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 In other words someone would have to teach that we will officially change a doctrine (the Sabbath is obsolete, the law of God is done away, God is a Trinity, etc.)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

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Strictly speaking, these may be valid points, if only it weren't for the fact that they are totally irrelevant.

The UCG is based on the WCG, which was based on the Radio Church of God, which was based on Herbert Armstrong, who was a complete heretical rebel from the Church of God Seventh Day, teaching the insanity of Richard Brothers from A Revealed Knowledge of the Prophecies and Times (1794).

Herbert, too, left his church to form a nutty cult. Anyone who bases their eschatology on Armstrongism is just plain wrong. Period. Proveably wrong.

So all the positioning about governance is totally irrelevant. The whole thing was bogus from the beginning.

It's as if there was an heretical sect of Scientologists who broke away to keep the Sabbath. British Israelism isn't that far away from the pseudo science fiction alternate history of Lord Xenu, after all. Then, of all things, this new sect of the cult of Scientology split in two, not because they didn't agree with the theories of the Thetans, but because they didn't like how the sect was run, and protested unfair treatment because some silly rules of governance were violated.

The only major difference I can see is that Armstrongism isn't prohibited in Germany and banned in France... yet.

DennisDiehl said...

Thats a lot of energy to put into dissent and differences of perspectives.

Would it be impossible for UCG or any COG leader and administration to just leave decisions about how they will go about living in their world and "obeying God" to them?

Can the words, "you'll have to make that decision for yourself" ever pass their lips, and without penalty?

NO2HWA said...

My 'favotire' part of Joel's screed was this, "...Mr. Larry Salyer, a respected minister with over 40 years of experience,..."

Respected???? This is a guy who connived and weaseled his way through the WCG ministry while in Pasadena. Stabbing people in the back was one of his many christian traits.

He was also one of the group of men who conspired to start a new church for Meredith while still on WCG payroll. Once that new church was started Meredith jumped ship proclaiming an instantaneous new church had formed.

Salyer then conspired in the background for the dissolution of Global. He joined forces with "Trembling lip's" McNair to usurp Meredith.

That chruch then fell apart into nothingness.

Then Salyer joined up with UCG proclaiming himself a converted evangelist for the word. UCG stupidly embraced him.

Now it is apparent that Salyer conspired once again, in the background, with more cunning and conniving to help form COGaWA.

There is nothing respectable about this man. Especially since he has joined forces with a cabal of legalists that desire to make members lives even more miserable with legalistic bullshit.

DennisDiehl said...

...so Mr. No...how do you feel abou this? :)

Lake of Fire Church of God said...

Douglas Becker said, "So all the positioning about governance is totally irrelevant. The whole thing was bogus from the beginning."

MY COMMENT - Agreed! And to quote Garner Ted Armstrong, "When the premise is wrong, everything else that follows is also wrong".

Richard

Lake of Fire Church of God said...

NO2HWA said, "Now it is apparent that Salyer conspired once again, in the background, with more cunning and conniving to help form COGaWA."

MY COMMENT - I have some history with Larry Salyer. He was sent here to Washington, D.C. after our Pastor Ken Westby was thrown out of the Church for his part in the "Rebellion of 1974". Salyer was definitely hard line.

While Mr. Salyer was here, he had Doug Horchak here as a ministerial assistant and King Finlay as a deacon. King Finlay is father of Debbie Finlay who left D.C. for Ambassador College and married future UCG President Clyde Kilough. It is my understanding from reading this website that Salyer, Horchak, King Finlay and the Kiloughs have all left UCG for COGaWA splinter. These WCG ties to one another go back almost 40 years ago here in the Washington, D.C area.

By the way, the Finlays I remember are the nicest people you will ever meet.

Richard

Anonymous said...

Mr. Joel Meeker‘s dissertation may or may not contain the facts in an unbiased presentation and it may be presented with total accuracy . I do not know nor is it important, the bigger question is not addressed . Where is the “Great God” that is the guiding factor in this organizations.? I seem to recall the early founder of the sect they follow was greatly chastised for not waiting on this deity to deliver the long promised son, and knocking up the wife’s hand maiden . The mantra of the church was wait on God , for us who do not understand what God is doing. I am but a casual outside observer , this god appears to be a very small and impotent deity who relies on a group of self designated men picking and choosing from the teachings of an old self proclaimed apostle who’s governing model they disavow as so flawed as to not be usable in UCG . Perhaps I have not addressed this will but what is missing here.?


wess