
Richard Pinelli
Richard Thompson
Leon Walker
The announcement dated August 17 was made in the COGWA website.
The next step includes selection by the board of a president. There will be other positions that will need to be filled in the administration, and members of a doctrine committee and an ethics committee will have to be selected.
The president cannot be a member of the board at the same time as he is president. But the board can choose one of their own members as president and that man then resigns from the board to accept the position of president.
My guess is that either Mr. Franks or Mr. Kilough will be named president, but this is just speculation.
Here is a link to the announcement:
http://members.cogwa.org/news/august-8-2011-ministieral-board-of-directors-results/
Victor Kubik has announced that UCG has appointed three new regional pastors. They are Vern Hargrove, Ken Martin, and Steve Nutzman. Link:
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2011/08/15/new-regional-pastors-appointed/
More to come...
Thursday, August 4, 2011
Could I Be Wrong About Governance? - Why I Believe Top-down Governance Is Better than Using Balloting
Just for the record, I do not accuse any individual on either side of this controversy of deliberate idolatry in the way he understands the scriptures, and I hope no one accuses me of that. In the past, I have said that UCG as an organization seems to be making an idol out of their commitment to using balloting to select leaders, not because I think they are mistaken in their views, but because they seemed to be so committed to their governance system that they seemed to be unwilling to even consider changing it. But I usually try to avoid accusing particular individuals of anything more than making a mistake because I cannot know any man's heart as God knows the heart.
Anyone can make a mistake in understanding of the scriptures, and only God can judge a particular individual for his attitude, views, and teachings because only God knows the heart. We make a mistake when we become too harsh towards each other for our differences. I would not want God to be harsh with me when I make mistakes, so I try not to be harsh with others. There is a way to debate controversial issues honestly and with respect, and I try to have a right balance in that.
Could I be wrong about governance? Of course I could. I am human. Perhaps I misunderstood the Bible about something. But I want to strive the best I can to understand the scriptures and believe what I read.
If someone is to show me I am wrong, it will have to be through the Bible, through logic, or through historical information I can check up on or know about. God can also put me through experiences through circumstances that will teach me lessons and make me think about things with a fresh perspective. And God can use us to correct each other and teach each other, and I am always aware that God may show me something through correction from others, so when someone disagrees with me, I try to follow their logic and compare it to mine to see if I might be wrong.
But that is not just true about governance. It is true for any doctrine, the Sabbath, the holy days, the nature of God - you name it. My commitment is not to these doctrines, but to the Word of God itself. I only believe the doctrines of the Church as long as I see that the Bible teaches them, but if someone showed me something in the Bible I did not see before, my commitment to God to believe what He says requires me to compare it with everything else in the Bible with an open mind and believe what God says, even if it means I have to change my doctrinal beliefs. No one has shown me from the Bible that I am wrong about the Sabbath or any other major doctrine so far.
Over time, God will correct our mistakes to the degree we are willing to believe what He says, but sometimes that correction and our learning takes time and we should be patient with each other. None of us knows everything perfectly yet, so we should still be willing to learn new things, even from each other. "As iron sharpens iron, So a man sharpens the countenance of his friend" (Proverbs 27:17). See also 1 Corinthians 13:9-13, 2 Peter 3:18, 1 Thessalonians 5:21, Acts 17:11, and Proverbs 11:14.
The reasons I believe top-down governance is what the Church of God should have rather than using balloting to choose leaders is that I see many examples of God using top-down governance in the Bible, but no examples of God setting up a system of balloting, and the Bible seems to teach us that we should learn from the examples in the Bible and not just commandments. Also, I see the fruits of Mr. Armstrong's top-down governance, and it seems to be better and greater fruit than anything produced by a group governed by a system of balloting. I think the fruits of his leadership are good, in spite of his mistakes and shortcomings, because none of us would be here if it was not for the work God did through him. I might be persuaded that I am wrong about governance, but I don't know how anyone can do so except to show me from the Bible that a) we are to learn only by the commands of God, not His examples, or b) the examples of the Bible endorse balloting as much as top-down structure in God's government. Show me one of both of these, and I will reconsider my position. Or show me from the Bible some other way. But personal insults will not persuade me much, nor would I expect them to persuade those who disagree with me.
COG NEWS UPDATE:
Michael Hanisko has reported on COGWA finances in his COGWA – Beloit blog. Steve McNeely, a COGWA accountant, reported that June income was over $800,000, and income for the year so far is about $3,880,000. He also reports that COGWA has a reserve in the bank of about $1,430,000 and that just under $400,000 of that is reserved for preaching the gospel.
Here is a link to that post:
http://cogbeloit.wordpress.com/2011/07/29/sabbath-note-7-29-11
More to come...
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
Government in the Church, Chapter 5
Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6
Church Government, Chapter 7
How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7
Anyone can make a mistake in understanding of the scriptures, and only God can judge a particular individual for his attitude, views, and teachings because only God knows the heart. We make a mistake when we become too harsh towards each other for our differences. I would not want God to be harsh with me when I make mistakes, so I try not to be harsh with others. There is a way to debate controversial issues honestly and with respect, and I try to have a right balance in that.
Could I be wrong about governance? Of course I could. I am human. Perhaps I misunderstood the Bible about something. But I want to strive the best I can to understand the scriptures and believe what I read.
If someone is to show me I am wrong, it will have to be through the Bible, through logic, or through historical information I can check up on or know about. God can also put me through experiences through circumstances that will teach me lessons and make me think about things with a fresh perspective. And God can use us to correct each other and teach each other, and I am always aware that God may show me something through correction from others, so when someone disagrees with me, I try to follow their logic and compare it to mine to see if I might be wrong.
But that is not just true about governance. It is true for any doctrine, the Sabbath, the holy days, the nature of God - you name it. My commitment is not to these doctrines, but to the Word of God itself. I only believe the doctrines of the Church as long as I see that the Bible teaches them, but if someone showed me something in the Bible I did not see before, my commitment to God to believe what He says requires me to compare it with everything else in the Bible with an open mind and believe what God says, even if it means I have to change my doctrinal beliefs. No one has shown me from the Bible that I am wrong about the Sabbath or any other major doctrine so far.
Over time, God will correct our mistakes to the degree we are willing to believe what He says, but sometimes that correction and our learning takes time and we should be patient with each other. None of us knows everything perfectly yet, so we should still be willing to learn new things, even from each other. "As iron sharpens iron, So a man sharpens the countenance of his friend" (Proverbs 27:17). See also 1 Corinthians 13:9-13, 2 Peter 3:18, 1 Thessalonians 5:21, Acts 17:11, and Proverbs 11:14.
The reasons I believe top-down governance is what the Church of God should have rather than using balloting to choose leaders is that I see many examples of God using top-down governance in the Bible, but no examples of God setting up a system of balloting, and the Bible seems to teach us that we should learn from the examples in the Bible and not just commandments. Also, I see the fruits of Mr. Armstrong's top-down governance, and it seems to be better and greater fruit than anything produced by a group governed by a system of balloting. I think the fruits of his leadership are good, in spite of his mistakes and shortcomings, because none of us would be here if it was not for the work God did through him. I might be persuaded that I am wrong about governance, but I don't know how anyone can do so except to show me from the Bible that a) we are to learn only by the commands of God, not His examples, or b) the examples of the Bible endorse balloting as much as top-down structure in God's government. Show me one of both of these, and I will reconsider my position. Or show me from the Bible some other way. But personal insults will not persuade me much, nor would I expect them to persuade those who disagree with me.
COG NEWS UPDATE:
Michael Hanisko has reported on COGWA finances in his COGWA – Beloit blog. Steve McNeely, a COGWA accountant, reported that June income was over $800,000, and income for the year so far is about $3,880,000. He also reports that COGWA has a reserve in the bank of about $1,430,000 and that just under $400,000 of that is reserved for preaching the gospel.
Here is a link to that post:
http://cogbeloit.wordpress.com/2011/07/29/sabbath-note-7-29-11
More to come...
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
Government in the Church, Chapter 5
Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6
Church Government, Chapter 7
How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7
Sunday, July 31, 2011
COGWA Announces Nomination Ballot Results
Church of God, a Worldwide Association (COGWA) has announced the results of balloting of career elders (paid with 5 years paid experience) to nominate 14 candidates for election to the Ministerial Board of Directors (MBOD). Here are the 14 men nominated:
David Lawrence Baker
Jim B. Franks
Arnold Jerome Hampton
Michael James Hanisko
Douglas Robert Horchak
Clyde L. Kilough
Leslie L. McCullough
Joel Christopher Meeker
Richard Robert Pinelli
David L. Register
Larry R. Salyer
Richard Conerly Thompson
Leon Walker
Lyle Eugene Welty
There will now be a ballot by the entire COGWA ministry (including unpaid local elders) to elect seven of these men to be members of the board. That board will in turn choose a president and other positions to help lead the Church. No schedule was announced for that balloting, but I imagine it will be finished before the end of August. Once that is done, I do not think it will take long for the board to name a president and other administrators. The board will also name members of two committees, a doctrine committee and an ethics committee.
Here is a link to the announcement:
http://members.cogwa.org/news/july-30-2011-governance-update/
More to come...
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
Government in the Church, Chapter 5
Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6
Church Government, Chapter 7
How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7
David Lawrence Baker
Jim B. Franks
Arnold Jerome Hampton
Michael James Hanisko
Douglas Robert Horchak
Clyde L. Kilough
Leslie L. McCullough
Joel Christopher Meeker
Richard Robert Pinelli
David L. Register
Larry R. Salyer
Richard Conerly Thompson
Leon Walker
Lyle Eugene Welty
There will now be a ballot by the entire COGWA ministry (including unpaid local elders) to elect seven of these men to be members of the board. That board will in turn choose a president and other positions to help lead the Church. No schedule was announced for that balloting, but I imagine it will be finished before the end of August. Once that is done, I do not think it will take long for the board to name a president and other administrators. The board will also name members of two committees, a doctrine committee and an ethics committee.
Here is a link to the announcement:
http://members.cogwa.org/news/july-30-2011-governance-update/
More to come...
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
Government in the Church, Chapter 5
Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6
Church Government, Chapter 7
How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
UCG Is Changing
Recently I read an article in the Journal by Dixon Cartwright about a question and answer session given by UCG leaders January 31 and February 1, 2011. I thought the article helped to give some insight into the state of UCG today and some clues as to where it may be headed. President Dennis Luker and ten members of the Council of Elders appeared before about 300 UCG elders and their wives and answered a variety of questions on such topics as governance, doctrine, reconciliation, and the split. Then men on stage included Scott Ashley, Bob Berendt, Aaron Dean, Bill Eddington, Roy Holladay, Victor Kubik, Dennis Luker, Darris McNeely, Melvin Rhodes, Mario Seiglie, and Robin Webber.
There was discussion of the situation in Latin America. Mr. Holladay said that about a quarter of original membership of UCG in Latin America has stayed with UCG. There was quite a bit of discussion about "servant leadership", and some of that may have been about the meaning of the term, though no clear definition seemed to come through. Aaron Dean said that income for the year is down about 35%.
Gary Petty spoke about reconciliation, saying that "we" failed at reconciliation. Bob Berendt said that since those who disagreed have left, there is a wonderful attitude now in UCG.
Mr. Berendt's comments about the wonderful attitude that now exists in UCG remind me of a trend in the Churches of God since the scattering of the Church after Mr. Armstrong's death, which I wrote about in my book (see section titled "Church Government"). Ministers in each group talk about the "wonderful unity" their group has, yet each group is sharply divided against the others. Each Church brags about its own unity while the whole Church of God is divided into fighting factions. Then a group, which brags about its unity, goes through a split. Then each of the fragments that is left brags about its own individual unity. Anyone remember United Church of God bragging about its unity since it formed, or after David Hulme left? Their very name, UNITED Church of God brags of unity. But they just split.
What is wonderful about UCG's attitude towards COGWA? But I think Mr. Berendt is talking about UCG's internal attitude towards itself, not towards other fellowships in the whole Church of God.
Hey, how about a merger between UCG and COGWA? After all, they have mostly the same form of governance and the same doctrines. Why not merge the two groups? (I'm only kidding.)
Shannon Lucas said that Satan caused the split and that UCG should not worry too much about the other side but rather UCG should just focus on their side.
Donald Ward spoke about governance and doctrine, saying that UCG has a dilemma. He mentioned that government was one of the most repeated doctrines Mr. Armstrong emphasized in the latter years of his life. I am not sure what point Dr. Ward was making. But he was not the only one who talked of government in the Church as "doctrine".
Howard Davis spoke of the superiority of UCG form of governance, saying that it is the God-inspired New Testament form of biblical governance, and that it should be articulated and raised to the doctrinal level. To me, he seemed to be saying that only UCG has the right form of governance.
Dael Baughman said that the current doctrinal review process is a hindrance to accepting new understanding, and that UCG should look at restructuring that process so that needed doctrinal change can be made. He seemed to say that doctrinal change has been bottled up in the past by two individuals. Melvin Rhodes said that one doctrine that has changed in the last 25 years is governance. Mr. Rhodes also encouraged elders who have suggestions for doctrinal change to write them up and submit them to the Council.
Mr. Luker encouraged audience response to some comments, in one case asking the audience to give someone a hand for saying she felt safe in UCG now, and in another case asking the audience if they would all say "amen" to a particular comment or question.
Here is a link to the full Journal article:
http://www.thejournal.org/issues/issue144/united-church-of-god-elders-ask-questions-of-council-members.html
UCG has changed and is changing. The split has changed it. It is a mistake to see UCG simply as a continuation of the group that started in 1995. This is not the same UCG minus a few dissidents. The United Church of God that existed five years ago does not exist today, under any name. It has been replaced by two new groups, the new United Church of God (UCG) and the new Church of God, a Worldwide Association, both of which are different from the old UCG. UCG members who have not realized this will, in time, see it. UCG will continue to change as time goes on.
There is a natural trend among people in general towards doctrinal liberalization, and this exists in the Churches of God as well as in the world. To resist this trend, there must be strong government. If a fellowship is allowed to drift, especially if it drifts in a direction popular with the membership, or if winning and holding members becomes a priority that leads the ministry to try to be popular with the members, that fellowship is as likely to move into liberalism as an apple is likely to fall from a tree. Right doctrine is not "natural" in that sense. Right doctrine must be actively and courageously taught, maintained, and defended, or it will be replaced by liberalism. Liberalism must be resisted, or it will gain ground.
If UCG leaders fight to maintain and defend right doctrine, and do not compromise, there will be no liberalization in UCG. But if they let things take their natural course, there will be.
More to come...
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
A Brief History of the Scattering of the Church, Chapter 5
Government in the Church, Chapter 5
Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6
Church Government, Chapter 7
How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7
There was discussion of the situation in Latin America. Mr. Holladay said that about a quarter of original membership of UCG in Latin America has stayed with UCG. There was quite a bit of discussion about "servant leadership", and some of that may have been about the meaning of the term, though no clear definition seemed to come through. Aaron Dean said that income for the year is down about 35%.
Gary Petty spoke about reconciliation, saying that "we" failed at reconciliation. Bob Berendt said that since those who disagreed have left, there is a wonderful attitude now in UCG.
Mr. Berendt's comments about the wonderful attitude that now exists in UCG remind me of a trend in the Churches of God since the scattering of the Church after Mr. Armstrong's death, which I wrote about in my book (see section titled "Church Government"). Ministers in each group talk about the "wonderful unity" their group has, yet each group is sharply divided against the others. Each Church brags about its own unity while the whole Church of God is divided into fighting factions. Then a group, which brags about its unity, goes through a split. Then each of the fragments that is left brags about its own individual unity. Anyone remember United Church of God bragging about its unity since it formed, or after David Hulme left? Their very name, UNITED Church of God brags of unity. But they just split.
What is wonderful about UCG's attitude towards COGWA? But I think Mr. Berendt is talking about UCG's internal attitude towards itself, not towards other fellowships in the whole Church of God.
Hey, how about a merger between UCG and COGWA? After all, they have mostly the same form of governance and the same doctrines. Why not merge the two groups? (I'm only kidding.)
Shannon Lucas said that Satan caused the split and that UCG should not worry too much about the other side but rather UCG should just focus on their side.
Donald Ward spoke about governance and doctrine, saying that UCG has a dilemma. He mentioned that government was one of the most repeated doctrines Mr. Armstrong emphasized in the latter years of his life. I am not sure what point Dr. Ward was making. But he was not the only one who talked of government in the Church as "doctrine".
Howard Davis spoke of the superiority of UCG form of governance, saying that it is the God-inspired New Testament form of biblical governance, and that it should be articulated and raised to the doctrinal level. To me, he seemed to be saying that only UCG has the right form of governance.
Dael Baughman said that the current doctrinal review process is a hindrance to accepting new understanding, and that UCG should look at restructuring that process so that needed doctrinal change can be made. He seemed to say that doctrinal change has been bottled up in the past by two individuals. Melvin Rhodes said that one doctrine that has changed in the last 25 years is governance. Mr. Rhodes also encouraged elders who have suggestions for doctrinal change to write them up and submit them to the Council.
Mr. Luker encouraged audience response to some comments, in one case asking the audience to give someone a hand for saying she felt safe in UCG now, and in another case asking the audience if they would all say "amen" to a particular comment or question.
Here is a link to the full Journal article:
http://www.thejournal.org/issues/issue144/united-church-of-god-elders-ask-questions-of-council-members.html
UCG has changed and is changing. The split has changed it. It is a mistake to see UCG simply as a continuation of the group that started in 1995. This is not the same UCG minus a few dissidents. The United Church of God that existed five years ago does not exist today, under any name. It has been replaced by two new groups, the new United Church of God (UCG) and the new Church of God, a Worldwide Association, both of which are different from the old UCG. UCG members who have not realized this will, in time, see it. UCG will continue to change as time goes on.
There is a natural trend among people in general towards doctrinal liberalization, and this exists in the Churches of God as well as in the world. To resist this trend, there must be strong government. If a fellowship is allowed to drift, especially if it drifts in a direction popular with the membership, or if winning and holding members becomes a priority that leads the ministry to try to be popular with the members, that fellowship is as likely to move into liberalism as an apple is likely to fall from a tree. Right doctrine is not "natural" in that sense. Right doctrine must be actively and courageously taught, maintained, and defended, or it will be replaced by liberalism. Liberalism must be resisted, or it will gain ground.
If UCG leaders fight to maintain and defend right doctrine, and do not compromise, there will be no liberalization in UCG. But if they let things take their natural course, there will be.
More to come...
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
A Brief History of the Scattering of the Church, Chapter 5
Government in the Church, Chapter 5
Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6
Church Government, Chapter 7
How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
