United Church of God, an International Association
Council of Elders Meeting Report

Monday, May 17, 1999 — Cincinnati, Ohio

 

Day five of the current round of Council meetings delved into two major areas of discussion. The morning brainstorming session addressed two topics—church identity and relationships with other groups, while the afternoon session covered several Home Office items of business.

Church Identity

The Council first talked about the concept of church identity. Moderator Roy Holladay asked a key question: what is relevant from the April-May, 1995 Indianapolis conference that led to the formation of the United Church of God, and what is not?

Council members revealed their thoughts on the topic:

• Leon Walker spoke up first, commenting that some individuals talk of returning to the spirit of Indianapolis. "I do not look upon Indianapolis as a place to return to," he said. "I personally, philosophically, am not interested in returning anywhere…I believe we need to be always progressing and moving ahead, not standing still in any one spot…How do we progress from Indianapolis…as we move ahead?"
• Chairman Robert Dick observed that "I have begun in the last year to refer them [those who ask about the topic] to the spirit that formed Indianapolis as being far more significant than the spirit of Indianapolis." That spirit, he said, was a spirit of refusal to stand by and watch a body of people fragment, or accept the doctrinal deconstruction that was taking place. Unfortunately, as he stated, the message that came out of the meetings was at times divided, since at least one presentation near the end of the conference departed from an approach agreed upon by all the planners of the Indianapolis conference earlier in the week. Mr. Dick pointed out that for some, that one presentation seemed to become what they considered the spirit of Indianapolis.
• Richard Thompson remembered how important maintaining truth was to him. He noted that some seemed to come away with a focus on how to proceed, while "to me the what was more important than the how."
• Dennis Luker agreed, and recalled the determination to come up with some type of organization that would not allow the kind of apostasy we had seen happen again. "But one thing that I did not want was a bunch of autonomous congregations," he said. "I wanted to be a part of something where everyone was working together and cooperating," he continued. "I didn’t have the concept that each church would be autonomous and independently operated at all."
• Victor Kubik recounted the events leading up to Indianapolis, calling attention to the desire to preserve doctrine, and install a system to prevent deception. But overtones were present at the conference, in his view, of contrary ideas in the organizational area.
• Aaron Dean mentioned that he had not attended at Indianapolis or at the December, 1995 Cincinnati conference that moved the church from its transition stage to a more permanent form of establishment . Viewing from a distance, he said, "I saw Indianapolis as a kind of reaction to a spiritual receivership like we had a physical receivership in ‘79." He wondered, though, whether there would have been any kind of shift in the church culture experienced before the formation of UCG without some of the problems that arose from the differing viewpoints at Indianapolis.
• Burk McNair stressed his support for greater member involvement, but recalled his desire for order and collaboration in doing a work.
• Leon Walker related his experience in coming to UCG later, after evaluating the choices available in the summer of 1995. "There were certain concepts that I heard about that appealed to me," he said. "One of those things that I felt was relevant to Indianapolis… was that we would have a system of checks and balances that I did not see that other groups had or were formulating… We would have something in our system that would, through a system of checks and balances, prevent the kind of doctrinal changes being unilaterally introduced, and that I felt could be introduced in other groups even at that moment in time."

Mr. Holladay formulated three more questions:

1. What was the spirit that formed Indianapolis?
2. What should we bring from Indianapolis?
3. If we are going to talk about church identity, what is it that makes us feel we are unique? Why should people come to UCG?

Regarding the spirit that formed Indianapolis:

• Mr. Dick stressed the identification of an attitude that he had not seen before, which he identified with five markers: 1) a willingness for the Council to be candid and open in its desire; 2) the formation of policies that said we would return all possessions that belonged to the Worldwide Church of God; 3) we would not proselyte. 4) our door would be open to any who wished to peaceably assemble with us. 5) willingness to practice mutual submission.
• Mr. Luker stated it as a spirit of love for the Law of God.
• Mr. Holladay added that it was a deep love and concern for the church, for the people of God.
• Mr. Thompson reflected on the absolute commitment to do God’s work again.

Mr. Holladay focused the Council’s attention on question #2, on what should be brought from Indianapolis:

• Mr. Kubik articulated the importance of coming away with a name for the church that reflected what we wanted to be, and the beginning of the ideas for a Constitution and Bylaws.
• Mr. Holladay remembered that not every detail of organization had been determined. Indianapolis was truly only a beginning.

• John Jewell related his situation, viewing what was happening from several thousand miles away. "What I saw coming out of Indianapolis was a wonderful and sincere desire to ‘get it right,’ to be amicable, to work together in unity and in peace, and have this great consensus, and an agreement, and what impressed me was that there was this great groundswell. There was no one person driving it, trying to force through his agenda, which had been the case in times past, and was the case in some of the other groups, and that was impressive. And I thought, ‘if anything is close to the biblical model, with the Spirit of God driving it, this is it.’ I have seen nothing since to change my mind in that."

What makes us unique? Mr. Holladay asked if there was a tendency to back away from articulating what the United Church of God is, out of fear of offending others. He suggested the question be asked: why are you in the United Church of God?

• Mr. Walker reiterated the importance of checks and balances to prevent any one individual or group of individuals from taking the church in the wrong direction.
• Mr. Dick stated that he didn’t see a conflict between the biblical example of church structure and greater member involvement. Greater member involvement at all levels has been encouraged from the start. "Some who have left us have gone back to total autocracy, some to complete autonomy", he observed, expressing the human tendency to head for one ditch or the other.
• Mr. Jewell commented on the non-competitive approach of the United Church of God.
• Mr. Dean saw an infrastructure designed to prepare the bride of Christ, rather than one that focused on a personality.
• Mr. Antion stressed the importance of what the church does with God’s truth—how it is used and taught in love.
• The elaborate process designed to protect the doctrines of the church impressed Mr. Luker as being unique to the United Church of God.
• Mr. Dick used the term "love of the membership" to have a system that allows both ministry and membership to appeal to the highest body in the church in the event of a grievance. This system allows all to be heard, without presuming the outcome in favor of any person or group.
• The process in place for credentialing elders is unique, stated Mr. Antion.
• Mr. Walker recognized that some elements, such as the appeal process Mr. Dick mentioned, were developed later, after Indianapolis, illustrating his earlier point that Indianapolis was a beginning, not a final structure. It served to set the church on the right path.
• Mr. Thompson approved of the clarity of the literature produced by the church, outgoing Council reporter Clyde Kilough stressed the importance of openness, and comments turned to developing a booklet along the lines of "This is the United Church of God."
• Donald Ward strongly supported this idea, suggesting that it could include the church’s fundamentals of belief and really be a hallmark booklet to identify who we are, what we stand for as a church, and the church’s vision of forward movement.
• Darris McNeely, Indianapolis pastor, added that he has been asked to produce such a booklet, and commented on the importance of understanding the audience to which it is written.
• Mr. Jewell applauded the greater use of the skills of the women in the church.
• Mr. Walker and Mr. Holladay concluded this portion of the morning’s brainstorming session by urging the importance of clearly understanding what the church is, so we can effectively communicate it to others.

Relationships With Other Groups

Mr. Dick guided the discussion on the related topics of relationships with other groups and outside speakers at UCG functions. Members of other groups have frequently attended UCG events or services; church policy makes them welcome. People frequently visit across church denomination lines, but the United Church of God has not officially defined relationships with other groups.

• Mr. Antion voiced his concern about Council making too many policies, taking initiative away from Ministerial Services. He advised that Ministerial Services have flexibility to handle individual situations, pointing out that policies limit options.

• Mr. Luker articulated a different concern: that Ministerial Services sometimes needs policies to back up decisions.
• President Les McCullough agreed, stating that the divergence of opinion among Council members makes it difficult for Ministerial Services without a policy in place.
• Mr. Walker introduced the complicating factor that U.S. policies sometimes have limits in international areas, but stressed the need for some basic criteria from which to work.
• This becomes a "wisdom decision," said Mr. Dean.

What is the Council’s mindset on this topic? Mr. Dick asked.

• Mr. Kubik cited his contact with the Ukrainian Sabbatarians as an example of wisdom needed in special situations. However, he added that people who come to a United Church of God service expect to hear a United Church of God minister, and should be assured they will.
• Ministerial Services manager Richard Pinelli responded to this comment, pointing out that in the United States, some individuals have asked to speak at UCG services. They have been told they are welcome to attend our services but that our tradition has been to have our own ministers speak.
• Mr. Dean commented on the desire expressed by many in the various churches to see some sort of coming together, and wondered if seminars in certain areas of research, such as UCG elder Rick Sherrod’s background on Israel, might be a way to begin to bridge gaps to other groups.
• Richard Thompson stressed that in the realm of church services we ought to be exclusive – a UCG service must have a UCG minister. Seminars, however, are different.
• Mr. Antion asked that special circumstances be allowed for, but with the proviso that each exception must be approved.
• Treasurer Tom Kirkpatrick and Burk McNair expressed reservations, both stating that UCG services should without exception have UCG speakers. This was the reaction of many members to the proposed invitation of a minister from another group to Cincinnati last winter
• Mr. Walker stated that in his view, it is not expedient for any UCG service to have anyone from another group speak in UCG services anywhere in the world right now. Some members would be offended, which alone would preclude it.
• Mr. McNair related his Ambassador College experience, when Mr. Herbert Armstrong suggested that students going to Oregon for the summer attend services of the Church of God, Seventh Day, since there was no congregation of the (then) Radio Church of God in the area. He recalled the arguments he saw between ministers from different groups after the close of services.
• Mr. Holladay noted that limited contact with officials of the Church of God, International and the Global Church of God has been made, but all agreed that progress depends first on doctrinal agreement.
• Mr. Luker posed a question—should a minister from the United Church of God speak to another group of the Church of God if asked? He stated that under certain circumstances, he would want to, with approval from Ministerial Services. He urged caution in crafting any statement, lest it give the impression, "we’re the biggest, we’re better than you are."
• Mr. Antion stated his strong feeling that while we should not be inviting non-UCG ministers to speak, he doesn’t want any policy statement to be so strong it contained no exception clause. What message is sent? he asked.
• "The wording is the key," observed Mr. Walker. He posed the question of how many people would we offend by any statement, and also pointed out how unlikely it is to receive an invitation from another group if there were no reciprocal involvement.
• Mr. Dick called attention to the fact that the Council may simply issue a position statement that articulates where the church stands, without binding future action as a policy statement does.
• Dr. Ward asked that careful attention be given to the wording selected. He suggested acknowledging the presence of converted people in other groups, indicating the church’s desire to relate to other groups, and stating a willingness to cooperate in educational ventures or seminars.

Mr. Dick then asked Ministerial Services, working in conjunction with the Ethics Committee of the Council, to formulate a statement, receive input and suggestions from the International areas, and bring the result back to the Council for its deliberation.

Finances

Treasurer Tom Kirkpatrick gave the Council the current financial report and discussed the upcoming audit. The income pattern continues almost exactly as budgeted, with the pleasant surprise exception of a recent large individual donation. Various departments have trimmed expenses, helping the overall pattern. Mr. Kirkpatrick suggested reviewing income patterns after the fall Holy Days to see whether some discretionary projects could be funded in this fiscal year. Net fund balance at the end of the fiscal year (March 31, 1999) stood at just under $1.5 million, representing about five and one half weeks of expenses at current spending levels. Mr. Luker inquired about what would constitute a wise level of cash reserves; Mr. Kirkpatrick answered that he views the church’s current situation as the minimum to seek, noting that some experts in the business world advocate three months’ cash reserve.

Auditors from PriceWaterhouseCoopers will arrive within the next few weeks, and this year’s audit will fulfill our contractual obligation to that firm. The auditors will give the church a separate audit opinion for each of the last four fiscal years, ending March 31, 1999, 1998, 1997, and 1996; Mr. Kirkpatrick anticipates no problem in receiving unqualified opinions for all four years, based on the current status of the church’s finances. This would certainly be a very important step for the church. Mr. Kirkpatrick suggested seeking auditing firm bids to carry out this task in future years.

Home Office Issues

Mr. McCullough discussed the possibility of standardized business cards and stationery for church employees, showing samples of the material currently used by the Home Office. The Council responded favorably to the materials viewed, with some minor changes suggested. Peter Eddington told the Council he would make those changes and bring back some graphic design samples for its inspection the following day.

Development of a church logo continues. Ideas forwarded to the Council during the summer will be discussed in August in Seattle.

Mr. McCullough led discussion on the concept of having a Public Relations consultant assist the church in pulling together many ideas generated in Council or from the membership.

The Communications Committee then initiated the following resolution:

WHEREAS it is vital that the United Church of God provide prompt, clear communication with the public,

IT IS RESOLVED that:

1. The President be the official spokesman for the United Church of God
2. That we retain the services of outside Public Relations counsel (name to be determined) to assist the Church in formulating a public relations strategy and be available as a consultant in such matters.

The Council entered a brief executive session to discuss the appointment of a consultant, and to empower the President to proceed with its backing, then passed the resolution unanimously.

Publishing

UCG publications managing editor Scott Ashley joined the meeting by teleconference to inform the Council about upcoming booklets and magazines. Upcoming cover themes for the Good News include:

• The real star wars (May-June)
• What happens after death? (July-August)
• Can you believe Bible prophecy? (September-October)
• Just what is the Millennium? (November-December)
• Are we on the threshold of a new age? (January-February, 2000)

Booklets planned include:

• Are we living in the last days?
• The Lost Ten Tribes in Prophecy
• The Book of Revelation Unveiled
• Seven Laws of Success
• Making Life Work
• Where Can You Find Lasting Values?
• Heaven and Hell
• Who and What is God?
• Which Biblical Laws Should a Christian Keep?
• Why Does God Allow Suffering?
• Transforming Your Life
• Marriage/child-rearing
• This is the United Church of God
• Is There Really a Devil?
• Who Was Jesus?

Mr. Ashley updated the Council on the Good News print run size, which with the May-June issue reached 193,318 copies. In addition, the 32-page special issue, with general interest articles and a cover story of "How to Raise a Moral Child," will add 100,000-110,000 copies, but will be used as a promotional copy for new subscribers, gift copies, and waiting room introductory packets.

Development of several direct mail packages is progressing, with either a September or December launch date planned. The supermarket "take one" program is being evaluated to see if expansion of this program is wise. Each issue of the Good News magazine for the remainder of 1999 will contain a literature request form.

The stand-alone Bible Study Course is on track to be offered this fall. Six lessons are complete, with all 12 due by late next year. Promotional efforts for the Course should generate 10,000-15,000 subscribers for the Course alone, plus generate perhaps 20,000 additional literature requests.

The Council evaluated several sample ads promoting the Good News. First they viewed four television ads produced by Beloit, Wisconsin, elder Galen Morrison, then saw two sample TV ads to run in Canada, and listened to excerpts from the radio program currently airing in the United Kingdom. The productions were generally well received.

Mr. Kubik updated the Council on the revised Elders Forum (now on the Internet), stating that volume has been low to date. He proposed ending the monitoring system in place for the Forum, since the difficulties prompting that system do not exist now. The control of the program would be after the fact, not before the messages are posted. He particularly stressed the fact that guidelines governing use of the Forum would not change with the removal of monitors. Mr. Kubik asked for Council input on his proposal, and after a short discussion, the Council agreed to suspend up-front monitoring of the messages.

Mr. Pinelli received Council consent without resolution on Sabbath service format guidelines. He then brought to the Council a proposed wording change regarding criteria determining an elder’s standing in the church, which the Council unanimously approved after slight amendment.
 

-Doug Johnson

© 1999 United Church of God, an International Association

<!--webbot bot="HitCounter" i-image="1" i-digits="0" preview="<strong>[Hit Counter]</strong>" u-custom i-resetvalue="0" startspan --><!--webbot bot="HitCounter" endspan i-checksum="61074" -->