For reasons I'll detail in the future, if God is willing and I have the opportunity, George rejected my offer.
In the wake of the rejection of my olive branch, I sent George a second, formal reply to his request.
My reply is significant in a way that goes beyond the actions of the Commission on Church Renewal.
It reflects on and provides documentation of the behavior of Dr. Richardson as far as his handling of the issue of my credentials is concerned.
Below is the text of my formal reply to George. I'll add comments below.
--------------------------------
George,
I have received your note, on behalf of the Commission on Church Renewal, requesting contact information on the equivalent of Faith's Council President or lead elder and, as uninformed as that request may be, there is another even more difficult issue that your note raises.
Your note indicates that my credentials have been removed. However, in spite the passage of a considerable amount of time and a number of private communications from you and a few others suggesting that there was lengthy discussion at Conference on the status of my credentials, I have received no request for the return of my ordination certificate. To this point, I tightfistedly hold on to my ordination certificate and consider myself to be an ordained member of the ERC clergy.
On the other hand, for years now, I have wished for a closer, mutually supportive, connection between Faith and your Commission and the Conference in general. Certainly, we could have benefited from your support in the past and, I believe, others could have learned some things about empowering the Priesthood of all Believers from what we have attempted.
Having said all of that, the fact remains that the premise upon which the Commission made its request is not based on reality as I understand it.
I continue to hope to have the opportunity to contribute to the effectiveness of the ministry of our community of Jesus followers.
Blessings,
bill
---------------
I have thoughts about two issues based on what I wrote to George.
One has to do with the manner in which the Commission/Conference related to Faith from the time the CGGC Mission Statement was created.
From the beginning, we at Faith wanted nothing more than to carry out the CGGC mission and we developed what became a nontraditional CGGC congregation.
And, despite our very intentional pursuit of what the CGGC said it had as its mission, at best, the Commission/Conference ignored us. At worst, it opposed us.
More information about that will come when I detail George's description of the alternatives the Commission envisioned for Faith.
Based on Lance's eNews about ERC sessions in 2017, the Conference mountaintoppers now acknowledge that their ministry is not succeeding.
Since Ed Rosenberry published the Mission Statement in 2009, Faith has been on the cutting edge of practicing the so-called Priesthood of all Believers and the Commission on Church Renewal, whose efforts are now, apparently, acknowledged to be a failure, never even sniffed in our direction.
When I said that Faith could have benefited from the Commission's support and others could have learned from us, I was perfectly sincere.
Second, I wrote this note to George three months to the day after the 2016 ERC sessions and, still, I had received no word from Dr. Richardson concerning the status of my credentials.
However, not long after I sent this note to George, in which I pointed out that I had received no notice that action was taken regarding my credentials, I received a notice from the post office informing me that there was a piece of certified mail awaiting me and it was sent from ERC CGGC.
How amazing is that coincidence?!!!!!!!
A long-time CGGC friend has written to me describing sitting in Conference in 2016, listening to Dr. Richardson describe, as my friend interpreted it, Dr. Richardson's painstaking effort to obey Matthew 18 in confronting me, hoping to reconcile me to the Conference.
I don't remember Dr. Richardson doing any of that, but I do read in this email that he had not followed up on the alleged act of Conference three months after sessions ended.
And, he hadn't.
To this day, the only brief contact I've had with Kevin is when he refused to discuss my concern that he'd not told the truth about me at Conference.
---------------
I have thoughts about two issues based on what I wrote to George.
One has to do with the manner in which the Commission/Conference related to Faith from the time the CGGC Mission Statement was created.
From the beginning, we at Faith wanted nothing more than to carry out the CGGC mission and we developed what became a nontraditional CGGC congregation.
And, despite our very intentional pursuit of what the CGGC said it had as its mission, at best, the Commission/Conference ignored us. At worst, it opposed us.
More information about that will come when I detail George's description of the alternatives the Commission envisioned for Faith.
Based on Lance's eNews about ERC sessions in 2017, the Conference mountaintoppers now acknowledge that their ministry is not succeeding.
Since Ed Rosenberry published the Mission Statement in 2009, Faith has been on the cutting edge of practicing the so-called Priesthood of all Believers and the Commission on Church Renewal, whose efforts are now, apparently, acknowledged to be a failure, never even sniffed in our direction.
When I said that Faith could have benefited from the Commission's support and others could have learned from us, I was perfectly sincere.
Second, I wrote this note to George three months to the day after the 2016 ERC sessions and, still, I had received no word from Dr. Richardson concerning the status of my credentials.
However, not long after I sent this note to George, in which I pointed out that I had received no notice that action was taken regarding my credentials, I received a notice from the post office informing me that there was a piece of certified mail awaiting me and it was sent from ERC CGGC.
How amazing is that coincidence?!!!!!!!
A long-time CGGC friend has written to me describing sitting in Conference in 2016, listening to Dr. Richardson describe, as my friend interpreted it, Dr. Richardson's painstaking effort to obey Matthew 18 in confronting me, hoping to reconcile me to the Conference.
I don't remember Dr. Richardson doing any of that, but I do read in this email that he had not followed up on the alleged act of Conference three months after sessions ended.
And, he hadn't.
To this day, the only brief contact I've had with Kevin is when he refused to discuss my concern that he'd not told the truth about me at Conference.
No comments:
Post a Comment