What Does Armstrongism, 'Glory Daze' and 'A Single Man' Have in Common?

Here's a couple of things that have been filmed on the Pasadena campus in the past few years.

Colin Firth in A Single Man: 

Colin Firth

A story that centers on an English professor who, one year after the sudden death of his partner, is unable to cope with his typical days in 1960's Los Angeles.

Spanky Meredith will be very unhappy with this one.  Well, maybe not.  Considering what HWA used to say about Spanky, he might actually LIKE this movie!  :-)



Then for the younger set there is the TV series  Glory Daze:

Centers on a group of friends who are trying to navigate college life in 1980s Indiana. From being out on their own for the first time to pledging a fraternity, they discover how challenging the next few years are going to be.

That's Manor Del Mar in the background.

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. 

Are "Scumbag's" Welcome in Your COG or Church?

A church in Florida has taken the radical love that Jesus brought into the world and is attempting to put it into practice.  Of course the self-righteous indignant Christians are having a hissy-fit.

"Calling people scumbags, that's just not right. I was raised in a Christian home and I was raised not to insult people," said passerby Bradley Lord.

Residents of the telephone area code do not like it either and have complained mightily.  It resulted in the city checking the sign  for code violations.  None were found and the sign stays, much to the dismay of angry residents.

The City of Tavares had code enforcement take a look at the large message after the city received complaints from residents. A spokeswoman said the church is well within its right of free speech and had no other comment.

Armstrongism has never liked scumbags wither.  In Pasadena we used to have guards on all the doors of the Auditorium, College gym and the Imperial gym to keep out scumbags.  The only people allowed in were the righteous, the chosen ones, the special ones.  At one point in time we even had a super deacon who carried a gun.

Walk-in's were never permitted.  You had to have special dispensation from the minister or had spent several months reading all of HWA's materials before you were allowed in.

That all came to a crashing end when Tkach Sr. said to stop it. Some of the super-deacons were not happy and still tried to do it, till JT forced them to stop.  These guys soon jumped ship to Flurry and Meredith's cults where they continue to do this to this day.

We have seen in the last several weeks the abject rage James Malm has towards the grace of Jesus.  Like all legalists he claims grace is a license to sin over and over and  over and over and over.

Brennan Manning has some great comments about grace:

Jesus spent a disproportionate amount of time with people described in the gospels as: the poor, the blind, the lame, the lepers, the hungry, sinners, prostitutes, tax collectors, the persecuted, the downtrodden, the captives, those possessed by unclean spirits all who labor and are heavy burdened, the rabble who know nothing of the law, the cowards, the little ones, the least, the last, and the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

In short, Jesus hung out with ragamuffins (Scumbags).

The saved sinner is prostrate in adoration, lost in wonder and praise.  He knows repentance is not what we do in order to earn forgiveness; it is what we do because we have been forgiven.  It serves as an expression of gratitude rather than an effort to earn forgiveness.  Thus the sequence of forgiveness and then repentance, rather than repentance and then forgiveness, is crucial for understanding the gospel of grace.

The sinners to whom Jesus directed his messianic ministry were not to those who skipped morning devotions or Sunday church.  His ministry was to those whom society considered real sinners.  They had done nothing to merit salvation.  Yet they opened themselves tot he gift that was offered them.  On the other hand, the self-righteous placed their trust in thew works of the Law and closed their hearts to the message of grace.

Because salvation is by grace through faith, I believe that among the countless number of people standing in front of the throne and in front of the Lamb, dressed in white robes and holding palms in their hands (revelation 7:9), I shall see the prostitute from the Kit-Kat Ranch in Carson City, Nevada, who tearfully told me she could find no other employment to support her two-year-old son .  I shall see the woman who had an abortion and is haunted by guilt and remorse but did the best she could faced with grueling alternatives; the businessman besieged with debt who sold his integrity in a series of desperate transactions; the insecure clergyman addicted to being liked, who never challenged his people from the pulpit and longed for unconditional love; the sexually-abused teen molested by his father and now selling his body on the street, who falls asleep each night after his last 'trick', whispers the name of the unknown God  he learned about in Sunday school; the death-bed convert who for decades had his cake and ate it, broke every law of God and man, wallowed in lust an draped the earth.

"But how?" we ask.  Then the voice says, "They have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of hte lamb."

There they are.  There we are-the multitude who so wanted to be faithful, who at times got defeated, soiled by life,and bested by trials, wearing the bloodied garments of life's tribulations. but through it all clung to the faith.

My friends, if this is not good news to you, you have never understood the gospel of grace.

From The Ragamuffin Gospel

I am glad to know a God who loves scumbags, the ragamuffins, the despised and the rejected!

Why After 70 Years the COG's Still Have Zero Impact in the World

The following was posted as a comment on the "What's On Your Mind Today" entry.  The response by Douglas sums up perfectly;y what is wrong with Armstrongism and the myriad of Churches of God.  Even with WCG's 60 some year presence in Pasadena and all the 'good work's that it did, it was till looked upon by the community as weird. Living in Pasadena, you soon got in the habit when you picked up the Star News and saw an article about the Church you cringed, knowing that there would be some idiotic comment or story about something stupid that the church or a chruchmember had done or said.

Douglas Becker said...

Armstrongists don't seem to understand what fools they look like to the outside world: No one is going to consider them credible with their infighting, silly ideas, failed predictions, blatant heresy, abuse and generally bad behavior.

If the Armstrongists want credibility, they need to set boundaries, abandon their crazy ideas, rethink their positions, stop the narcissism, quit the greed, take responsibility, stop setting a terrible example, quit the abuse and generally get their act together. They seem to think that their behavior is isolated and no one that matters can see their evil doing.

Wrong.

The couple being stalked in the UCG got a restraining order from Superior Court. That Boy in the Box thing hit the newspapers. The Orthodox Jews aren't happy about British Israelism. The Church of God Seventh Day isn't going to consider keeping the Feasts because of the entirely accurate reports of drunkeness and alcoholic behavior at the Feast of Tabernacles. The Seventh Day Church of God calls Armstrongism idolatry. Failed prophecies make the venue look really ridiculous to the general populace. The "church wars" are nothing but entertainment for stable Christian Churches -- and as evidence of the lack of viability the entire Armstrongist community has. The values and behaviors are laughable and panned at every turn. Psychiatrists who have learned of their behavior evaluate the Armstrongists of having multiple mental disorders.

Congratulations on bringing darkness (and dorkness) to the (spiritual) Gentiles. Do you claim to be of God? It sure doesn't look like it to an objective eye.

Congratulations for setting a terrible example to the whole world.

The ACoGs are much like an obstreperous drunken couple arguing at a restaurant, seeming to believe that no one around them sees or hears them because they are so focused on each other in their anger. They should be aware that if they continue and the Manager returns, they may be ejected after paying for the damages they caused.

March 6, 2011 8:11 AM