Gang,
After reading an early draft of this entry, it occurred to me that my purpose in composing it was not clear. This is not about me being snooty because someone in Findlay didn't respond to an email.
It is about the reality that, in the CGGC culture, it is not necessary, or even important, that what we profess and how we live be consistent with each other.
One of my Thirteen Characteristics of the CGGC Brand is:
10. To Talk is to Walk-ism. According to the New Testament, a follower of Jesus is one who possesses a faith that organically produces acts of obedience. (Matthew 7:21-23, 24-26, 25:1-46 Jn. 14:15; 2 Cor. 5:10; Eph .2:8-10; Jas 2:12-26; Rev. 2-3). CGGC faith is flawed because it is disconnected from action. It is possible to talk CGGC talk without walking it. Hence the GC Mission and Vision Statements that are not lived out. The CGGC talks an amazing talk but on the day Jesus says, "I know your deeds," it's going to be in trouble.According to CGGC talk, we embrace APEST, i.e., the belief that Christ still gives apostles, prophets, evangelists, shepherds and teachers to serve His Body and to prepare the saints for works of ministry.
In fact, the new CGGC credentials plan allows for the operation of 'apostolic teams' within our regions.
For years, I have been openly claiming to be gifted by Jesus to be a prophet called to speak prophetic words to the CGGC.
My purpose in what I write here is to use the fact of the ignored email (included below) to illustrate that our leaders talk the APEST talk but do not walk the APEST walk.
Jesus gives His Body two options in responding to prophecy: Either accept it and obey it or deem it to be false and treat the one who speaks it as a false prophet in the way the Word instructs.
Our leaders do not do that.
----------------------------------------------------
Preface:
Several years ago, I embraced the truth of Ephesians 4:13 that, until He returns, Jesus will give the church apostles, prophets, evangelists, shepherds and teachers. Not long after that, after much prayer, I began to see myself as a prophet. And, sometime after that, I began to wonder what life would look like if I prophecied and the church rejected my message.
I find numerous examples in the Word.
One thing that happens when a prophet is rejected, of course, is that the prophet is persecuted. In fact, Jesus said that it is a certainty that those who follow Him and live prophetically will be insulted and persecuted. (Mt. 5:11-12)
However, it seems to me that the persecution of a prophet by the predominating religious culture normally came as a last resort. When it rejects a prophet's message. the dominating culture normally first tries to engage the prophet, hoping for compromise. After that, the powers-that-be attempt to ignore the prophet, hoping that s/he will disappear or that no one will listen.
After that the persecution manifests itself.
In my ministry to the CGGC, I believe that I am, at least, in the second stage: The Ignoring Stage (However, I have been told by people in ERC leadership that there is ongoing conversation on the highest peak of that mountaintop about revoking my credentials.).
Below is a note I sent to a member of GC staff. Judge for yourself the tone of the email. This is one of several similar notes I've sent to people on staff that has received no reply.
For myself, I am fine with being ignored. Far better people than I have received that treatment--and worse. For me, I believe, faithfulness is a function of being willing to send forth truth, no matter what the response.
However, I think that the fact that I appear to be persona non grata in the highest seats of CGGC power puts those people in a bad spiritual place. Jesus warns us, "Watch our for false prophets."
I regularly invite people who think that I am a false prophet to obey what the Word demands of God's people faced with false prophecy.
Ignoring a false prophet is disobedience. Ignoring the message of a genuine prophet? Well, read the Word.
(I have done all I can to preserve the anonymity of the person to whom I sent the note.)
bill
----------------------------
__________, my friend,
I have just finished my first reading of
the latest CHURCH ADVOCATE, which was both thought and confusion provoking for
me. ...I'm writing this brief
note to you because we have, in the past, shared a similar vision for the future
of God's Kingdom.
Because my involvement in what goes on
and comes out of Harrisburg and Findlay is so limited, I am really only in a
position to judge the fruit that you guys produce without knowledge of what
processes led to that fruit being produced.
And, looking back over the past six to
eight years, I must say that I am extremely confused and seriously disoriented.
Six to eight years ago, you and I and
others were motivated by the six 'shifts' Reggie (McNeal) called for in The
Present Future.
One of those shifts calls for
deconversion from what he calls 'churchianity' to Christianity. He talks about
the increasing number of 'post-congregational' Christians and calls us to focus,
not on the local church, but on the Kingdom. I thought you and I and others
embraced that call. Based on polling Barna was doing at that time, Barna
projects that by the year 2025 about 2/3 of American Christians will be
post-congregational. Therefore, I have no understanding of what you have in mind
in developing the denominational program (something Reggie decries in
calling for the sixth shift) Transformational CHURCH. That
church-focused program represents the way of thinking that I thought you and
many of us rejected years ago. I am truly confused. Why are we focusing,
again, not on Kingdom but on church? Why are you leading by producing a
denominational program designed to be consumed by pastors and churches? I
thought this was a form of repentance we had achieved?
When I read through the recent CHURCH
ADVOCATE, I was stunned by something Ed wrote on page 14:
"Every church and every church leader [notice the double church focus] has a choice when it comes to ministry. They can either get smart or give in to chaos. The simple difference is prayerful planning."
__________, don't you remember that
the fifth of Reggie's six shifts is "from planning to preparation?" Why are we
advocating going back to a method that has failed horribly--one which you and I
once rejected?!
My friend, I love you. I love all of
you on General Conference staff. I love the CGGC.
But I am now entirely without
understanding of what you believe and where it is you guys want to take the
CGGC. As far as I can tell, all of the fruit you are producing these days is,
based on what we embraced from Reggie those few years ago, corrupt. According
to Reggie, Barna and others, it will take us on a path destined to insolate us from
the world to which we all hope to take the Gospel.
I don't write this to condemn you or
anyone but I repeat to you that what you are doing confuses me. It confounds
me. I am a person who begins with truth and principle. Your deeds don't make
sense on the level of truth.
What you are doing leaves me at a point that I don't know what to do other
than, based on what I thought we both believed, fight against what you are
doing because, as I understand it, if you guys get your way, we will walk apart
from the Spirit and we will have a mission viewed as irrelevant to the world Jesus sends us
into.
Again, I do love you--all of you--and I love the CGGC, but not as much as I
love the Lord and His Kingdom and His Word. If I have to choose, I will choose
the latter.
Is there a way you can set my mind at ease?
bill
