UCG Calls For "God to Lovingly Intervene" in Zambia Cattle Fiasco

With mounting negative publicity shining a bad light on UCG's "christian charity" it has hit back through Kubik with a letter regarding the Zambia Cattle fiasco.

November 18, 2011

In recent weeks, a number of people have weighed in concerning what they claimed happened or is happening regarding members of the United Church of God in Zambia. This includes one person who directly wrote to a family member of a former UCG COE member, copied to leadership of the Church of God, a Worldwide Association (COGWA), asking that an “open letter” be published on anti-United Church of God websites “and anywhere else it can find a home.”  

As is evident by the now-published material, that request has been carried out, apparently with no one who received that request asking that  it  remain private for determination by the appropriate authorities.   This “open letter” includes a distorted  summary of events, as well as what can only be described as a completely fabricated story about an “apology” that simply never took place. 

What is particularly sad and tragic is that, what started out as a legitimate prayer request for God to intervene and straighten matters out regarding the loss of cattle harming the livelihood of some UCG members, has now become a public campaign to bias the facts.  While we were not interested in a war of words, this public misinformation requires a reply, lest silence be taken for agreement of the false information being broadly circulated.

What we would desire, and what we believe is the position of the United Church of God, would be that a spirit of civility be restored among those who were once dear friends working together, that property be restored in a spirit of honesty to whom they were intended and that all of this be done according to the will of God.

With this, we humbly renew the prayer request, asking that God positively and lovingly intervene and set these matters aright. Since this simple prayer request, which did not include any other factors in Zambia, has been inaccurately portrayed and escalated publicly by others, it is necessary that we provide the following summary of events so members can focus their prayers.


In early January 2011, our now former pastor along with some other members of the United Church of God in Zambia announced that they were no longer going to be affiliated with United Church of God, an International Association and, instead, became affiliated with Church of God, a Worldwide Association (COGWA).   However, these people decided to claim a continuing control of the name United Church of God in Zambia (and with that control and ownership of its physical assets).   Members in United Church of God in Zambia who desired to remain affiliated with United Church of God, an International Association also claimed that they have the right to the name and property of United Church of God in Zambia and dispute the right of this now COGWA affiliated group to that name or assets. 

Last February, United’s former pastor in Zambia, who is now a pastor for COGWA in that country, wrote that they would not relinquish control of the UCG-Zambia name or its assets unless “proof” was produced that they were required to do so by simply claiming that they have the legal right to use the registered name of the United Church of God and declaring in writing that they “had never left this church,” they claim ownership.   The fact that most members of United Church of God in Zambia continue to maintain that they remain, as before, affiliated with United Church of God, an International Association and desire continued use of the United name and its property does not matter to them. 

There is no question that the property they are keeping was overwhelmingly the result of gifts of people still affiliated with United Church of God, IA.   Yet they still refuse to walk away and build their own separate COGWA entity in Zambia.  And to add insult to injury, when announcing their break with us last January, they stated that they “sincerely appreciate the financial support that the United Church of God, an International Association has provided in the past years.”

As a consequence, litigation was initiated about last summer by two United Church of God elders in Zambia to seek a ruling on those issues, which case is slowing proceeding in the Zambian courts.  A judge has indicated that the issues involved are questions that appear to require adjudication in a trial to essentially determine which of the two groups is the “true” (from a legal standpoint) “United Church of God” in Zambia entitled to use of that name and ownership of its assets. 

Similarly, at the same time last January, members of the breakaway COGWA group in Zambia who happened to be directors of the LifeNets (International) local Chapter in Zambia also announced the severance of their affiliation with its International sponsor, but retained the local Chapter name and its assets.  They have rejected LifeNets (International) call on them to relinquish that name and assets to those seeking to maintain an affiliation with LifeNets (International).

Of course  these former members are also well aware that Beverly Kubik, wife of Mr. Kubik, personally assisted in raising  much of the funding that made possible the purchase of the property and erection of buildings and their furnishings for United Church of God activities in Zambia as well as projects (such as the Heifer gifting program) and other assets for LifeNets outreach in Zambia. Many photographs of the Kubiks’ trips to Zambia to help brethren have appeared in several publications. They demonstrate the direct engagement of the Kubiks in helping Zambia members.

Attempts were made to peacefully resolve the cattle taking issue privately but to no avail. Members who had their cattle taken were understandably upset and traumatized by these actions. Thus a worldwide prayer request was issued to ask for God’s direct intervention.

We call on COGWA and its affiliate in Zambia to honor its ethical promise of last January that  “We will respect all property of our former affiliation (tangible, intangible and intellectual) and will promptly return all such items to the local congregational leaders of United Church of God (Hebrews 13:5). This can be done by returning:

1)      The United Church of God property donated for  our Zambian UCGIA affiliated members – a Festival site and youth camp, etc. – and LifeNets gifted property are returned to these rightful owners (those who remain affiliated with UCGIA and LifeNets (International), including vehicles and the $42,000 in the Zambian account that was to be used to finish the buildings on the property. This would honor all donors, and particularly the two UCG members who contributed the vast majority of funds (over $100,000) required to purchase the property and build the facility. It would help restore peace, honor God and give use of the facility to the majority of Zambian brethren  who have chosen to remain affiliated with UCGIA and who, this year, were forced to pay for an alternate Feast site and youth camp elsewhere in Zambia.

2)     The remaining cattle gifted to individual members or to UCG Zambia, but not yet returned to those owners must be returned immediately, as planting season has already begun. It should be noted that no efforts by these COGWA affiliated people have been made to take cattle away from cattle owners who benefited from the LifeNets Heifer gifting, but who are affiliated with the COGWA fellowship—they only took cattle away from members retaining their affiliation with UCGIA.

On a visit to Zambia in about mid-January 2011, Victor Kubik tried to have discussions with the former Zambian senior UCG official who had resigned from UCG when these actions first occurred. Contrary to what has been publically posted, this former senior UCG official wrote that he would not talk to or meet with Victor Kubik.   This was prior to any involvement by any attorneys writing to that former UCG minister objecting to their continued use of the UCG-Zambia name and property in late January and February, 2011. 

It was on a later trip to Zambia in April 2011 following another request by Victor Kubik to meet that Mr. Kubik received the e-mail, now publicly posted, listing that former UCG elder’s pre-conditions  for any meeting.  A meeting could have taken place before any legal action was filed (that occurred sometime later)... 

We also reject the proposition that we are “taking a brother to court.”  The recovery of the exclusive use of the name United Church of God and of that Church’s asset is against people who are former members of United.  They are falsely claiming to be members of United Church of God while belonging to (and attending the Feast site of) another church (COGWA) and who refuse to relinquish Church owned property.  They are not “brothers.” They do not recognize any person in our Church as having the authority to act as arbiter in this matter.  
 
We do not appreciate the posting of selective correspondence that leads to false conclusion that we did not try to resolve this matter face to face   before being forced into a different course of action.

LifeNets and UCG have gone to great lengths, with personal visits, phone calls, e-mails and meetings to be circumspect and accurate in what has been written above. This response is in answer to posts, asked to be made public, that paint an inaccurate picture of events.  

We bear no animosity, but we do seek equity and God’s intervention in all the related matters in Zambia. It is the fiduciary duty of the leadership of  UCG in Zambia to  protect the integrity of their projects and the assets given to and for use of Zambian members who did not leave our fellowship.

 

Zambia Cattle Rustling Saga Paints Kubik and UCG In Bad Light

Poor Victor Kubik keeps getting raked through the coals and looks worse every day in regards to the Zambia cattle rusting situation.

First he made false public allegations against Zambia COGWA members stealing cows he had given to UCG brethren (this was prior to the split) through his "charity" Lifenets.  COGWA hit back denying the allegations just prior to the Feast.  They essentially called him a lair and took the UCG members who stole the cattle to court and won.  The cattle had to be returned.

Kubik hits back at them again and COGWA quickly responds calling him a lair again.

Today, Apostle Malm has a behind the scenes background on UCG and Kubik which gets into how UCG was formed when they jumped ship in 1994/5.

Kubik and a large group of cronies met for months while on WCG's payroll in the 360-390 apartments on the Pasadena campus.  They plotted and schemed on how they could form a new splinter group, take a lot of money along with them, and to ensure that their standards of living would be maintained.  For many of these in this group it was more about maintaining their living standards that they were used to than it was about leaving over doctrines.  Remember that almost all of these men had never held a normal civilian job in their lives.  They had no work ethic to fall back on to.

Malm correctly points out that many of these men (who were still employed by WCG) actively kicked out WCG members during this time because they were not agreeing with the changes.  Yet while they were doing this they were secretly plotting to form a new church where some of these disfellowshipped people would join after it was formed.

You would think that once they been abused by these abusive men that they would steer clear of the new organization, but no, they jumped right over and started getting abused again.  Many in the COG are just like battered women.  They hate the abuse, but find safety in the presence of the abuser because they think they have no where else to go.  A beating now and then pales in having a "home" to come back to all the time.

Malm lists several things that these men were concerned about as they were sitting in the apartments plotting their new group:

Finally in Dec 1994-Jan 1995 both shoes fell. The new doctrines were presented to the brethren, shocking those who had insisted on keeping their eyes tightly shut and denying the reality around them. Then the shock treatment was applied to the ministry.

• The Jan 95 Pastor General Report indicated that the Pastors could not be guaranteed their jobs in the future and should now start evaluating their marketable skills.
• Over 40 ministers were handed “last chance” retirement packages.
• 30 more ministers were scheduled for lay-off with a 150 additional lay-offs projected by the end of 1995
• Contracts for the entire fleet of ministerial rental cars were canceled.
• Many local churches throughout the US merged for services.
• All subsidies to the International work have been discontinued.

This was BEFORE most of the brethren had left; and was PLANNED well before the announcement in the PGR. This was a very carefully prepared corporate move to divest of potential dissidents and financial burdens.
In additional news:

• The WCG airplane was put up for sale.
• Hundreds of regular employees were laid off.
• Imperial School closed as of July 1st.
• 1/2 of the editorial staff was dismissed.
• Major cuts abound at the Festival Office, and the Feast of Tabernacles `95 (now known as the celebration of Jesus Christ) looks questionable.
• Seven evangelists were offered healthy severance packages [only if they agree to never preach again and to keep quiet about their WCG experience] including Debar Appertain, David Hulme, Dean Wilson, Leroy Neff and the famous Gerald Waterhouse.

Some elders left because of doctrine!  Others left to get and hold a job!  Still others left to continue the effort to apostatize the brethren!  In most cases they did NOT leave of their own will, but were FORCED OUT!

These men were FORCED out; and the later meeting led by Denny Luker, to form a new entity was done with the knowledge and tacit approval of Joseph Tkach!  Most of these men did not leave voluntarily; they were forced out by Tkach for economic reasons, or as a part of the stripping away of any potential dissidents to his new doctrine.

 Very many in the vanguard of the Tkach doctrinal changes, also left WCG to have a job and the adulation of the people;  These folks wanted to follow the Charismatic mega church success model and to eventually bring the Tkach changes into the new organization called UCG.  Others were indeed followers of the HWA success model and wanted to maintain the HWA focus and his traditional teachings and style.

From the very beginning UCG was a deeply divided organization with these two internal founding groups battling for power and control.  That made a further split inevitable which ultimately came in Dec 2010.
The HWA based folks left to form the COGWA and those who wanted the Evangelical mold remained and now control UCG.

Malm is pointing all of this out because he says this is the background story of the Zambia cattle situation.  It's the HWA men (COGWA) vs the liberals in UCG who want to maintained their power positions.

The present situation in Zambia developed when the majority of the Zambia board  chose to terminate Association with UCG and instead Associate with COGWA.  COGWA being much more Armstrong loyalists.  The church in Zambia was registered as an independent legal entity in accordance with the UCGaia Rules of Association. All Zambian church assets were vested in this legal entity and not in individuals, and certainly not solely in Mr. Banda.  The legal entity in Zambia is managed by 5 Trustees of which Banda is one.

The situation in Zambia came to a crisis point when a person was unwilling to subscribe to the terms of the loan program of the cattle revolving fund. The animals in question were NOT the personal property of these particular individual. This person, angry over losing the animals (which were all voluntarily returned), and angry over the split of the congregation fabricated the  “rustling” story.

Then Malm says that Kubik sued the COGWA for  the return of the cattle and lost the lawsuit.

Vic Kubik sued Banda as an individual, demanding that he (as an individual) hand over assets to himself [to Kubik], which belonged to the Zambian church entity mentioned above. It would be illegal (and theft) for Mr. Banda to take assets registered in the name of this entity, and hand them over to Mr. Kubik. Mr. Banda has no authority to do this.

After the above was explained to the court, the injunction that was obtained against Banda at the behest of Mr. Kubik was discharged, and Mr. Kubik was stricken from the proceedings. It seems that Banda was involuntarily dragged to the courts of this world by Vic Kubik.

UCG is ripe with corruption  and greedy men.  This was well known by many when they formed their group back in the mid 90's.  That is why so many who disagreed with the changes did not go with UCG and stopped attending.

UCG had a chance when they formed their church to start a new and revitalized organization. Instead they brought the same corrupt men over, put them into the same power positions where corruption reigns to this day.  Their homes, cars, and salaries are their first priority, power is second, and for a select few, caring for the brethren is then taken into consideration. Others couldn't give a rat's ass what happens to the members.  They have made this quit obvious in their actions.

If UCG had truly believed in their core doctrines they would have stepped out in faith and might had done amazing things.  But greed and power was the model for the day and remains to this day.  It is no wonder that UCG is losing members rapidly and is NOT the glorious beacon of Truth that they let on.

Read the rest of Malm's blog entry here:  The Zambian situation explained

COGWA: Kubik Needs To Apologize For His "Ugly, Filthy Lie..."

The UCG/COGWA battle is gearing up again.  Charges of slander against Kubik are being leveled.  Once more we get to see the finest of the "true" church engaging in what seems to come naturally to so many in the hierarchy of the COG.  Thanks for showing the world once again what TRUE Christian love is all about (at least in Armstrongism.)

Open letter from Tine Banda 

The question of how much time one should invest in countering slander is of course a personal one, a question that I have been wrestling with for months. The return on such an investment is usually low, and if one values their autonomy, the residual risks can be high. But in light of the fact that both my family and I are now inundated with genuine queries (interestingly from some in UCG), and also in view of the fact that on multiple occasions I have been solicited and encouraged to give my personal comment on the matter (more vigorously so when I travelled out of jurisdiction to attend the Feast of Tabernacles), I did make the decision a couple of weeks ago to address a few core issues. Even then, it did take me a while to finally put pen to paper, because quite frankly, I do not labor under a sense of urgency when it comes to countering propaganda.

While I realize that for the most part this effort may well turn out to an academic exercise with little practical benefit (whether for myself, or for my readers), to the extent that what I am about to say will help some people (however few) better understand the issues, I am convinced that the benefits outweigh the hassle, perhaps only marginally.

My statement is a tribute to all of you (regardless of affiliation), that have displayed exceptional maturity in seeking first to understand the full scope of the issues at play, before presiding as a self-appointed judge, jury and executor in a matter that you do not, and cannot, fully understand. The world, both the present and the next, needs you.

But on to the issue at hand: On October 7th 2011 a dramatic prayer request was widely disseminated, and those who have come to know both myself and my family over the years immediately knew that something was amiss. The gist of the request was essentially that brethren worldwide were to “pray for Zambian brethren in need of protection from cattle rustlers” [paraphrased]. While many were, and still are, stunned by the severity of the allegations that were dispatched far afield in such dramatic fashion, I personally was not.

The same allegation made its debut as early as May 24th 2011, this time on Oath, in an Affidavit that formed the core pleading of the law suit (for church assets) mounted against Mr. Banda by Victor Kubik. So for my family and I (and the rest of the brethren in Zambia), it was simply a matter of here we go again. That aspect of the court case was of course found to be lacking in merit. But as I have noted to several individuals over the past few months, the court of public opinion, similar to a kangaroo court, does not follow the procedural rules of evidence. And as such, a case can be built, tried, and won entirely on hearsay evidence.

But I digress. To get back to the prayer request in question, if at all anything surprised me about that request, it was the issue of timing, not of content. Court pleadings in Zambia are a matter of public record and as such, this accusation has been in the public domain for a term of months. That being the case, the question ripe for posture is this: If cattle rustling had been occurring as early as May, why did the situation only become of sufficient urgency to warrant an “urgent” Prayer Request in October?

In his open letter of October 7, Mr. Banda lamented the fact that these accusations had been spread abroad before the persons besmirched could be approached in private as per the biblical mandate. In response to the open letter, Mr. Kubik then went ahead and published a letter he had written to Mr. Banda on September 30, and also published Mr. Banda’s subsequent response on even date, presumably to demonstrate that contrary to Mr. Banda’s assertions, he (Mr. Kubik) had so approached Mr. Banda.

Let’s be clear, these allegations had been in the public domain for months. The prayer request of October 05 was merely the latest installment of slander. Indeed, prior to Mr. Kubik’s letter of September 30, an elder from the United States had already alerted Mr. Banda via email and phone of the allegations Mr. Kubik was making. It is therefore preposterous to claim that the letter of September 30 qualified as a private confrontation when the defamatory allegations had already gone far afield. Moreover, Mr. Banda had already made substantive responses to those allegations both in and out of court. It would be superfluous and redundant for him to replicate a defense to Mr. Kubik, the very person who had dragged him to court just a few months earlier. Further, the tone of the September 30 letter (with official signature) was hardly conciliatory or fact-finding. It very much carried a “do what I ask/or else” tone. It did not merit a response, and I was surprised that Mr. Banda even offered one.

The “or else” part of the letter of course had no bite. It would take much more than that to intimidate a man who had just recently emerged from a grueling court battle. And having so emerged, Mr. Banda was in no mood to entertain threats.

I also wish to earnestly lay to rest the false allegation that Mr. Banda rebuffed peaceful reconciliation. Let us be absolutely clear, Mr. Banda resigned from the ministry of UCG-aia in January, and that very month, received a threatening letter from a lawyer acting on the instructions of Mr. Kubik. Legal instructions and threats had already been issued as far back as January without a single attempt at “peaceful resolution”, and in a letter to Mr. Banda in February, Mr. Kubik’s lawyer informed Mr. Banda that he had instructions from Victor Kubik to issue court process against him.

It was only in April that Mrs. Kubik emailed both Mr. Banda and me, expressing a desire to talk. Mr. Banda immediately responded to Mrs. Kubik expressing a desire to speak to Mr. Kubik directly AND requesting that Mr. Kubik do the biblical thing and drop the legal charges he had initiated against him as a brother. Mr. Kubik then contacted Mr. Banda expressing his willingness to talk, but he curiously did not address the issue of the law suit he was initiating.

Mr. Banda then sent Mr. Kubik the email I copy below, reminding him to address the issue of the law suit. Could Mr. Banda’s email even remotely be classified a rebuff? Or does this sound like a man genuinely interested in reconciliation premised on an adherence to scripture?

From: Kambani Banda
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 11:35 PM
To: ‘victor kubik.
Cc: ‘bev kubik
Subject: RE: I will be glad to meet with you

Good evening sir
Thank you very much for letter. I really was looking forward to hearing from you for a long time.

I deeply appreciate your willingness to meet with me but I want to quote from the letter I sent to Mrs. Kubik.

If Mr. Kubik genuinely wants us to reconcile, then I request that he does what God’s Word instructs and refrain from legal action and talk with me.

Paul’s instructions in 1 Corinthians 6:1-7 make it clear that Christians should strive to sit down and talk through differences and discuss matters and make judgments based on His Word, before ever considering going to the law or courts of this world.

In order for this to happen, he would need to:

1) Instruct his lawyer Mr. Nyirenda and copy the instruction to me. The instructions should read that Mr. Nyirenda write a letter to my lawyers informing them that, his client, Mr. Kubik has dropped all legal claims against me.

2) When my Lawyers write a letter to me confirming the facts in 1 above, then, we can make a plan to talk

I checked your letter thoroughly and there in, you make no reference to my above request.

Was this an error of omission? Or God forbid and I even tremble as ask the next question, could it be that you are not willing to do what God instructs in his word? I certainly hope that this was an error of omission.

We met in 2000 and began a relationship, which I still deeply value, based on the understanding that we both feared God. Our proposed meeting will only bear good fruit if this premise still holds true.

When I receive a comment on both of my requests then:

a) I will be in a position to comment on the rest of your letter

b) I will also be in a position to decide whether to meet you next week or to meet you in court; should you choose to travel the later route.

Yours sincerely
Kambani Banda

After Mr. Kubik failed to state whether he was willing to abide by scripture, Mr. Banda for the third and final time in a subsequent email dated April 21st, repeated his request to Mr. Kubik and never heard back from him. The next “communication” Mr. Banda received from Mr. Kubik was formal court process.

 In light of the above, how can it seriously be maintained that a “peaceful resolution” was pursued, and that for months! Aside from the April communications I have alluded to above, Mr. Banda and Mr. Kubik did not communicate until September 30. Sadly, it is Mr. Kubik who rebuffed peaceful reconciliation by his unwillingness to drop the lawsuit as an overture to resolution.

And so began a very sad chapter in church history, where brother went to law against brother, and that before unbelievers. It seems to me that the question that needs to be asked is this: why was a lawsuit (for church assets) initiated in crude defiance of the clear instructions in 1st Corinthians 6?

With all the Hullabaloo that went abroad concerning the “unconscionable” thievery of cattle, it may interest you to learn that Armstrong Maninga, the individual who filed the bogus police complaint against Winter (and then subsequently against the four trustees of the church including Mr. Banda), this past week visited the home of Jerry Schachoongo (one of our elders that resides in the Mumbwa area) to APOLOGIZE for the lies that he has told, the lies that have thrown the whole community into disarray, and in particular, the ugly and filthy lie that our brethren STOLE cattle belonging to him and two other members of similar affiliation. This apology was made in the presence of witnesses including senior members of the village community and Armstrong cannot distance himself from it. What is interesting is that local members of the community (not affiliated with any church group) are acquainted with the revolving fund of oxen and have strongly castigated Armstrong for his fabrication. Please understand that these falsities have not only impacted those in the church, they have also impacted the small rural community where these people live. And while we cannot withhold forgiveness, the havoc that these lies have wreaked in the lives of innocent people is horrendous, not to mention the many precious hours that have been dithered away resolving this issue.

All the Oxen in the revolving pool are in the custody of the Trustees where they belong. Despite Armstrong’s public apology and the various assurances the police have given to drop the matter, I would not be surprised if these allegations resurface again. If criminal charges are pursued, my professional opinion is that the allegations will be relatively easy to dislodge given that the revolving cattle fund is of such notoriety in the community: almost every last person in a particular radius (from the weaned toddler to the senior citizen) is aware that the charges leveled against a son of that community (Winter) were malicious and bogus.

As I conclude now, I wish to make this abundantly clear: if you do not hear an immediate response to allegations disseminated on the internet or elsewhere, understand that we are otherwise occupied. We are not paid to sit and answer allegations; we have to make our bread and butter elsewhere; we too, have to eat.

Do not however, mistake our silence for acquiescence. You will observe that even when an internet article misrepresenting the outcome of judicial proceedings was published, we let the fabrication go unchallenged (never mind the fact that the outcome reported in the article was actually the exact opposite of the outcome that subsisted in reality).

The months that we spent fighting the court case were incredibly involving and stressful: countering misinformation was not a top priority then. Moreover, when policemen come to your home to arrest a family member on trumped up charges (as they tried to do last week, albeit with little success) the last thing on your mind is the latest spin or innuendo gracing the internet. I just thank God that I returned home from my nomadic wonderings in time to support my parents deal with this drama…which has now become a torment of unmitigated proportions.

To those of you inclined to question the authenticity of this basic piece of writing, please do your homework, and stick to an issue based discussion. Yes, I wrote this, and no, nobody “polished” it up for me. I graduated at the top of my Cornell Law School class, so I am sure I can string together a sentence or two…and pay appropriate heed to American grammar and syntax.

The author of this article can be contacted at:    tinebanda@yahoo.co.uk

Police Intervene in UCG/COGWA Cattle Wars

Just before the annual Church of God Festival that portrays the millennial peace that the world will be dwelling in, UCG and COGWA went to battle over stolen cattle.

Victor Kubic started it off on October 5, when he announced that cattle that his organization had given to UCG brethren in Zambia had been rustled in September by "former friends and acquaintances" of the "victim-farmers."  That was double speak that  Church of God a Worldwide Association members were stealing UCG cattle.

 The unhappy report that we received and verified related that these cattle were forcibly taken away by former friends or acquaintances of these victim-farmers. These former friends now belong to a Church of God fellowship largely comprised of former members and former ministers of the UCG. It is also our understanding from this report that the leader(s) of that fellowship refuse to intervene to stop the theft of these cattle by their members, nor have they condemned the actions that their members are taking.

More can be found here: Zambia COG Members Stealing Cattle from UCG Members

Then Church of God a Worldwide Association swiftly hit back with a broadside calling Victor a liar.

It is disappointing that I am being drawn away from necessary preparation for the Day of Atonement and the Feast of Tabernacles to respond to the public message which you have disseminated on the Internet and among God’s people. Based on the level of upset and division you are causing within the Body of Christ, you leave me with little choice but to personally respond to your false claims and set the record straight. This is an open letter, and it may be shared with others. While I would normally try to avoid a public response to false allegations such as these, it is necessary to give an answer to your outrageous charges. 

The entire letter can be read here:  Zambia COGWA Calls Out Kubic For False Allegations 

Then the COGWA minister kind of went AWOL and no communication happened with him. (He was probably at the Feast)  The Zambia UCG members went to the police and finally got them to act.  The Police ordered some of the cows to be returned.

Kubic had the following up on his site about this:

Updated October 10, 2011
GREAT NEWS!!  In one of the areas where the cattle given by LifeNets "Pass on the Gift" program was taken, the police ordered that four head of cattle be returned  to owners immediately without conditions.  We have not heard yet from the other area which is some distance away.  We are appalled by the false stories circulating minimizing the huge consequences on poor people.  We are leaving for the Fall Festival in Estonia in a few moments, but wanted to get this update to you.  After the Festival, we will have written reports exact detailing all that happened.  We thank you for your prayers and are thankful for the redemption.

Updated October 14, 2011

Police have ordered that ALL LifeNets cattle that were stolen must be returned. We are just going to wait until after the FOT for the matter to be resolved. Thank you for your prayers to protect our beneficiaries' livelihoods!

Cattle rustling timeline on Kubic's site: Rustling of Members' Cattle in Zambia

I guess none of us should be surprised at this normal behavior between COG groups.  There has been bitterness and acrimonious behavior between all COG's as they have split and split and split over the last 70 some years.  There are well over 600 some splinter groups from the original mother church, "The Radio Church of God."  None have ever worked together in harmony or made any attempt to.  Each considers itself to be "the one true church." and all others are imposter's and heretics.  HWA got that bad behavior ball rolling when he started arguing with COG7Day. With labels like, "they are Sardis," "they are blinded to the truth," "they have turned their back on the truth," etc, the present COG has followed suit and have thrown that wedge up between themselves and others.


Armstrongism has made it standard practice to mock Christianity for it's many different churches, yet Armstrongism is just as fractured and probably WORSE than mainstream Christianity.  At least a broad majority of Christian churches work together in all kinds of ways.  They may not believe the same in different minor areas, but will still work together as brothers and sisters towards a common goal. But not so in Armstrongism.  Accusations fly, bitterness rules the day.  Families are destroyed, marriages broken and friendships destroyed.  Even the right-wing evangelicals hatred of liberals pales in comparison with the Armstrongite acrimony that exists.


With that sad legacy that stains Armstrongism it is no wonder that people are leaving all the splinter groups.  Church attendance is dropping in all COG's.  Flurry's group is down 4,000 from last years Feast.  LCG's is down from last year.  UCG is dramatically down due to the split. 


Armstrongism has no future.  It's various cult leaders are aging out and will be dying off. The youth are leaving in droves. That is certainly some legacy to leave behind.