Popism

It was about two years ago that I responded to the credentials proposal generated by the team Ed organized and, in what I believe is righteousness indignation, coined the term, popish, to describe the process Ed employed to develop the proposal.

It was popish because, on his own authority, Ed set aside every human and written authority over him that exists in the CGGC.  He also directly defied some of those authorities.

Response to my characterization of Ed's actions as popish was energetic and angry for our tolerant, shepherd-dominated group. One person even announced that he had decided to leave the CGGC over it. (I don't know if he really did.)

Looking back, I am content with what I said and I have only one regret, i.e., the insult to Roman Catholic Popes, few of whom would have defied authority over them in the way Ed defied the authorities over him.

Two years after the fact, I remain convinced that I was right to point out the authoritarianism of the Rosenberry style of leadership--AND to call for the resurrection of the authority of the CGGC  Eldership, in submission to We Believe and the Mission Statement over CGGC authoritarians who, in the future, would attempt to out-pope the Roman Catholic Popes.

With Ed's resignation, we are at a crossroads.

We don't need another pope.  But, it is hard to unring that sort of bell once that sort of authority has been claimed and not opposed.

Can we stop a runaway train?