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. 

Poor Lil' Joel Meeker Get's Raked Over The Coals For Deception

Lil' Joel has been called on the  carpet for his recent letter where he gave his reasons for leaving UCG.  It looks like Lil' Joel was not as forthright in his letter as he claimed:

Joel was fired not for “being open with members of the French association, and warning them...of remaining with UCG” (the latter of which is problematic enough), but over evidence that he was actively attempting to break the French association away from UCGIA. I had at first heard this from only one person on the Council but was able to hear further testimony on the matter at the UCG ministerial conference. At the suggestion of other Council and administration members, I spoke to people who were directly involved with the situation in France, who gave me a detailed account of recent events. In early December 2010, Joel was still a UCGIA employee and president of EDU-France (i.e., the UCG in France). I was told that at this time he met with with French association members and verbally proposed an amendment to the Rules of Association of EDU-France to remove the requirement that its president be a minister in good standing of UCGIA. This, he is reported to have told them, was to allow him to remain their pastor even if he was no longer employed by UCGIA. The retired elder in France then sent an email to Joel stating that such action would in effect be hijacking EDU-France and that he would have to ask UCGIA president Denny Luker for help in the matter—which he eventually did on December 21. (Such action would have left those in France who wanted to remain with UCGIA cut off without an official organization there, as it’s a hard and lengthy process to incorporate as a religious organization in France due to strict laws against foreign “sects.”) Denny then contacted Joel about the matter, but, as Denny stated to me, Joel said the French elder “misunderstood.” This was apparently subterfuge, because at this time or immediately afterward, again while still a UCGIA employee, Joel wrote a letter to French association members on December 23 seeking a vote to dissolve the French association! He stated that the French work should not go independent, so he would suggest alternate affiliation. Thus, Joel was clearly working against UCGIA while a UCGIA employee. He even stated within the letter that when this action became known he would likely be fired. And he was—after this letter was translated and sent to the UCG administration and to Larry Darden, the church's attorney. I spoke with Larry, and he verified this as well. And by email Larry confirmed to me: “Joel sent the letter to UCG members in France (and other francophone countries served by France) while he was still employed by UCGIA (he was discharged and credentials revoked AFTER the COE saw his letter of December 23). The letter was a ‘smoking gun’ with respect to his intention to leave UCG and try to engineer taking the assets of EDU-France with him using an ‘Extraordinary’ meeting of member[s] of that entity.” I have a copy of the Dec. 23 letter in French and the translation into English and am able to provide these as evidence of what took place. Again, in light of this letter, it is utterly stunning that Joel would merely say he was fired for being open with the French association and giving them a warning. He obviously did a lot more than that.

Read more of the letter here: Lil'Joel

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

Board Announced For WCG2, French Not Too Keen On Joining WCG2

In COGaWA's background planning meetings while many were still part of UCG they set up a temorary list of men that would run the church.  These men were to be voted on at the COGaWA conference this past weekend.  It shoudl come as no surprise that these men were ratified to remain in power for the next six months while they see what addtional growth happens to their new church.

As usual in COGdom, it is the same old Catholic based power structure.  The same men who were rulers under Armstrong, Tkach Sr. and UCG are once again ruling in their ivory tower.

The Church of God a Worldwide Association  Board

Michael Hanisko, George Evans, Roger West, Ken Giese and Greg Sargent

Temporary Leadership Team

Jim Franks, Doug Horchak, Clyde Kilough, David Register and Richard Thompson.

It looks like poor Joel Meeker did not get many of the French speaking members in Europe to jump ship with him to the new WCG2. Of the twenty members of UCG in France only five jumped ship with Meeker. Belgium also has five members who joined him.  Big times are ahead little Joel!  Big Times!  Woo Hoo!