To Banned…
The following is an email I sent to a couple of friends of mine who inquired as to the status of Christian Educational Ministries’ current legal actions against RLDEA and the estate of the late Allie Dart. This couple found my update so interesting that they suggested I share this information on Banned. So please feel free to re-post it if you think your readership would find it interesting. You might find it too detailed and boring.
Also, Gary Gibbons, Cathy Gibbons, and I are going to spend the next month or so going thru Allie Dart’s old correspondence. For historical purposes, we would like to share with Banned a few emails and other correspondence between Allie and others to provide a more complete picture as to how this unfortunate situation has gotten to where it is today. The history behind all of this is fascinating.
--Wes White
Dear Mr. and Mrs. ______,
Thanks for asking about the current state of Christian Educational Ministries’ current legal actions against RLDEA and the estate of the late Allie Dart.
Again, I’m not directly involved in executing Allie’s will. I have no direct interest in Allie’s estate. However, the executor (Cathy Gibbons) keeps me updated on matters that may ultimately affect RLDEA of which I am president.
It is a somewhat complicated situation, so please bear with me as I try to explain what I think is one of the major impediments to a settlement. I will try not to get so granular that I end up boring you with too many details. And forgive me if I tell you things that I’ve told you before. You and I have been talking about this for over a year now? Didn’t Allie die August 2017?
Anyway, after Ron died, Allie was told by her attorney that she did not have to probate his will. Instead, an Affidavit of Heirship was presented to the court stating that Allie was the sole heir to all their community property. Allie was led to believe that, as Ron’s wife, she inherited everything of Ron’s and that she just needed to make sure her will was updated. This legal advice later proved to be incorrect.
So Allie re-wrote her will – making sure she provided for Ron’s relatives and her own relatives. She also basically disinherited CEM and left a large portion of her estate to the Ronald L. Dart Evangelistic Association which she set up before she died and instructed it to carry on and promote Ron’s materials after her death.
As you know, the Darts were well off and their assets did NOT come from the tithes and offerings of the church brethren. Ron’s salary at CEM was anywhere from $40,000 to $60,000 per year. The Dart money came from Allie’s real estate business and their rental properties. For many years, she was one of the top real estate sales agents in the Tyler area.
One of the many generous features of Allie’s will was that she gifted houses to the following four people:
n Philip Hufton (son of Ian Hufton and the late Thalia Hufton)
n Dianne and Gary McDonnell (long-time church members)
n Jamie Bozarth (Ron’s niece)
n Cathy Gibbons (who was left a house as compensation for being the executor of a complicated will that may take years to execute).
Very shortly after Allie died, Cathy turned over the deeds of their respective houses to Philip Hufton and Dianne McDonnell. Philip and Dianne now own these houses free and clear. Well, sort of.
And let’s be clear on this point: If those houses would not have been willed to Philip and Dianne, they would have gone to RLDEA. As president of RLDEA, I have absolutely no problem that RLDEA did not get these houses. First, because it’s what Allie wanted and it was her money to disburse as she pleased. And second, because the other monies RLDEA has received from Allie’s estate is more than sufficient to pay for our ministry. It is for this reason that we do not and will not accept contributions from the public.
After Allie died, the CEM board got their lawyers to set things in motion for Ron’s will to get executed because, even though CEM is not entitled to anything from Allie’s will, CEM is indeed entitled to an inheritance from Ron’s will. And let’s be honest: This is only right!
But Allie had no idea this was the case. Allie had been told by her estate attorney that it was unnecessary to probate Ron's will. Allie operated in good faith based on what her lawyer advised her. She genuinely believed that Ron’s will should never have been executed. (Needless to say, that lawyer is no longer being used to assist in the execution of Allie’s estate.)
You also asked me who is on the CEM board. It is my understanding that the following men currently comprise the CEM board of directors. The list below may not be current:
n Larry Watkins of Texas (He is a leading minister in Church of God International)
n John Beasley of Arkansas
n Rod Martin (C. Roderick Martin) of Arkansas
n Richard Crow of Texas
n Jon Garnant of California (He is a leading minister in United Church of God. I have heard he will probably eventually be on UCM’s board of directors.)
n John Currier of Alabama
n Willie Oxendine of Florida (president of CEM)
And here is the part that makes me feel really bad: CEM now says that Philip and Dianne must sell the houses which they now own and give 50% of the sale to CEM! When Cathy informed me of CEM’s demand for half of Philip’s and Dianne’s houses, she and I sat there stunned and horrified.
So here is what Cathy did. She had the new lawyer for Allie’s estate propose the following to CEM: That the four properties gifted to Allie's dearest friends be forgiven by CEM. That request was promptly refused. Cathy then made a second negotiation to CEM stating that she (Cathy) would surrender any and all claims to the house she was gifted if CEM would drop its demand that Philip, Dianne, and Jamie give CEM 50% of their houses. Cathy was willing to completely give up her gift so that Philip, Dianne, and Jamie would not get screwed out of half of their inheritance gift. (Please see Cathy’s letter below.)
And get this. CEM has rejected this offer! And I find this appalling. Based on my limited understanding of this legal situation, if Philip and Dianne refuse to sell their houses and surrender to CEM 50% of the sale, then CEM will have to take them to court. And has every intention of doing so. And we all know what Ron taught against taking a brother to court in his series on the Epistles of Paul.
There are a lot of people who are affiliated with CEM (and friends of CEM) who regularly slander Cathy. I have heard the following with my own ears:
n “I hope Cathy is happy now that she has everything of Allie’s.” Cathy now has everything?!? This is false because Cathy has received only a few personal items given to her by Allie. To date, Cathy has not even received an executor's fee for all her on-going, tireless work. These people are upset that a big portion of Allie’s will went to RLDEA and their thinking is now so twisted that they believe Cathy somehow “owns” the money that RLDEA has gotten from Allie’s estate! This is untrue. I am the president of RLDEA and I am committed to spending that money to promote Ron’s materials. Further, as a non-profit organization, RLDEA must spend its money for legitimate purposes or I will end up in jail. That’s not going to happen.
n “Cathy is a snake in the grass.”
n One person told me the following several months ago: “So-and-so happened to be driving by Allie’s house a couple of times and it looks like people are living in it. So we are wondering if Cathy has moved into Allie’s house.”
My first reaction to that was to think, “Allie’s house is on a dead end street! How can someone ‘happen to drive by Allie’s house’?” You talk about petty.
And let’s be clear: Cathy never moved into Allie’s house. Cathy already has her own beautiful house, filled with her stuff and her cats, and she has no need to live in Allie’s house. The truth of the matter is that Cathy (as executor) has spent many, many hours in Allie’s house cleaning up the place, doing repairs, and getting the house and its contents ready for sale. So, if you “happened to drive by Allie’s house,” you might have seen Cathy’s car parked there on numerous occasions. You might also have been struck (“if you happened to drive by Allie's house”) by how pristine the Dart's home looks. This would be because both Cathy and Gary have been respectful stewards of Ron and Allie's home and their estate. Certainly, the CEM contingents have had no part in this labor – it is fully on the backs of Cathy and Gary. Finally, I have been to Allie’s house many times since her death. And I can assure you that no one has lived in that house since Allie died.
So here we have Cathy who is willing to give up her personal inherited gift so that Philip, Dianne, and Jamie can receive a whole house (as Allie desired) instead of a half a house (as CEM desires). On the other hand, we have the CEM board which is demanding half of Philip’s house and half of Dianne’s house, as well as half of Jamie's (Ron’s niece) house and half of Cathy's house.
Anyway, this half-a-house problem is just one part of this huge drama. I have said from the beginning that, if CEM were to just sit down with Cathy and with Ron’s niece, Jamie (who is now the administrator of Ron’s will), they could probably resolve all this stuff. But again, this would require skills in conflict resolution – something that is unknown in so many parts of the fragmenting Armstrong Empire. Too many times, it seems as though the more years a person has spent in Armstrongism – the less ability he has to make nice with others and the less able he is to know how to work things out with others in Christian love. I believe this is the very reason why CEM keeps all the lawyers so busy. The meters for all these attorneys keep running and running. The lawyers will end up being the biggest winners in this whole thing. And it’s all so unnecessary. In addition, I don't think that this is what the supporters of Ron Dart and CEM would condone as a good use of their donation and tithe money.
The bottom line is that I have no doubt whatsoever that Ron and Allie would be aghast at what the CEM board is doing in regards to their will and final wishes.
Thanks for your inquiry.
Your brother,
Wes
___________________________________________________________________
From: Cathy Gibbons
To: The CEM Board of Directors
Re: Release of Four Properties
Date: November 20, 2018
Dear CEM Board of Directors: Willie Oxendine, John Beasley, C. Roderick Martin, Jon Garnant, John Currier, Larry Watkins and Richard Crow
For the record and on behalf of the Allie and Ron Dart estates:
1) October 18, 2018 - additional note attached to the FSA from attorney Craig Daugherty sent to CEM through their attorney Steve Spitzer:
3.3 - It is still our position that the interest of the Ron Dart Estate in the four properties devised by Allie should be gifted to the devisees. Here is a statement by my client in that regard:
Jamie Bozarth, Rodney Kubena and Cathy Gibbons, in consultation with the rest of the Dart/Driver family members, all believe in doing the right thing by deeding the four properties that Allie willed to them at 100%. We do not wish to create a monetary hardship, particularly on the McDonnell's and Philip Hufton, by making them pay half the value of their house to Ron's estate. They would probably have to sell the houses to pay this fee. These folks are members of the Church of God and CEM is the only contingent beneficiary calling for this money. When these deeds were signed over to the beneficiaries, Jim Gillen, Allie's estate attorney believed that all of Ron's property at his death belonged to Allie to do with as she wished. Ron and Allie would never have intended -- nor approved -- the gifting of only half a property. It is what it is now, so we must move forward and do the right, Christian thing
2) On November 14, 2018 attorney for CEM revised the FSA to state that all the properties, including the four that Allie willed are to be sold and 1/2 the value to be paid to Ron's estate.
Again, on behalf of Ron's estate, Administrator Jamie Bozarth (together with the Dart/Driver family) would like to ask, plead to CEM, as a contingent beneficiary, to allow Ron's estate to gift its 1/2 of these four properties to the recipients. We all believe that Ron and Allie would not have intended to gift 1/2 of a house to their family and friends.
However, if CEM feels that they must have this money, I would like to make a personal offer. We, Gary and Cathy Gibbons will gladly give up our 1/2 of the sale of the El Cerrito property to CEM that Allie willed to us if CEM will allow Jamie Bozarth, the McDonnell's and Philip Hufton to keep their properties without having to sell and pay 1/2 the value to Ron's estate.
I (Cathy Gibbons) and the surviving Dart/Driver families are requesting that CEM allow these three parties to fully have what has been willed to them. What the law says and what is morally right are often two different things. I believe that the selling of these properties will create a hardship specifically on the McDonnell's and Philip Hufton who are members of the Church of God faith.
In the end, CEM is positioned to receive a considerable amount of money from Ron's estate even without the three gifted properties.
Please consider this request as an act of Christian love as we all move forward in the finalization of the Dart Family Settlement Agreement.
Sincerely,
Cathy C. Gibbons
Followup from Cathy - December 4, 2018:
Dear Mr. Spitzer,
I received the CEM/FSA correspondence note from you today forwarded to me from my attorney Craig Daugherty. CEM is still demanding that all (4) properties (gifted by Allie) pay 1/2 their sold value to Ron's estate.
My offer letter has not been addressed. Did they receive the letter I sent to them through you on Nov. 28th? I would appreciate the favor of a response from the CEM board please.
Sincerely,
Cathy Gibbons
Response from CEM attorney Steve Spitzer – December 5, 2018:
“The CEM board declined the offer. I apologize if that was not clear from our prior communications.”
Best regards,
Steve Spitzer
Steve M. Spitzer
Ramey & Flock, PC
100 East Ferguson, Suite 404
Tyler, Texas 75702
29 comments:
I thought there were "Christians" in the Christian Educational Ministries group???? That is what their name implies.
I hope Cathy hires a really good lawyer, and even if they don't win, the case can get help up in court for a long time, until all the CEM members have gone to their heavenly reward, or disappeared.
And once again COG members prove to be nasty people. It is all about "get" for so many of them. Both Ron and Allie would be disgusted and shocked at the actions of CEM.
This is what the COGs always did. If someone left half of the house proceeds to the church, it inevitably forced the person owning the second half into default because hiring a lawyer is most often cost prohibitive. I would imagine in these litigations, the church would probably always win 99% of the time. This happened to my mother, who would've used that 1/2 of the proceeds to just survive as the ex-husband fleeced her for everything she ever had during the marriage that ended in divorce. My mother was faithful to the WCG until the end of her life, and that began my odyssey walking out the door and never turning back. Corrupt bunch of bastards.
Typical Baptists!
The love of money is a root of all evil.
Too bad this does not involve Bible followers.
All of the Church of God's learned this tactic well from their mother church, the Worldwide Church of God. WCG regularly sued estates and family members who objected to WCG family members given their entire estates to the church. This was the main function of Ralph Helge and his cohorts. The Ambassador Report has several stories about how the church literally bankrupted families and ripped inheritances out of children's hands.
Is this Big Sandy? It would seem that the Armstrongism documentary producers would only need to look to east Texas to fill a good half of their upcoming documentary.
Apollos, Paul, Ron, Allie, Skip, Larry, Cathy... where is Jesus Christ in any of this?
In the letter cited above, Wes White wrote:
Jon Garnant of California (He is a leading minister in United Church of God. I have heard he will probably eventually be on UCM’s board of directors.)
What is "UCM"? Garnant is already on the CEM board of directors; what is this other group? Or does White mean to write "UCG"? If the latter, what kind of lame gossip is behind White's "I have heard he will probably eventually be" on UCG's Board of Directors (aka Council of Elders)? White loses a lot of credibility when he tries to defend "Cathy" against gossip but engages in his own gossip about others. In this, of course, White is nothing unusual; his approach is typical of "leading ministers" (to use White's own term) in the ACOGs. It does, however, make me want to stay away from all sides in this argument until they are finished fussing among themselves.
Nice reporting by one of my best friends Wes. When I'm talking with him I feel downright normal lol
...well except for the religion thingy 😉
It is vitally important that ANYONE with significant interests and assets, have in place a LIVING TRUST, and to have those assets in the trust before death. Doing so can eliminate probate, and issues such as this, including contentions of a will.
“Born to Win” seems to have been transformed into “Born to litigate”.
Don’t we just love it when Armstrongites do the Christian thing by threatening to drag their brethren into Court? How many people did Jesus drag into Court bringing lawsuits against them?
Something isn’t smelling right to me! Given that I challenged White twice about dishonesty here on Banned a couple months back to no avail of receiving a response, it may be biasing me to characterize this Wes White as “just another Armstrongite bottom feeder with little to no real world experience”. But this Wes White states:
“Anyway, after Ron died, Allie was told by her attorney that she did not have to probate his will. Instead, an Affidavit of Heirship was presented to the court stating that Allie was the sole heir to all their community property”.
The above statement alone raises a bunch of red flags in my mind:
1) Probate is required only when there is no other mechanism by which to transfer the asset to the heirs or devisees of an estate. Did the attorney who allegedly gave the incorrect legal advice actually see and read Ron Dart’s Will? I contend he/she couldn’t have read it otherwise the attorney would have known it had to be probated.
2) Was the Affidavit adjudicated by the Court? (Did a Judge signoff on the estate transfer to Allie in essence probating Ron Dart’s Will indirectly?
3) Was this Affidavit of Heirship fraudulent – Was a fraud perpetrated on the Court? Afterall, who doesn’t read a Will when it impacts them?
4) Attorneys are business people too. Most carry errors and omissions insurance. Why hasn’t the attorney who gave the bad advice been sued – at least for enough damages to compensate for the equity in the 4 houses? My guess is because we aren’t being given the full story here by Mr. White.
Like a couple months back, I won’t hold my breathe for an answer from this Wes White. Many questions, few answers. There is nothing like so-called Christians being a light to the world by dragging their brethren into Courts, or perpetrating frauds on one another.
Richard
As an Addendum to my last post - I had to search the Banned site, and alas, it wasn't a couple months ago that I challenged this so called "apolitical" Mr. Wes White, but was only December 10, 2018 under the topic "Einstein and the COGs". I guess time flies when you are having fun here on Banned :)
Mr. White, I would still like an answer to those questions I raised on the December 10 post as well as the ones I raised here. It might help your credibility. Of course, your beneficial interest in the Dart estate matters cannot be overlooked.
Richard
Nothing has ever revealed the true nature of human beings like a good confusion over who gets whose stuff...
Good show Richard December 28, 2018 at 4:16 PM
These people are always to be watched. He is or was part of Armstrongism.
There is the overt, and then the subliminal. Often the subliminal provides more of an aura of truth. Seems like this is the way the current CEM board intends to get the gospel out. After all, especially in the case of the gospel, actions do speak louder than words. Hey, CEM: Don't preach it if you can't live it. HWA did that, and look what has happened to his empire.
BB
Normally, I don’t get involved in the debates that take place in the Comments section of Banned. I figure that, if Banned is nice enough to post something I write, I have had my chance to express myself and that afterwards it is everyone else’s turn to talk – even if they disagree with me. And I don’t mind being told my thoughts are baloney. This is all part of the process we participate in on Banned.
Richard from the Lake of Fire COG has asked some questions of me. I’ll do my best to answer them.
Regarding the Allie Dart Estate post, he asks some VERY LEGAL questions. I am sorry to say that I don’t know the answers to these questions. It goes without saying that I am not a lawyer. And, since I am not the executor of Allie’s estate, there is more that I don’t know than I do know about her will. It is for this reason that I narrowed the focus of my post to deal mostly with what I feel is the injustice of what is happening regarding the four houses. I know enough about that one aspect of the will to believe that this is just plain wrong. Again, I tried to concentrate on this single issue because I think it’s so unfair that these four people are each probably going to lose half a house. If Richard wants to chastise me for being ignorant on the other matters he brings up, I have no problem with that. You won’t get any argument from me that I am ignorant of many aspects of Allie’s will.
Further, I commend Richard for being so knowledgeable of the law. He makes some good points. For that reason, I am going to forward his comments to Cathy who may find them helpful. Perhaps Richard can give me his email address in case Cathy wants to contact him if she has questions about what he has written. Richard can send his email address to me at wdwhite49@yahoo.com. I welcome further discussion on this topic and others.
Regarding his statement that I am not giving the full story, he is absolutely correct. I have NOT given the whole story because I don’t know the whole story. I am trying not to get any more involved in the execution of Allie’s estate than I have to. Further, Cathy doesn’t need me to be involved. As an untrained, non-legal person, I would only get in her way as she attempts to perform her duties as executor.
Regarding my December 10 post on Einstein, Richard asked why I believe Trump’s defined elements of nationalism are fanatical and are insanity. I never said that Trump’s defined elements of nationalism are fanatical and are insanity. What I said was this:
With all of the above in mind (again, without necessarily placing any value on the following), I believe we can paraphrase Einstein and ask the question below about the Armstrong COG movement: “When posterity recounts the achievements of the Armstrong COGs, shall men say that decades of painstaking Bible study, prayer, and fellowship carried them no farther than from religious fanaticism to the insanity of nationalism?” Again, I am only asking a question.
I get it that Richard doesn’t like it that I am apolitical. This is understandable because this bothers a lot of people. Many times, the first reaction of many liberals is to accuse me of being a conservative. The first reaction of many conservatives is to accuse me of being a liberal. In other words, “If you ain’t fer me, you must be against me.”
I am neither liberal nor conservative.
On one hand, I am against abortion. I preach that homosexuality is a sin. I love the Second Amendment and have a CCL. Liberals hate this about me.
On the other hand, I am not against ObamaCare and other social programs that help the poor. Conservatives hate this about me.
I sincerely believe I am apolitical. I don’t trust most politicians. Personally, it wouldn’t hurt my feelings if both Hillary and Trump both ended up in jail. Both have told so many lies. I am not calling them liars. Just pointing out that each has been caught in a lot of lies.
But again, it’s not my job to advocate how justice should be meted out to Hillary or Trump or any politician. I steer clear of these subjects. The only discussion I have about politics is how I regret that politics have been injected into the ecclesia via sermons, articles, booklets, Bible studies, pot luck conversation, etc. The brethren should have better things to talk about when they assemble on the Sabbath.
--Wes White
I have no idea who are the bad guys, good guys in this situation. Don't know Wes White, I don't know Cathy nor the current CEM board of directors. But i do know Ron Dart was seen by people with alternative motives as a cash cow. That I do know.
Wes White,
Thank you for responding to my questions - both on this post and your previous post on December 10. At least with me, your credibility just shot up.
I get it that you don't want to debate, but you can't just "post and run" and expect people not to question what you have written or challenge your possession. It shows you that people are reading your posts. Gary often comments to clarify or answer questions from people who comment on his posts. Dennis Diehl does the same. It was ingrained in our WCG upbringing NOT to question. In my mind, anyone including Gary the owner, is speaking from the electronic pulpit when they post topics on this website. WCG minister spoke from a physical pulpit, and no one was to question their authority or what they preached. To do so was Lake of Fire damnation as Satan inspired rebellion against the Government of God.
We may disagree or agree to disagree. That is how the best ideas surface to the top. I am wrong on many things and I learn and receive correction from others. An old adage "iron sharpens iron" applies. In the WCG, ministers beat the "weak and base things" brethren down and did not sharpen them. Instead, they turned the brethren into doormats.
The Dart estates sounds like a mess. I am not an attorney nor would I commit the crime of "unlawful practice of Law". I am just asking questions from my experience that drew red flags to me as I read your account of the events. Even your introduction stating -"This couple found my update so interesting that they suggested I share this information on Banned" - put questions of your motive in my mind. What was so interesting that it had to be shared on Banned? That Ron Dart's Will wasn't probated and the Executor was AWOL? With Probate Court approval, why didn't a substitute Executor step in while Allie was alive? (I am asking in general, I know you don't know the answer and aren't responsible for the Ron Dart portion of the estate).
I have to go with my gut, however. Something just does not smell right about this situation. This Affidavit of Heirship smacks fraud to me since apparently Ron Dart included CEM in his Will. It sounds like you agree that CEM derserves 50% of the equity when you write,"CEM is indeed entitled to an inheritance from Ron’s will. And let’s be honest: This is only right!". May I make a settlement suggestion?
If everyone agrees CEM is entitled to 50% of the value of the houses at Ron Dart's death date (death date is when "basis" for IRS purposes is established in estates) and we all know CEM is money motivated, then instead of Lawyers litigating and all the ill will of alleged brethren being dragged into Court as Jesus would do (right?), why not see if CEM would accept an offer of first mortgage deed of trust Notes with monthly payments on their 50% equity in the properties? Terms can be negotiated. CEM gets an income stream from the properties.
Conversely, if people can't make monthly deed of trust payments to CEM, then offer to sell CEM the properties with individuals named taking back Deed of Trust Notes and receive monthly income stream from CEM.
To CEM directors who may be reading my post - what can be more fair than what I have proposed?
Richard
When the tithe stream slows to a trickle, ACOG leaders resort to different tactics to bring in the financing required to live well and to get their message out. We’ve witnessed this time and again. There is a heart-rending litany of inheritances going largely to attorneys, while sickly and impoverished people who would normally be the beneficiaries of estates watch their inheritances taken away. Indoctrinated authoritarians reason that “this is God’s money!” (somehow always meaning that it belongs to themselves, and to hell with everyone else).
What can we do about it? We can do as we always do. If the CEM “board” gets their way with these houses, in any venue where they present their message, we can post comments that remind people of how they obtained their financial resources. Reality is they will have cursed their own ministries. I believe the internet has held the Armstrong movement captive, limiting its damage for the past twenty years! Welcome to the party,
CEM.
Still, part of me realizes that Ron Dart, although he transformed himself into a benign messenger, rather than conforming to the role that HWA pioneered as scammer/manipulator, still preached a brand of Armstrongism. Although benign himself, he still perpetuated a diet version of a false system, a theological scam, and he was looked to by independent or nonaligned Armstrongites as their leader. Would it be a bad thing if that all came to nought with the rest of Armstrongism?
BB
Hi Richard—
Thank you for your kind words. I hope I can live up to them.
You are correct that Allie’s estate situation has become a mess because of all the seemingly endless litigation.
Regarding your thoughts about any of the CEM leaders reading this, that would be great, but I doubt it will happen. The participants of this forum are considered to be the enemy of the Armstrong ministerial brotherhood. By participating here, I have been accused of sleeping with the enemy. These folks don’t understand the simple Christian principle that, just because a guy disagrees with you, he is not automatically your enemy.
I welcome the differences of opinion on Banned. No one here is my enemy.
—Wes
Hi Richard—
Thank you for your kind words. I hope I can live up to them.
You are correct that Allie’s estate situation has become a mess because of all the seemingly endless litigation.
Regarding your thoughts about any of the CEM leaders reading this, that would be great, but I doubt it will happen. The participants of this forum are considered to be the enemy of the Armstrong ministerial brotherhood. By participating here, I have been accused of sleeping with the enemy. These folks don’t understand the simple Christian principle that, just because a guy disagrees with you, he is not automatically your enemy.
I welcome the differences of opinion on Banned. No one here is my enemy.
—Wes
My first sentence in the second paragraph should have read, "I get it that you don't want to debate, but you can't just "post and run" and expect people not to question what you have written or challenge your position". Not possession. I was interrupted multiple times while I was writing my last post.
One other thing Wes - since you mention conflict resolution is not a strong skill in Armstrongism, if CEM doesn't accept taking back a deed of trust Note (or the converse situation) that I suggested, then I would recommend an independent business arbitrator to negotiate rather than litigate. It always less expensive to arbitrate a resolution.
To think CEM would haul alleged brethren into Court, and throw brethren out of their houses without equitable treatment is so un-Christian like. Matt. 25:35-36 doesn't say, "for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me, and when there was a conflict in executing Ron Dart's Will, you sued the hell out of me".
Richard
Richard, you nailed it in your last paragraph. I don't mean to imply that every splinter does every single one of these things, but let's face it, we're just looking at degrees of the same types of behavior caused by the doctrines of Armstrongism as we review the following list of Armstrongism's greatest hits: Leave your disabled child at the mall. Give us the inheritance you've willed us now, when it can do some good (the members got no help when they needed it later, despite deeply heart rending requests). Your retirement as a minister is based not on your years of service, but on whether or not you continue to agree with us. You may not take Passover because you depend on glaucoma medicine to preserve your eyesight. When I tell you to quit your job at a retirement center, you leave that day; none of this "giving two weeks' notice business. If your husband is beating you, don't ask us to correct him for something that happens because you have not yet learned Godly submissiveness. Don't cite us as your authority for refusing vaccinations or being a conscientious objector. Tell the court these are based on your own convictions. If your child stops attending church, you must kick them out of the house, or you yourselves are out of the church. Everything you own actually belongs to God, which in plain English means to God's ministers. So long as they remain in "God's Church", you must have compassion on your child's molester, especially if he is a minister, or minister's child. Don't pray for your unconverted relatives to come into "God's Church"! That would be as presumptuous as requesting that a friend or relative beget children! If you see a traffic accident, and it does not involve some of the brethren in the church, don't stop to aid people whom God is clearly punishing.
We've seen so much of this type of behavior over the years, that it should be perfectly obvious that Christian values are not what motivates the leaders of Armstrongism. They're going to be like Herbie, who once stated that he would lie, cheat, steal, or do anything else he thought was necessary to get out the gospel of Jesus Christ. Still, it always saddens one when there appears to be the rare rebel-outlaw good one, and the vultures end up swooping down any way, and applying the real tenets of Armstrongism to co-opt his work for Satan!
BB
I am astounded that anyone would think the COGs are bad at conflict resolution. Don’t you remember how GCG and LCG equitably shared the wealth after their split? How WCG generously shared the wealth after they changed their theology with all the splinters and freely gave the rights to all the old literature to them.
We all just love each other in the COGs and would rather suffer loss than to argue with our brothers- just like Paul admonished us.
@BB - Vultures, yes, thank you, for that reminded me of this:
http://armstrongismlibrary.blogspot.com/2017/07/cem-vultures-are-circling.html
Post a Comment