Showing posts with label UCG Resignations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label UCG Resignations. Show all posts

Monday, March 7, 2011

Lil'Joel Throws Another Tantrum



Poor misunderstood Joel Meeker.  Poor little guy can't get any respect! First he is booted from UCG and now people accuse him of deception.  Joel is having to defend his self-righteous actions yet again.  While he spends the month traveling around Africa he has sent out a missive detailing his "righteous" actions.  I feel sorry for the little guy. 

Hello again friends,

Several people have asked follow-up question about my original letter explaining why I decided I could no longer continue in the United Church of God. Some of my reasons have been challenged, and I have been asked to give further evidence of what I stated.

I will attempt to sum up the challenges and the requests for further information I have received and respond to them in this letter. If I fail to respond to these requests to the satisfaction of those making them I apologize in advance, this is a good faith effort. I don’t intend to release any more public statements on these issues, I’m not interested in an endless public debate, but people are welcome to contact me privately about any of them.

First a word about the originator of most of the challenges below, a friend of mine named Tom Robinson. Tom is a very committed Christian and an intelligent and talented writer whom I have known and respected for many years. He is also a logical and deep thinker and a good, sharp debater. At the same time, Tom is not an elder and so has not had direct access to or been involved in most, if any, of the key issues involved in the breakup of UCG. Tom works in the media department directly under a Council member who is a trusted friend of his, and who had been intimately involved in many of the problems that have broken trust in UCG. I believe Tom is being fair according to what he has been told by people he trusts. But I reject much of what he has been told. Having been personally involved in many of the matters raised, I know very certainly that Tom has been given incomplete and twisted information, when it was not simply false.

Tom kindly informed me in an e-mail about the message he was sending out in response to my first letter. When I responded to his e-mail and gave further evidence he had requested, he wrote back, indicating that he understood that his paper was based on indirect and possibly incomplete information that was at least at times difficult to accurately interpret. He wrote in part:

“I think that I still don't have enough of the context to be able to ascertain just what particular facts indicate--and certainly most people in the Church don't. In other cases, you've raised serious issues that need to be clarified in the light of day. I will try to find out the truth on these matters--though I suspect I will probably still be unable to.”

This is recognition that in his position it’s difficult if not impossible to understand everything that’s gone on, and he apparently believes he probably won’t be able to do so fully in the future. That is a very honest admission of the kind I would expect from Tom. He has only second or third-hand information, and is basing his questions or conclusions either on statements of mine for which he doesn’t have all the background or on what others have told him, and some of those “others” are far from unbiased, in fact they are at the very heart of the problems of unethical behavior and misrepresentation of facts. Conclusions can only be as good as the information on which they are based.

Also the challenges to my letter came out on a Friday before the Sunday morning on which I left for a month-long pastoral trip to Africa, a trip in which I am still engaged. On these trips I’m busy from morning to night, and it has therefore taken a bit of time for me to prepare this response. The time taken should not be construed as evidence, as some have claimed, that I was stymied and had no answers to give.

1. Challenge: I and others only provided our opinions; therefore there are not 2 or 3 witnesses as required in 1 Timothy 5:19 to receive an accusation against an elder.

2. Challenge: “Testimony” has been heard that I attempted to break the French association away from UCG; I was not simply being “open” with them, as I claimed. I verbally proposed an amendment to the French association that would have removed the stipulation that the president of UCG France be an elder in good standing of UCG ia. I told Dennis Luker that the elder in France who reported this had misunderstood, therefore I was practicing subterfuge. I called a meeting, asking for a vote to dissolve the French association so I could “take the church assets with me”, and that I would suggest an alternate affiliation.

3. Challenge: When I have been asked about specific examples of wrong-doing on the part of the Council, I have been speechless and unable to answer, which gives the impression I don’t have any real evidence. The three documents (What are the real issues?, What really happened in Latin America? and What were the Real Efforts at Reconciliation?) don’t really contain any proof of any wrong-doing. 

4. Challenge: I have not given any specifics of how Council members broke ethical laws or God’s law. Even if there were such specifics, a few examples of bad behavior are not sufficient reason to “split the church.”

5. Challenge: I implied there was a specific list of evidence of wrong doing had been presented to the Council. If that’s so, where is it? The Council has the right to interpret the Bylaws, so we need to just accept their interpretation of what they did.

6. Challenge: I stated that the Rules of Association have been completely junked. Where’s the proof? "

7. Challenge: I stated that we don’t have a government of men directly under God, but in reality we do. Mr. Armstrong as pastor General didn’t have unlimited authority, and the Council doesn’t either. I wrongly claimed that Dennis Luker equated respectful dissent with rebellion against God.

8. Challenge: I stated that the current Council members worked against former GCE and Council decisions and criticized them, but they now consider that rebellion. But really they never criticized former Council members other than privately. The process on the vote to move to Texas was based on the dissemination of “wrong information” anyway so trying to overturn it was OK.

9. Challenge: I claim that checks and balances were not respected, but they don’t have to be respected. Checks and balances work on their own and need no help. There is an Elder Expulsion Appeal Committee (EEAC) to overrule wrong expulsions. The General Conference of Elders could have removed Council members next May; everyone should have waited until then. Some men refused to follow our appeal process out to its end, so it’s their own fault for leaving.

10. Challenge: I said the Council mislead people (lied) about the Alternative Internet Forum after its investigation. But why would they even investigate at all if they were guilty? It was shut down before it could affect the voting anyway. I said they violated the 9th commandment because they gave the impressions of impartiality, but no wrong behavior was ever proven about the alternative forum. On the other hand Leon Walker did try to affect voting with his e-mail to Latin American Elders, and he also must have lied because he said in one place he answered to the president and at another time we said he never answered to the president. I also told someone “I can’t defend Leon Walker’s behavior” implying I knew he did something wrong.

11. Challenge: I knowingly leaked confidential information taken from a Council retreat about Paul Kieffer running his LIFE internet forum. My punishment was ridiculous but it was worked out by Clyde Kilough to save my employment. It was OK for the Council not to lift my punishment as promised because I was unrepentant and still maintained I was right to make the information public

12. Challenge: I said the Council was lying about Leon Walker and that it was the spirit of murder to try to destroy his reputation, but 1 Timothy 5:20 says if an elder sins, he is to be corrected before all, so the 30+ pages written about Mr. Walker were perfectly Christian.

13. Challenge: I said the Council took direct action against the members and ministry in Latin America, but really the Council and administration didn’t exclude anyone except for the cases forced on them by Mr. Walker and other ministers who wouldn’t even talk with UCG unless Mr. Walker were reinstated.

14. Challenge: I mischaracterized what happened to Jack Hendren, therefore I lied. He was never told he had to support the Council in what they had done to Mr. Walker. Actually he told the administration he no longer recognized their spiritual authority, so that’s why they fired him and were right to do so.

15. Challenge: The white papers never claimed to be official positions of UCG. The paper never said that the family didn’t violate the Sabbath by having their employees work on the Sabbath. No doctrinal review was really necessary since they were only letters, so it’s wrong to say any policy was violated by bypassing the doctrine committee 

16. Challenge: The fasting paper did not substantially change our teaching on fasting; therefore I was wrong to say it did.

17. Challenge: I misrepresented what happened to Larry Salyer by leaving out “important information,” therefore I lied. Mr. Salyer really did wrong things and it’s no surprise he was fired; nothing abusive happened.

18. Challenge: I claim the Council excluded some of its members from discussions. What are the details and where’s the proof? 

19. Challenge: I said it was wrong for the Council to withdraw the resolution to create a governance review task force put forward by all three officers. But it was really an “end-run” around Council authority. It probably also violated the Bylaws, and the Church lawyer and one outside lawyer said so. So nothing wrong really happened.

20. Challenge: I said there have been violations of God’s law and man’s law. Where is the list of these violations? The three documents (What are the real issues?, What really happened in Latin America? and What were the Real Efforts at Reconciliation?) don’t really contain any proof of wrong-doing in them.

21. Challenge: I concluded the present Council and administration are practicing lawlessness. This is “outrageous”; I have not given any proof of that. Eight men on the Council would never participate together in lies and sinful behavior.

You can read his responses here: Meeker Letter 1 and here Meeker Letter 2

              

When you read Lil' Joel's latest screed you will get to see the great dance he does to get around the accusations.  Joel seems to think he is with no fault and was one of the greatest assets UCG ever had.  Ho hum. 

Friday, February 11, 2011

COGaWA (WCG2)Premiers It's Website

WCG2/Church of God a Worldwide Association has its new official web site up.  You can follow along as little Joel talks about his superfantastic trips around the world and Ralphie talks about single life.  Such fun!

Thursday, February 10, 2011

UCG: Everything is all Daffodils and Cute Bunnies


Reading UCG Realtime you would think UCG has had only a minor little hiccup in their organizational structure and everything is phantasmagorically fabulous!  Pretty daffodils and bunnies playing in the fields of the Lord....

Here is their list of hiccups laid out:

For your information, in early 2010, there were 492 credentialed elders in the United Church of God, an International Association. Of that number, 323 (66%) are still with UCG. Of that total, we have retained 62 of 131 salaried field ministers (47%); 15 of 20 elders salaried by the home office (75%); 9 of 14 retired elders (64%); and 237 of 327 non-salaried elders (73%).
In the United States, we have retained 250 of 382 elders (65%). Of that total, we have retained 46 of 100 salaried field ministers and 180 of 248 non-salaried elders (73%).

Wednesday, February 9, 2011

Tuesday, February 1, 2011

UCG Members Still Not Happy With HQ



UCG is currently in the process of holding a private meeting for it's remaining elders and ministers.  They are determining their future as a church and what their focus will be.  UCG members around the country are tired of not getting answers from UCG brass.  Will they be forthright in their answers after the conference?  COG history says ....no.

A sampling of complaints about the non-information flow follows:


After sunset last sabbath, Aaron Dean headed up a Q&A session after services in our hall @ Big Sandy, TX. We were not very many in number, but some in attendance were there just for the session, not the services, so more arrived for the Q&A than actually attended the worship service. And with few exceptions, most of us there had been to COGWA's services earlier that day, but wanted very much to hear from both sides, so we attended both. I hold Mr. Dean in the highest regard, which made it all the more difficult to listen to how the questions were circumvented time and again. He did say vehemently that admin's stance on the sabbath has not changed, but little else was responded to directly. It was quite frustrating for members to ask questions and get lengthy responses on unrelated topics. The questions went on for hours, so people trickled out throughout the meeting feeling no better educated about what was happening than when we arrived. He kept reassuring us that he just wanted to never discuss this subject again (or in the first place) and that we as members should never have been privy to any of it anyhow. I truly do not know if he was just reluctant to answer questions himself or if he was told to talk a lot but not SAY anything. The meeting left so very much to be desired, unfortunately. Aaron Dean seemed to be genuinely heartbroken about all that's transpired and my heart goes out to him as it does for the brethren in our congregation, but hedging the questions was decidedly poor form.At a time when we desperately need leaders to fulfill living transparently, so to speak, we apparently have none capable or willing to do this. And yes, I did say this at the meeting with Aaron Dean. We were quite disillusioned about the lack of information we were getting, which makes it difficult to sift through this mess we are all in now. And for what it's worth, I believe neither camp is blameless and scrupulously sinless in their words and actions. I have chosen (and admitted freely at the meeting) that I refuse to choose a side as God's people, MY people, are in both organizations as of this moment. My allegiance is not to a certain minister or a certain organization, but to a God and His called out ones--you know, the ones who are currently picking up the tab yet again for divisions wrought by others. I didn't cause this, you didn't cause this, but still here we all are.
One thing I do hear everyone saying no matter where they are attending is that they all want to 'move forward' now. I pray that we can, even if not collectively anymore. But one thing I know to be true is that we will keep having these same issues as long as we keep doing the same things. My earnest prayer is for peace as the dust settles, and to have discerning eyes as we watch the fruits of new and existing administrations unfold.
-------------------
we had a Q&A in Tampa last Sabbath also. We don't yet know who our new minister will be, as the entire paid ministry in Florida left UCG. The circuits will probably need to be reconfigured; however, a minister most likely will need to reside in the state--somewhere. The Home Office simply doesn't have the logistical answers to some of the areas yet, and that may also be the case with Big Sandy (I don't know.) Several in our sister church in St. Pete are indeed attending both services for awhile without repercussions from UCG. It's a good question, though, and one that would be answered and acted upon according to, as you indicated, personal conviction. Many are confused and blindsided by this whole thing and need time to sort it out. They refuse to take sides until doing so. I just spoke with a member this past week who is doing exactly that.
-------------------------
Not being there I can't of course characterize how things went down. But I have been to q&a's held by Mr. Rhodes and I can tell you that we are never going to hear fully, publicly, the side of the council or of United Church of God.

Why? Because they have taken the stance that it is more important to absorb the abuse then it is to publicly criticize the individuals who have left. They want to leave the door open when and if those who have left decide to come back. They would rather be thought of as being in the wrong than to become a lighting rod for controversy.

Criminal Complaint Filed in Florida Accusing COGaWA UPDATED 2/1/11



The attorney for COGaWA has established that the complainant, Sarah Luther is a fake name.  
Here is one of his comments:

As a former prosecutor, I occasionally had the distinction of interviewing delusional individuals such as this who would fabricate patently ridiculous allegations and then ask me to act upon them. Thus, it is no surprise that the Florida Attorney General sent this individual elsewhere when she took her fish story to them. However, I would be surprised indeed to learn that they asked her to present her pitch to your agency and waste its resources.

If someone in UCG egged this person on to do this, the crap is going to hit the fan once more for United!
Read his entire letter here:  COGaWA Swiftly Responds To Accusations




Malm writes on his blog today:

A criminal complaint against four people associated with the recent split of the UCG has been filed by concerned private persons with the:  Division of Consumer Services Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.  The complaint has since been assigned to a case manager, Ms. Ben Brown, and assigned Case # 1101-03172.  The complaint alleges embezzlement or theft by deception in possible diverting of money sent to UCG HQ over the past 18 months.

Thursday, January 27, 2011

Lil' Joel Throws Another Temper Tantrum


Dear friend,
Thank you for your note and your questions about what has been happening in the United Church of God (UCG), and why I left.

As you have visited http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com, you have access to much of the pertinent information in the form of primary documents. I will respond with my own perspective here.

First of all thank you for your trust in asking for my thoughts in this difficult time. I need to let you know in the interest of transparency, that I was fired from UCG a few weeks back for being open with members of the French association, and warning them of spiritual danger I see in remaining with UCG under its current leadership. You will want to know why I felt it important to do that when it would obviously lead to my dismissal and the removal of my credentials by the leadership of the United Church of God.

The question I and others are often asked is “Where is the smoking gun?” in what's wrong in UCG. That is usually assumed to be of necessity “doctrinal,” as if a compromise of some theoretical type with a doctrine is the only valid reason for leaving a church association. In other words someone would have to teach that we will officially change a doctrine (the Sabbath is obsolete, the law of God is done away, God is a Trinity, etc.) before there would be a really serious issue. Everyone makes mistakes, we are told, therefore wrong and damaging behavior or decisions from our leadership are not reason to take the drastic step of leaving a church association. The president and the Council would have us believe this, and they repeat that the current crisis is not about doctrine, therefore there is no reason to take any action. They claim this is just a disagreement among men with no spiritual overtones. So trust them; they’re sincere and they’re in authority, so trust them. However, we must remember that doctrine is more than a theoretical belief, and more is required of Church leadership than simply thinking proper thoughts and teaching proper theory.

I will first give a short answer as to why I felt I had to be open about the danger of staying with UCG, and then give a more detailed explanation.
The short answer is first of all,  this present Council and administration are acting as if they’re “above the law” – both the governing documents in UCG and the law of God. Of course they repeat that they have high regard for and obey all proper rules and laws. But in reality they have repeatedly broken those laws, and continue to do so. Some of this is unethical (violations of men’s laws or rules); some of it is outright sin (violations of God’s law). As God does, we are to forgive sins against us when the sinner repents, but there must be repentance.

This brings us to the second point: when confronted with evidence of their unethical and sinful behavior, this Council and administration have refused to repent. They refuse even to call themselves into question. They will generally admit “we all make mistakes; I make mistakes” but they don’t admit to any particular violations of any rule or law. Rather, their answer is always to quote the UCG constitution or bylaws to claim “we are in charge, and we interpret the rules.” That is almost the only part of the UCG governing documents that they quote: the Council is “in charge,” the Council has oversight, the Council interprets, the Council decides. I believe everyone agrees that the Council is “in charge” and “decides” but only to the extent allowed by the association’s governing documents and the law of God. The Council and administration cannot lawfully exceed those limits. But they have done so and continue to do so.

The Rules of Association, for example, that must guide relationships between UCGIA, the US corporation, and national associations in other countries have been completely junked; there is no longer even a pretense of abiding by that document, the respect of which is required in the UCG Constitution and Bylaws. Constitution article 3.2.2.4 states clearly “The Council of Elders shall conduct itself in accordance with Scripture, this Constitution, the duly adopted corporate Bylaws, the Rules of Association of the UCG and applicable law.” But the Council has not and does not.

They seem to want us to accept the idea that in UCG there is government of men directly under God, in the mold of a Pastor General with unlimited authority. The Council of Elders, goes this reasoning, are the men that have either been chosen specifically by God or at least have been duly elected with God’s permission, and therefore to dissent from their decisions is rebellion against God’s government. The president appears to believe this, and says so often in his letters. The Council repeats this in its various communications.

One should note that the men who make up the current Council did not hold this point of view about our Church government before they were in power. They actively worked against previous Council and GCE decisions, and several of them admit to having criticized their predecessors on the Council and in the administration. That was acceptable back then, but they would have us believe it is now rebellion against God.

But more importantly, UCG was not and is not organized to have a government of “special” men directly under God. We didn’t feel when we organized that God had led us to see any particular men as directly chosen by Him to be our leaders. Rather we were to govern and be governed collegially, and so set up a framework of rules, under which each elder would have certain abilities and authorities and also certain responsibilities.
All elders in UCG are part of the General Conference of Elders which has certain responsibilities and prerogatives, within certain limits.
Some are chosen to serve on the Council of Elders, which is given certain responsibilities and prerogatives, within certain limits.

Some are chosen to be officers or operations managers, to whom are given certain responsibilities and prerogatives, within certain limits.
We were to all work together within that framework. Because of the abuses we witnessed in the final months we were part of the Worldwide Church of God, checks and balances were put in place in the structure of UCG to insure that no man or group of men could dominate and commandeer the organization and exert a destructive influence. But these checks and balances are not being respected or obeyed by the Council and the administration. Ongoing violations have destroyed the trust that is prerequisite for us to work together, and have negated their legitimacy.

Here are some examples of the violations under discussion:

1. When concerns were raised about the existence of a secret Internet forum which was conducted by some ministers to specifically allow them to criticize the Council and administration, and work to overturn decisions such as the relocation to Texas, the Council felt compelled to officially investigate. The result was a paper issued about “Private Discussion Groups” which cleared those involved of any wrong-doing. But the paper did not disclose that it was a member of the Council who originated and run the secret forum, and that other Council members participated. The paper was written in such a way that it gave the impression that the Council was completely impartial in the matter. This was a violation of the 9th commandment, in the spirit if not the letter. Two Council members, Clyde Kilough and Richard Thompson, resigned rather than have their names associated with such a dishonest paper.

2. Ephesians 5:11 states “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them.” When I informed the members of the GCE, through a posting on our Elders Forum (open to all elders), that Council members had originated and participated in the secret forum, the response from the Council was not explanation or repentance but punishment. I was threatened by the Council that my job was in danger for leaking “executive session” information (even though there had been no executive session meeting of the Council), and was placed on an “improvement plan” which was originally to have lasted for six months, but which was never lifted at all. This started almost 2 ½ years ago. I was further punished by being forbidden to fulfill any ministerial duties in English. I was forbidden even to give an opening or closing prayer in church services in any English-speaking areas though I was expected to quietly continue making trips to unstable parts of Africa. This open-ended punishment continued until the termination of my employment. This arbitrary punishment in order to cover the Council’s own dishonesty does not show a proper Christian approach to say the least.

3. Mr. Leon Walker, an elder of over 50 years of faithful service, was fired and replaced as Regional Director in a most abrupt manner without due process being followed, and in violation of a number of provisions in the Rules of Association. The Council then attempted to destroy Mr. Walker’s reputation through the publication of long papers claiming to publically document his guilt of all sorts of violations. The papers contained much material that was either totally false or severely distorted. The Church of God has never before published such offensive diatribes aimed at destroying the reputation of an individual minister and it is extremely shameful conduct. These actions violated the 6th and the 9th commandments.

4. Nearly 10 percent of our church membership, almost the entirety of the ministry and membership in Latin American were abruptly cut off from UCG with no explanation. This action violated not only our Rules of Association, but also basic Christian tenets of love, concern and providing needed assistance to fellow Christians. Some members were so disillusioned by the treatment their area received that they have stopped coming to services altogether. This is a serious responsibility according to Matthew 18:6-7: “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world because of offenses! For offenses must come, but woe to that man by whom the offense comes!”

I realize that those of us who have left UCG are being accused of causing offense to little ones, but that is a different scenario. The Council took direct action against the members and ministry in Latin America: they cut them off with no explanation. This is what caused the offense there: aggressive action. We who leave UCG now are taking no action against anyone, we’re simply saying “This is offensive to God and man; I won’t be a part of it any longer.” We refuse to accept the exclusion of innocent brethren and ministers, which the Council attempted to require of us.

5. When church pastor Jack Hendren explained to members in his area the false nature of the accusations against Mr. Walker, he was ordered to appear before Council delegates. He was informed that he had to support the Council in what it had done in regard to Mr. Walker and to agree to the suspension of an elder in his area who also maintained that Mr. Walker had been unfairly treated. When he stated he could not do so in good conscience, he was fired. This is the Council demanding that ministers violate their consciences or face termination.

6. The behavior of a family in Chile became an issue when it was learned that their family-owned school remained open for business on the Sabbath (Friday evening after sunset) and on certain Holy Days. This is the family of Mrs. Mario Seiglie, wife of a current Council member. The church President and the Chairman of the Council published a “white paper” titled “How do members of the United Church of God observe the Sabbath Day?” In claiming to give doctrinal instruction on the topic, the paper stated the family did not violate the Sabbath by having their employees work on the Sabbath and Holy Days. This paper did not go through the required doctrinal review prior to publication, and repeated protests by the Doctrine Committee of the Council were ignored for three weeks. The Doctrine Committee by policy must review all material of a doctrinal nature. The paper was finally withdrawn from the Church website, with the explanation that it had been posted too quickly. Months later, the Council finally did state that members should not have employees work for them on the Sabbath, but the white paper has never been repudiated and no statement of rejection or apology has been issued for it.

7. A similar “white paper” was published, titled “Fasting, Prayer and the Will of God.” This paper was written to defend the behavior of elders, including Council members. After the initial decision to relocate the office to Texas, which was preceded by a Church-wide day of fasting and prayer, these elders almost immediately began an effort to overturn the decision. This caused concern and upset among quite a number of elders who felt they had asked, through fasting and prayer, for God to guide the decision. The white paper was a rather muddled defense of the effort to rescind the decision to move, by claiming that fasting and prayer don’t really allow Christians to know God’s will. This represented a substantial change in our teaching about fasting. It is still posted and public in spite of not having been reviewed by the Doctrine Committee, and in spite of protests by the Doctrine Committee.

8. When Mr. Larry Salyer, a respected minister with over 40 years of experience, explained to members in his congregations that there were doctrinal problems in the two white papers, he was suspended and ultimately, fired for “speaking against the Council.

9. It has been documented that the Council has excluded some of its members from discussions and decisions. Some Council members were not informed that discussions would be held, and decisions were reached outside of official meetings without the participation of all members. This is highly illegal.

10. All three corporate officers placed an item on the General Conference of Elders agenda for 2010. The item was the proposal of forming a GCE task force to examine our governing structure and possibly suggest improvements to the GCE for its consideration. Bylaw 7.9.2 states that any one officer may place an item on the agenda, but the Council intervened and removed the item, claiming it violated the Bylaws and the Council’s authority. Several lawyers have stated that it did not violate the Bylaws but the Council removed it anyway.

There are many other issues and violations of internal rules and the law of God. As stated above, where there is repentance there is forgiveness. Groups of elders have gone to the Council and administration numerous times to bring to their attention violations of men’s law and God’s law. But in every case, these pleas for action and redress have been rejected out of hand. We have gone to the Council and administration numerous times in the spirit of Matthew 18.

Matthew 18:15-17 states “Moreover if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother. But if he will not hear, take with you one or two more, that ‘by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.’ And if he refuses to hear them, tell it to the church. But if he refuses even to hear the church, let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector.”

In response to brothers in the ministry coming to them humbly with sincere concerns over sin, they have not responded in a spirit of humility and receptiveness, but rather in a spirit of “exercising dominion” (i.e. Matthew 20:25), claiming that their authority as Council members precludes them having to attend to these concerns. Paul told Timothy “we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully” (1Timothy 1:8). Laws and rules can either be used properly or they can be misused and distorted. The Council and administration have been misusing rules and laws to the point of outright violation. And they suspend, expel and fire those who will not support their abuses.

I have reached the conclusion that the attitude and approach displayed by the current Council and administration is not that of seeking the will of God in submission to His law, but rather seeking their own will, and using selected provisions of human documents as justification. This will be a spiritual danger to any who continue to follow them. 2 Corinthians 6:14 warns “For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness?” I believe the above examples among many others prove that, though they claim otherwise, the current leadership of UCG is practicing lawlessness. This is why I’m convinced it is no longer fitting or right to remain part of the United Church of God, an International Association.
I hope this clarifies why I have taken the actions I have and why I believe it is time to leave UCG. Of course each of us must act on his or her personal conviction and conscience, and we will all give account before our Maker, so I certainly think no
ill of those who wait or make a different choice. I'm glad you're investigating for yourself so you can make an informed decision.

Very sincerely,
Joel Meeker

Saturday, January 22, 2011

Friday, January 14, 2011

Harold Rhodes Forced Into Retirement Because UCG Had A Dramatic Drop In Income?

Was it really a money issue or they were ticked off at his stance for questioning them?  COG has  knack for wrecking people's lives with they are in their sickbed's!





Dear Brethren,

Thursday evening, December 30, 2010, I resigned from the corporate body of the United Church of God, an International Association.  In no way am I resigning as a minister of Jesus Christ.  I have been a faithful minister of Christ for over 41 years – following and supporting the human leaders of the Church, as they followed Christ’s example; (I Cor. 11:1).


Examples of my conflict with promising unquestioning loyalty to the administration is laid out in the three documents, What Really Happened in Latin America?, What Are The Real Issues? and What Were The Real Efforts to Seek Reconciliation? (available upon request).


As a shepherd, my responsibility first and foremost, is to feed and protect the flock of God.  If I remain silent about tainted food and fouled water being distributed to the sheep of God, in order to promote peace and harmony in God’s congregations that I pastor, I prove myself to be a hireling and only interested in peace among men (Ezek. 34).  Truth sometimes brings conflict.  Despite the uproar caused by Christ when He spoke the truth, true disciples had peace with God.  


I want to share with you an interesting quote by Dr. Roger W. Sapp.  Dr. Sapp was an Army chaplain who taught leadership skills to commissioned and non-commissioned officers.  In one of his writings titled – Honoring the Truth-Teller – he states the following: “… Often in an organization, whether it is a local church, a business, a denomination, or a fellowship of churches, loyalty becomes the overriding value and begins to overcome truthfulness.  This is often revealed in private words, actions and attitudes rather than the official position of the organization.  The leaders of an organization may say that they value truthfulness but reveal in their actions that this is not really so.”


The apostle Paul chose truth over harmony when writing to the Corinthians about immoral behavior.  He incited godly disharmony when he later corrected them for accepting and putting up with a different spirit, those whom he defined as deceitful workers.  A member of the Council and Administration commented to me recently that, “a different spirit has entered the Church”.  I told him I certainly agreed.


Dealing with disharmony and standing up for what is right is a necessary part of growing in the character of Jesus Christ.  In fact, Paul said, there must be divisions among us so that those who are approved are recognized (I Cor. 11:19).


I personally do not claim perfect behavior or excellent wisdom in my every approach.  I ask for your forgiveness for anything I’ve done or said that is not a representation of the mind of Christ.  Like the apostle Paul said, I have not already attained, or am already perfected; but I press on, that I may lay hold of that which Christ Jesus has also laid on me (Philippians 3:12-14).  I hope and pray that you will do the same.


On a personal note, as all of you know, I was in three different hospitals flat on my back, for nine months fighting for my life since February 1st of last year.  The first seven weeks were spent in ICU.  But thanks to your prayers, and the prayers of many of the brethren around the world, God has intervened and I’m now finally in a position, although still somewhat incapacitated, to actively serve you, as your pastor, once again.


Several months ago, I received a visit in the hospital by Mr. Victor Kubik, (manager of Ministerial and Member Services), my boss.  He asked me if there was anything he could do for me.  I responded by saying, “Yes, there are two things you can do for me – one, please continue to pray for my recovery, and two, don’t pull the plug on me – with God’s help, I believe I can make a comeback”.  I was told I had his prayers and any change in my status, such as retirement, would be my call.  I was visited by Mr. Kubik and Mr. Aaron Dean on December 16th, 2010.  My wife and I were told that the purpose of their visit was to retire me on December 31st 2010, two weeks later.  I felt it was no need, at that point, to remind them that United’s retirement policy states, that if the Church initiated my retirement they would give me 24-36 months to prepare for it.  I was given two weeks.  They stated the reason was a financial one since the income was down.  I told them I had already received notice from the Church’s insurance company that they would no longer cover me after January 31 of 2011.  Therefore, I was in the process of setting up my Medicare Part B plus an Advantage Program to cover the rest, so I would not be a financial burden to the Church.  This seemed to make no difference.  I was surprised and pointed out that I had not planned to retire and besides, I had already made out the speaking schedule for the local church areas for January and February of 2011, and I was on it.  


Moreover, while I was in the hospital, the Administration offered my job to two different ministers, who turned it down because they knew I was planning to return to active service.  One of them contacted me after I was home and asked was I aware of this.  I said no one had talked to me at all; that’s cold.

As an employee, I can no longer support the current Council or Administration because of their actions, based on God’s standards and scriptural principles.

Loree and I have appreciated the many friendships we have formed over the past 17 years, and have counted it a privilege to serve you, the brethren in this part of the country.  We are both deeply saddened by the events unfolding in the United Church of God.  May God guide you and sustain you in these difficult and challenging times.


We will be here to serve those who wish to be associated with our new organization – the Church of God; a Worldwide Association.  We will let those of you who would like to know, the  locations and times for local church services as soon as we can make those arrangements.


With deep love and respect,

Harold and Loree Rhodes