I will be posting excerpts from a report by a member of a special committee on a Church of God Reform initiative. This committee was appointed by the Executive Committee and was to report back to them findings and recommendations. This particular member forwarded a copy of his recommendations to this special committee.

I will be posting 5 (or so) excerpts over the next several days. Pursuant to the final post/excerpt I will disclose the author/appointed member of this committee…and will post the entire 17 page, single type space document.

Excerpt #1 of 5:

“…the leadership (or whoever) of this denomination is defying logic and history when the belief is stated that a “centralized form of government” will preserve doctrinal beliefs. This is a fallacious statement, and can be easily refuted by many examples. The Church of God, as most people know, is a carbon copy of the Methodistic philosophy of church government. When the leadership of the Methodist church became highly liberal (on doctrine), there was a gradual erosion of belief and conduct until, today, that church will countenance homosexuals, ministers deny the supernatural, Biblical infallibility is abandoned and the like. Note that this all came about in a church, organized like ours~ when the wrong kind of leadership gained control of the reigns of the church. The Church of God is open to the exact same mistakes; and to say that it could not happen is nonsense.”

Thoughts?????

Annually, over $13,000,000 is given to the Evangelism and Home Missions Budgets on the state/regional level for the express purpose of “new field work and in the case of an emergency, small church assistance.” This is mandated by the General Assembly Minutes in response to the missional directive of Jesus in Matthew 28:19-20.

It is well understood that those monies are spent for everything from administration to senior adult retreats and state evangelists…all good things. But, in this case to quote Jim Collins, “good is the enemy of great.” The good has led us to truly objectionable places. However, with a focused spending of these resources, we could: be faithful to the Minutes and begin a Gospel revolution through the Church of God. Picture this:

• 260 church planters per year receiving matching funds up to $50,000 each for a total $100,000 each.

OR

• 130 church planters per year receiving matching funds up to $100,000 each for a total of $200,000 each.

This would would be a return to the Gospel mandate of Matthew 28:19-20. This would lead to a revitalization of the Church of God. This would:

• spark a wave of young ministers staying in the Church of God.
• spark a wave of young ministers from sister organizations flocking to the COG to launch churches through us.
• begin the difficult process of realigning our stated positions with our behavioral realities.
• And, all of this in some form should already be happening according to the Minutes.

The residual effect of these annual church launchings would be seen in the decades to come. Imagine what would happen 10 years from now as 1,300-2,600 new churches have grown from a founding heart of multiplication and Gospel advancement? New churches start new churches. New churches also baptize more people than churches that are 10 years old and older.

It would not be a stretch to say that in 20 years, our churches started in that time from this budget alone could equal the number of churches started in our previous 122 years. You could add to those numbers from the resources turned over in our properties of closed churches and you have the real potential of doubling those monies (a couple sold properties in Florida or California could easily surpass the EHM funds alone).

Unfortunately, because of the decades old, inherited mismanagement of these funds and the language proposing the removal of this designation, we are standing at the precipice of potentially the greatest lost opportunity in the history of the Church of God.

Therefore, I am calling on the Executive Committee, the members of the Council of 18, our Ordained Bishops, and the members of the General Assembly to take every opportunity to preserve this designation AS WE REDUCE the mandated funds going to Cleveland. There is most certainly a path to this place if we will only take it.

Bill Isaacs, Administrative Bishop for the state of Louisiana and a member of the Council of 18 is writing about the agenda at Forward Leadership.  Blogs fail to gain traction when they:

• are general, beat around-the-bush and are not specific
• are too corporate
• are not open for real dialogue

Bill is opening up some really good dialogue that appears to be headed for success.  You should participate…check out the discussion on:

Agenda Item #2

Agenda Item #4

Agenda Item #3 & #7

General Council Agenda 2008

I will continue to confess that I am of the deep conviction that, in my opinion, the Church of God does not have a money problem primarily…it has a credibility and trust problem. It seems that holding that opinion may suggest being against any measure to reduce the burden of required financial contributions from local churches to the denomination. That is not true. I too believe we need a cut…and anticipate being very involved the “Realignment of Resources,” item on the agenda. But is our desperation setting us up…?

I feel the legalistic language in the preamble (or rationale) portion of the “Realignment of Resources” agenda item creates some sort of sacrosanct orientation toward the tithe of tithe…thereby rendering any consideration for reducing THAT portion as “undiscussable.” The implication that, “Due to scripture we mustn’t even consider dialog regarding the 10%,” is to me, manipulative at a minimum. I’m really sort of surprised it was presented in that fashion.

You know the old debate supposition, “Grant the premise…concede the conclusion.” In this case the conclusion would be: “The only thing really left for discussion is the 5% we have designated as “offerings” for World Missions and Evangelism/Home Missions, since from a scriptural and spiritual standpoint we can’t talk about ‘the other.’” That one really bugs me on several levels. I am prepared to neither, “Grant the Premise”…or to “Concede the Conclusion,” in this matter on what has been suggested as undiscussable.

I have recently rediscovered and been reimpacted by the incredible legacy and history of the Church of God. Part of that rediscovery was the spirit in which the COG gave birth to the designated percentages presently given to Missions. I guess it is the spirit of that that I am trying to hang on to. Maybe it’s a bad idea. I believe sincerely that the far, far greater issue on the table at this point in our history is one of organizational integrity for the COG.

This whole process right now is about recapturing honest dialog and ultimately credibility and trust. It’s about words and actions. It’s about preserving tomorrow’s “blessing.” I really feel the current “Realignment of Resources” measure as presented may very well leverage the financial desperation of the Ordained Bishops (and local churches) into accepting something …anything…that will satisfy the current financial hunger pangs that gnaw away at us. Unfortunately this may leave us bereft of the “blessing” that would be ours tomorrow.

For me…I don’t’ know that I am willing to surrender the potential blessing of regained credibility and trust …and dialog …and vision …and fellowship …and spiritual fatherhood. Someone else may set the current table of expedience…but I do not have to sit down and eat. A bowl of bean soup may be great at the moment…and may satisfy the hunger today…but the long range implications may separate us from the destiny that would otherwise be ours. Ask Esau.

In Matthew 6:21 the words of Christ seem to offer an observation on the human value system, “Where the treasure is, there the heart will be also.” Last year while reading, “The Treasure Principle” by Randy Alcorn I was deeply challenged by what he establishes as the trail of evidence our money provides. There is a strain to consistency between our heart and our money (or treasure). Find where a person spends their money and you will find their heart. But he goes further in saying that if you want “develop a heart” for something…then put your money there.

Next - COG Treasure and Heart Report #1:

In 1942 there was a group of people who gathered for a Church of God General Assembly and said essentially, “We are about to make a statement to God about our heart. We are going to make a statement about the heart of the Church of God…and we are going to make that statement through our “treasure.” We are going to designate a significantly large percentage and portion of our “treasure” resources to be invested as specifically as possible in the Great Commission.” This was pursuant to other specific resolutions and declarations in the 1927 and 1931 General Assemblies.

In 1931 at the 26^th General Assembly of the Church of God, one E.W. Williams makes this declaration, “When the Church of God ceases to be a missionary church she will die.” By 1942 the spirit and heart of this conviction was formalized into the language we presently hold today concerning the percentage of our “treasure” we allot to World Missions and Evangelism/Home Missions. If we are to accept the observation of Jesus in Matthew 6:21 then what happened there was as well a declaration of the “heart” of the Church of God.

We have been presented with an agenda item titled, “Realignment of Resources.” Part of that measure includes removing the segment of the COG Minutes regarding our “declared” designated contributions to World Missions and Evangelism/Home Missions. The “Realignment of Resources” provides the “cut” through the removal of this historically designated missional giving.
Perhaps our “resources” will be realigned.
Perhaps as pastors we will be willing to take a cut anywhere we can find it and vote it through.
Perhaps……

But we already know Jesus’ opinion on the matter…call it a vote on “resources” all you want…what we are really voting on is a, “Realignment of Our Heart.”

We have a heart problem…but nearly as bad as the one we may have on August 10^th.

]]> http://missionalcog.wordpress.com/2008/06/25/173/feed/ tomsterbens http://missionalcog.wordpress.com/2008/06/19/congruence-principle-and-the-church-of-god/ http://missionalcog.wordpress.com/2008/06/19/congruence-principle-and-the-church-of-god/#comments Thu, 19 Jun 2008 15:25:49 +0000 travjohnson http://missionalcog.wordpress.com/?p=171

I’ve heard that the following principle attributed to Blaise Pascal as “Pascal’s Congruence Principle,” though I have been unable to wade through the mathematic formulas he used to arrive at the conclusion. In laymen’s terms it was described to me in the following statement from the perspective of a 2008 church leader:

It is impossible for a person (or organization) to live too long where there is incongruence between their belief and their behavior.

The resulting logic, according to Blaise Pascal’s mathematics, is that if you want to change someone’s behavior, change their beliefs. And, if you want to change someone’s beliefs, change their behavior.

As seen in only a singular issue, the resulting correlation to the Church of God is:

• Since 1942, we have believed that the Evangelism and Home Missions Budget is to be spent on “new field work and in the case of emergency, small church assistance.”

Unfortunately, our behavior is to spend those millions of dollars annually on whatever we want. In 2008, the Executive Council has now determined that we should no longer believe that and has proposed to strike this language which articulates our belief held for the past 66 years without striking the requirement to remit these funds.

I’d propose that if we are going to strike this language as we have already stricken this practice, we better head over to our mission and vision and also strike this pesky little statement under “Church Planting,” that says, “We commit to focusing designated resources of the local church, state/regional offices, and the international offices for planting new churches.”

What you are seeing is Pascal’s Congruence Principle in action on a grand scale.

There are a number of other issues that can be snapped in line with Pascal’s principle inside the Church of God. Perhaps, these behaviors illustrate the largest theme of incongruence between the behaviors and beliefs in the Church of God. The most frightening at this juncture may very well be the incongruence between the stated policy that the General Assembly is our highest governing body and the behavior that other bodies WILL HAVE the final say.

Congruency will be achieved eventually, either in the favor of our stated beliefs or in the favor of our practiced behaviors. I’m praying we live up to what we say we believe, repent for our broken covenant, and repair the decades of damage which has been passed down from one administration to the next.

There have been recent assertions that actions taken and issues raised by Travis Johnson and by me constitute that which is “disrespectful” or “having no respect for those in authority.” I would like to respond, not defensively, but to give an accountable answer for my actions.

There is no doubt that today there is certainly a lack of respect in our culture…and that it is not a new thing. I share everyone’s concern for that. But perhaps the broader term that scripture uses to describe this dynamic would be “honor.” Lost honor.

One of the reasons we instruct the kids, in particular in our church, to refer to their pastors as “Pastor,” is not because we are in to titles but rather, it is to try and recapture something of the lost sense of honor that Malachi declares is at the foundation of the moral and spiritual unraveling of the nation of Israel. Malachi’s indictment is riveting…because the fathers have not honored The Father (God) …the children thus do not honor their fathers and as a result a legacy of faith and covenant stands to be lost…or to be treated with no “value.”

The majority of people would probably be quick to agree that every “next” generation seems to have stamped on its DNA the tendency toward a lack of respect. But Malachi’s allegation seems to imply that it is the honor-less actions of the “fathers” that seem to fertilize the opportunity for this honor-less propensity that already exists within the hearts of the young. The fathers haven’t “honored” the covenant with God in general, or with “the wife of their youth,” or with their finances, etc. The net effect of this absence of honor is what Malachi (or God) calls the “separation of hearts” (fathers from the children…children from the fathers). (More on that…)

Entering the New Testament…I love the words time’ and timao (honor/to honor). And while “honor” is certainly something that we are to give others, these words do not just address the sense of “status” one may hold or be given. Linguists tell us that in a larger scope these words address the “valuation system” by which that status (of honor) is established, thus it is translated, “price,” as well. That is huge. Further, as I understand the root term…it was one used in the judicial process for something akin to the “sentencing” portion of the “judgment” sequence. In the judicial sense…a “valuation” of relative liability (guilt or not) would be made of an individual and then the appropriate “status” would be assigned. It perhaps could fairly be said that a sentenced criminal had been, “honored” appropriately by the courts. Of interesting note is a colloquial reference we use about someone who has spent time incarcerated for a crime…”they have paid their debt to society.”

No matter how you approach the term…whether a criminal found guilty of a crime or someone in an esteemed position of leadership and influence…there is a “value” placed on their position and there is a “price” to be “paid” for the “value” of that “status.”

I have a question for those who make the declaration that what we are doing constitutes a failure to “honor the office,” and that we are acting dishonorably and with no respect.

When “the office” is one of esteemed spiritual “status” and incredible spiritual “value”…

When “the office” is one in which our “valuation system” places an immeasurable amount of influence over other lives…

Then….do you see it as a failure to properly “honor the office” when those “honored” persons are asked to authenticate the trust placed in them…even when it appears certain actions or behavior run contrary to the “valuation system” that has been mutually embraced?

While I am aware of (and value) the “touch not God’s anointed,” dynamic and truth, yet I ask, “Where is the voice of Samuel to Saul, Nathan to David, Elijah to Ahab, that summoned the full “value” potential of the position of honor held?”

What do we do with, “To whom much is given, much is REQUIRED?” The scope of responsibility is proportionate to the scope of influence of giftedness.

At our church we have a drug and alcohol rehabilitation ministry. One of the recurring points of truth I bring to them is regarding the skewed “honor” system they bring in off the street with them. There is a sort of code of “honor” to not “rat someone out,” even if one of the students should somehow get their hands on drugs/alcohol or they in some other fashion violate the covenant of life in the Restoration House. The “honor” system of the street says you don’t “tell.” It’s a street justice. It’s a twisted “honor” system. The only problem is…that their “honor” system in fact insulates the violating individual from the accountability that will help bring them the desired result of deliverance. I tell them that they are not helping their buddy one bit by helping them “hide” from the truth that will set them free. There is no “honor” or ultimate “value” in that. And there will never be the achieving of the “honor” (status) that God has in mind for them through the grace and truth manifested in deliverance from their addiction. Unwittingly they accept a “status” of life far beneath the honor God has intended.

Ironically the word for “truth” in the New Testament means to “un-hide,” (in the simplest of senses). Also ironically the first action of mankind after the fall was to, “hide themselves,” from none other than God Himself. The result is what we refer to as, “The Fall.” The fall…from the “status” God has originally intended for us to walk in and fulfill His high purpose in us.

If asking tough questions of those who have been “honored” by our fellowship to hold the place of influence they hold is seen as a lack of “honor” or an appropriate valuation of them (or their office)…then you are free to hold that opinion. But I happen to believe that they are more “valuable,” and more “valu-able” than that.

In Malachi’s day there was indeed an “honor” system. It was just not God’s honor system. They had “twisted” the terms of the covenant to meet their own ends…and their own “values.” My concern is that our contrived “honor” system in the Church of God would in fact “honor” actions and methods that are not only NOT in keeping with God’s word…but are not in keeping with the “code” of behavior we have mutually embraced (cf. The Minutes of the General Assembly).

When we fail to establish “honor” on God’s terms…it will have the same effect as it did in Malachi’s day….hearts will be separated…not only from each other…but perhaps from the understanding of God’s “fatherhood” intentions as well.

When we act in a fashion that is without “honor”…and thus without “value”…how dare we indict the next generation of young shepherds for saying they see no “value” in what we hold. The fact is……..God may very well agree with them.

Over 10,000 square feet of meeting space at the 72nd General Assembly. Information. Discussion. Prayer. August 4 & 5 from 9 PM-12:30 AM. Notable guests. Food and beverage served.

Ed Stetzer hammers home a thought on change that is powerfully relevant. He shared it at Engage 21. He shared it again today in his analysis of the Southern Baptist Convention. About change and the “tipping point,” he says:

People never change until the pain of staying the same grows greater than the pain of change.

I can’t tell you the number of times I have heard the following statements:

1. “COG World Missions is a, ‘church within a church,’ they need to be reigned in!”

2. “World Missions spends the entire 2 1/2% on state side administration!”

3. “World Missions is out of control, they have no accountability!”

Commentary:

“COG World Missions is a, ‘church within a church,’ they need to be reigned in!”

Each time I have been told this I have asked the person for a specific example. Only one time has anyone given an example which I have not been able to verify…it is as follows: At some point in the past one of the General Directors of COG World Missions apparently made a statement to the current General Overseer that he (WM Director) was, “elected just like the General Overseer.” Apparently implying that the General Overseer could not tell him what to do.

Although I have been given a name of the person who allegedly said this I have been unable to substantiate it with certainty or when it was said. What I do know for sure is that it was not Roland Vaughan, the current General Director of COGWM.

“World Missions spends the entire 2 1/2% in Cleveland!”

From the online postings which anyone can examine at www.cogwm.org you will see that is not true. I have investigated more deeply and have found that not to be true. As a matter of fact the last time this was told to me was weeks ago by a member of the International Executive Council. When I asked him if he could give me any specific or general estimation of his assertion in real dollars and cents he could not.

“World Missions is of control, they have no accountability!”

I find this one quite remarkable. I’ll cite only one example.

For approximately two months various Ordained Bishops have been trying to obtain detailed financial information for General Church expenditures from the COG finance office. Information of this nature (audit) was pledged to be made available to them by a specific measure approved by the 68^th General Assembly.

Though a number of Ordained Bishops have made request for this specific financial information none have received it.

Even though one Ordained Bishop signed and returned the “COG Privacy Statement and Agreement,” which, in my opinion is a violation of Minutes of the General Assembly, yet he only received a 16 page summary with little detailed information. Further and multiple requests for additional financial information have been denied.

On the afternoon of May 25^th, 2008 I called Bishop Roland Vaughan and communicated a request for detailed financial information for COG World Missions including the most recent audit available. Since it was Memorial Day weekend I told him that I would like to formalize my request effective as of 8:00 AM Tuesday, May 27^th, 2008. He said that would be fine.

On May 27^th, 2008 at 11:48 AM I received an email from Church of God World Missions with three attachments.

• A 184 page 2008-2009 approved budget for COG
• A 23 page independent auditor’s report for 2007 performed by, “Arnett, Kirksey, Kimsey, Sullivan & Lay, PLLC” Certified Public Accountants
• An Excel spreadsheet with updated 2009 budget items

I was not asked to sign a confidentiality agreement.

Bishop Roland Vaughan said that as far as he was concerned he would be glad for any Ordained Minister that wanted to know where the money was spent.

It may just be me….but that doesn’t sound like an organization that does not want any accountability.

I find it fascinating that any single member of the International Executive Committee and/or Executive Council would indict World Missions for an absence of accountability and yet….refuse financial information to an Ordained Bishop which was pledged to be made available to him by the will and mandate of the General Assembly.

Again……..we do not have a money problem…we have a credibility and trust problem.