Council of Elders Meeting Report - December 8, 2015

Printer-friendly versionPDF version

United Church of God, an International Association

Council of Elders Quarterly Meeting Report

Milford, Ohio

Tuesday, December 8, 2015

Chairman Robin Webber called the morning session to order at 9:11 a.m., and the meeting was opened with prayer. Ten Council of Elders (Council) members were present. Mario Seiglie joined about 90 minutes later because of teaching an ABC class. Mark Mickelson was absent due to health reasons.

Strategic Planning Exercise—Bill Bradford [video done]

Bill Bradford, as the chairman of the Strategic Planning and Finance Committee (SPFC), led the discussion looking to improve and prepare for the future survey for 2017. The SPFC has consulted with Julie Brown to work through this process. After 10 years of utilizing the same basic survey with occasional edits, it was felt best that we produce a new survey that specifically will meet our needs in serving the brethren, the ministry and the home office employees as we evaluate its input for the major strategic survey in 2017. They will also move up the time schedule to send to the brethren so that the Council will have additional time to review its content before the winter meetings of 2017. The emphasis is serving the brethren. There was much input to the topics they would like to know more about for the future survey.

Planned Giving Session—Victor Kubik and Howard Marchbanks [video done]

President Victor Kubik began the presentation on the topic of planned giving. It is an area that is often neglected or not adequately explored. We are financed primarily through tithes and offerings in the Church. Planned Giving is not meant to solicit others but simply to inform people about additional ways of voluntarily giving. There are those who want to give, and we want them to know the opportunities to give to the Church.

Mr. Kubik introduced Howard Marchbanks, a deacon in the Redlands, California, congregation, for the rest of the presentation. Mr. Marchbanks spent 1 ½ hours to go through the details of planned giving and the advantages. The fact is that a number of people simply do not plan ahead in regards to how to share the accumulation of their life’s financial resources. He answered questions and emphasized the importance of educating those who are looking for this option. The Council found the discussion very helpful to themselves at a personal level in planning for the future and came to see a twofold value in such a program: 1) Considering the possibility of planned giving helps the individual define their own financial resources, 2) There would be a benefit to the Church as a beneficiary towards further expanding our ability to fulfill our mission statement.

GCE Survey Review—Robin Webber, Charles Melear [video done]

Robin Webber reminded the Council that they do serve on behalf of the GCE. The annual meeting of the General Conference is a business meeting, and it is educational in nature as well.

Charles Melear as the chairman of the GCE task force went through the surveys sent in from the GCE with the Council.

Rainer Salomaa asked if the Q&A at the GCE should be dropped since it had the most negative comments on the survey.

Mr. Webber said the Q&A has always been a fundamental part of our ministerial gatherings for 20 years. If we are asked to accept the mantle of leadership, we also have to be able to receive questions regarding our proposals and decisions. The Q&A session is always a challenge towards creating an effective session. A couple of times over the last several years the session commenced with a statement of sincere interest to the presenter but not necessarily to the GCE. It was often elongated in nature. It was Mr. Webber’s judgment call as the moderator. The Council dealt with such inquires as best as possible even though there were stated time limits. In 2015 every written and verbal question was answered, and the session only went over 12 minutes from the initial 90-minute framing for this activity to ensure the GCE could be responded to. The session was specifically designed to deal with the issues at hand in a systematic order of dealing with the Strategic Plan, the Operation Plan, the Budget, and any pending amendments for the 2015 session. He concluded by stating, “The open microphone should continue for the Q&A.”

John Elliott stated that the free flow of communication between the GCE and the Council is very important. The Q&A is one way of doing it. It would be appreciated for the GCE to have questions and not pre-positioned statements. The Q&A is not designed for those statements. The Council is looking for questions that are seeking answers.

Tony Wasilkoff asked about the level of response of the GCE surveys.

Peter Eddington said that from those that attended the GCE, 106 filled out a survey from a total of 200 attendees. There were 64 that filled out a survey that didn’t go since there were questions for them too. This was a good response.

Mr. Wasilkoff also asked if it is possible to share the results from the survey so the GCE knows that they are being heard and to encourage them to respond more in the future.

It was decided that the raw data could be sent out without the comment boxes.

The discussion then went through the proposed themes for the May 2016 GCE meeting. There was much discussion and input on what to have as the theme. There were four proposed beforehand.

Mr. Elliott recommended the theme “Live the Word” with some element of the other four aspects being covered. The majority agreed with this theme, and it was approved.

Charles Melear then concluded by mentioning that two task force members dropped off of the GCE task force and needed to be replaced. It was agreed that Robin Webber as chairman of the GCE and Darris McNeely, associate media producer, would be added to the task force. It was also agreed that Frank Dunkle, ABC director, and Lisa Fenchel, Women’s Services employee, would be on the task force as well.

The Council went into planned executive session at 2:05 p.m. to cover ordinations, retirement procedures and to review of sanctity of marriage statement.

Review of Fundamental Belief Amendments Sponsored by GCE Members That Are Currently Under Discussion (That Were Previously Reviewed at Beginning of 2015) [video done]

At 6:15 p.m. the Council came into open session to share the following:

Chairman Webber shared deliberations that the Council has been extensively going over for the large majority of the afternoon. After extensive deliberation we had opportunity to once again review the current live proposed amendments to the Fundamentals of Belief (FB).Those proposals were initially reviewed on February 24, 2015, by the full Council in regular face-to-face meetings. After an afternoon of discussion and deliberation, the quorum of the Council (11 members present, with Mark Mickelson absent) has unanimously maintained its statements of concern regarding both proposals: 1) the Passover and 2) the Sanctity of Marriage. In that regard, the Council has also amended its initial statement of concern to the Sanctity of Marriage proposed amendment. That was also by quorum of the Council adopted unanimously. Those authors of these proposed amendments have the opportunity, as does every GCE member, to understand that those proposals remain live and moving towards the GCE conference of May 2016. Further notification will be coming Dec. 16 from the secretary.

Chairman Webber’s second statement was in regards to a matter remanded to the Doctrine Committee (DC) in February 2015. He made this statement based on recognizing the interest and also the need of having a further definition on this vital issue. The DC after much review has brought forth a paper that the Council had the opportunity to go through fully this afternoon. That paper will be called “United Church of God Doctrinal Statement Defining the Biblical Marriage Relationship.” That paper was also adopted by a quorum of the Council unanimously. That paper will be sent out to the entire GCE to seek its approval in May of 2016. This paper will not be a Fundamental of Belief in its presentation. Please note: It will be a doctrinal statement. Because of the content and importance of this doctrine it will be a General Conference of Elders statement, not just a Council of Elders statement. That statement will be put forth to the GCE, and the level of approval is at two-thirds of the valid ballots cast.

The Council adjourned at 6:20 p.m.

 

United Church of God Doctrinal Statement Defining the Biblical Marriage Relationship

God is in the process of establishing His spiritual family (Ephesians:3:14-15; Hebrews:2:10), which the human family portrays.

At creation, God designed and established marriage between the first man and woman as a divine institution (Genesis:2:24; Matthew:19:4-6; Mark:10:6-9). He created man and woman in His own image (Genesis:1:27) but with distinct differences between male and female. In creating Adam, God said it was not good for him to be alone (Genesis:2:18). Man needed suitable and complementary companionship. So God specifically made woman and established marriage as a covenant relationship not only between a man and a woman, but also with God (Genesis:2:21-25; Matthew:19:4-6; Malachi:2:14).

Marriage between a husband and wife is the basic building block of the family and human society, and is the only biblically approved sexual relationship (Hebrews:13:4). The Bible teaches that God intends sexual intimacy to occur only between a man and a woman who are married to each other. We believe God intends that marriage only be between one man and one woman in a single, exclusive union (1 Corinthians 7:2-3). God also stated that husband and wife are made “one” to produce “godly offspring” (Malachi:2:15).

God’s intent for the marriage union moves beyond just the physical plane of a social and economic compact with human bonding and procreation. The marriage relationship between a husband and wife with their inherent personal and gender uniqueness was established to teach husbands and wives to love, honor and respect one another with the same kind of giving and self-sacrificial love demonstrated in the relationship between Jesus Christ and His Church (Ephesians:5:22-33). Marriage thus has a great divine purpose that transcends this physical existence.

Marriage is a godly relationship and divine institution, and God joins together a husband and wife in marriage (Matthew:19:6; Mark:10:9). Any definition of marriage other than as an exclusive relationship between one man and one woman is illegitimate and invalid in the sight of God and His Church and contradicts His divine instruction as revealed in the Bible (Acts:5:29).

Marriage is a very serious commitment, safeguarded in the law of God. Any form of sexual immorality, such as adultery, fornication, homosexual acts, bisexual conduct, bestiality, incest, sexual lust or use of pornography, is sinful and offensive to Him (Exodus:20:14; 1 Corinthians:6:9-11; Hebrews:13:4; Ephesians:5:5; Matthew:5:48; Galatians:5:19-21). Similarly, a transgender marriage or sexual relationship, and/or changing the God-ordained roles of men and women, is sinful and unbiblical. However, God offers reconciliation to all whom He calls and who repent of these and all other sins and seek His forgiveness and turn to Him in faith and obedience (Acts:2:38; 1 Corinthians:6:9-11; 1 Peter:3:9-13; 1 John:1:8-9). While God clearly and unequivocally condemns all sin with the suffering and harm that it brings, every person should be afforded compassion, love and kindness (Titus:3:3-7).

The governing documents of the United Church of God, an International Association, specify that the collective ministry of the Church is vested with the authority to define its beliefs and practices based on the Bible, the supreme source of revelation for mankind (2 Timothy:3:16-17).

-end-

Council Reporter

Shawn Cortelyou

© 2015 United Church of God, an International Association