A One-Year-Later Update on my Brent Sleasman eNews Prophetic Prediction

A case study.

From time to time, comments offered here imply that I get things wrong. Yet my sense is that my take on the CGGC is accurate. So, I decided, nearly a year ago, to test myself in an objective way...based on real words.

Last September, I entered a post here predicting that a recommendation offered in an eNews article by Brent Sleasman, President of Winebrenner Theological Seminary, would "come to nothing."

I rarely make predictions on this blog.

It's very possible that I've never, ever been as specific and detailed...and bold... in a prediction as I was in that post.

------------------

Here's some background. I'm certain you don't recall the details.

Last summer, Brent was invited, by Lance, to author an eNews article on engaging people who are not disciples in conversation about important issues.

Brent's article was intelligent and provocative. It dealt, in this case, with discussion of issues of human sexuality. And, I responded to it.

I mentioned Brent's article, and my response, here on the blog.

I recommended readers of this blog check out Brent's article as well as my response. I noted that I didn't save my response but I was certain it would be published, because my responses always had been published in the past. (A description of my response is included in the post I've copied below.)

However, my comment wasn't published as a comment on the eNews. After a time, I entered a rather miffed comment about that fact.

Later, Lance sent me a private email saying that it had "come to (his) attention" that I was saying he didn't publish my comment. (Until then, I didn't know that Lance was the moderator at that time.)

Lance added that he wanted me to know that he didn't receive the comment and that he had always published my comments in the past, no matter what they said. He added that I shouldn't bother responding to his email because he wouldn't read anything I wrote to him personally. (I did, however, respond with an apology, though I'm certain that Lance was true to his promise and that he didn't read it.)

It was after that that I wrote the post that is copied below, suggesting that nothing would come of Brent's post.

Brent created a Facebook link to the post...and it became the second most read post in the history of this blog.

------------------

To the point of this post:

1. My prediction...that Brent's idea would come to nothing...was purely and perfectly accurate. What Brent suggested, with Lance's blessing, has come to absolutely and precisely nothing in the CGGC. My guess is that it long since forgotten by everyone, except me.

We, in the CGGC always do forget. We have been conditioned to forget. We are constantly inundated with grand ideas from CGGC institutional authorities. But, there hasn't been follow-up, for at least a decade, on any of the great ideas.

My post serves to illustrate the reality of the CGGC characteristic, To Talk is to Walk-ism.


2. It's true that I decide long ago to revisit my prediction from a year ago, however the timing of this revisit strikes me as being significant.

Significant how?

The institutional authorities in Findlay have recently rolled out a first-ever-in-nearly-200-years CGGC Strategic Plan.

Can you guess why I think that there's a very high probability that it will come to nothing?

Here, however, is a twist on my "come to nothing" prediction:

I'm convinced that, if it depends on the hierarchs in Findlay, the Strategic Plan will come to nothing. These folks are talkers, not walkers.

In fact, their booklet introducing the plan tells CGGCers that they are not expected to adopt the Strategic Plan.

Here's the twist on the "come to nothing" prediction:

It's possible that others in the Eldership, to whom Lance and his crew are, technically, accountable, may force the issue and demand that the Findlay Talkers actually walk.

I'm not predicting that they will. In fact, my doubts about that are immense.

I've been clear that I think that the very idea of adopting any strategic plan is a very serious mistake.

Yet, for the sake of defeating Talk-ism, even only one time, I'm hoping.

------------------

So, here is the predictive prophecy from last September. I've abridged it slightly to prevent this post from being longer than necessary. You are welcome to read the whole thing in the blog's archives.

====================

Why Brent Sleasman's Call to "Important Conversations" will come to Nothing

Apart from the brouhaha over why my eNews comment on Brent's guest article in the eNews, SETTING THE STAGE FOR IMPORTANT CONVERSATIONS: HUMAN SEXUALITY, was not published, I want to make a predictive prophecy about it.

I don't do the predictive part of prophecy often. In this case, as is usually the case, when I do it, I'm slightly embarrassed because I suspect everyone who reads it will think, "Well, duh! Who doesn't already know that?"

Yet, what seems obvious to me usually isn't to everyone. 

So, in case you haven't realized it, what Brent and Lance want to happen in the CGGC...with CGGC people setting the stage for and having important conversations about difficult issues...isn't going to become the way of the CGGC future.

Unless, of course, we repent. 

It's the reasons I see for that reality that leads me to type this out even though you probably already know it. There are several reasons and they're not all that profound. 

1. They want our parish priests to be the people leading these conversations. 

This is a mistake that we started making at least 80 years ago and we continue to make and it ALWAYS leads to failure. ALWAYS. 

In Church of God movement days, our minute handful of ministers, they weren't called pastors until very recently, did not provide religious products and services to be consumed by a passive laity. 

In Church of God movement days, we didn't have a clergy and we most certainly didn't have a laity.

In Church of God movement days, it was understood that the work of the Kingdom was done by the people of the congregations and that the ministers were servants of the Lord whose role was to prepare the saints for works of ministry, as Paul describes the role of APESTs in Ephesians 4:11-13.

It's become our way constantly to tweak the role of the parish priest, to add just one more little duty to the job description to suit changing times or to follow fads. 

And, that's what's being done here. 

And why not!??!!?!! 

In Church of God movement days, our people...our PEOPLE...were having the important conversations...about slavery, about war, about alcohol abuse. 

And, our ministers were empowering those conversations. But, they weren't being paid to be the people who invested time and established space for those conversations to take place. 

We talk about discipling but we walk the system in which our pastors are parish priests who provide religious products and services to be consumed by our passive laity...and, now, apparently, by the unchurched world.

We always do this. It always fails. 

It will fail again.

2. More at the place where parish priest ministry meets the road...

...what are the people of our aging congregations expected to think when their pastor adds setting the stage for important conversations to his/her schedule and has less time for sermon and Bible Study preparation and home and hospital visitation?

What does the laity always think!

When the people of the laity, who pay the Conference tithe, complain to regional leadership and demand that their pastor either spend more time with the old people, or get them a pastor who will, what's regional leadership always do?

This setting the stage for important conversations is a big task. It involves the investment of time and emotion for a parish priest. 

What's the consumer of the parish priest's more traditional products and services supposed to do? Those consumers are paying good money for the services that they expect to receive. What's the pastor's family supposed to do?

What does the parish priest stop doing to start preparing for important conversations?

CGGC mountaintoppers created our laity. They've created the expectation that churches consume religious products and services. CGGC mountaintoppers created, from Winebrenner's movement, the notion of credentialed priestly leadership in the place of Winebrenner's universal priesthood.

For this setting the stage for important conversations vision to work, the roles of the parish priest and the consuming laity will have to be adjusted, at the very least.

They won't be. 

3. One of my Characteristics of the CGGC Brand is, Cynicism. 

Despite the fact that I regularly denounce the cynics, I suspect that many who read my blog are cynics. If you're not already a cynic, imagine being a cynic reading these articles by Brent.

How many times have you heard, or heard of, these ideas and initiatives rolling down from the CGGC mountaintop?!!!?!

Are you even going to bother to moan at this one?

There's nothing in what Brent's suggesting that will soften the hearts of our many cynics.

------------------ 

So, the SETTING THE STAGE FOR IMPORTANT CONVERSATIONS thing will go nowhere. 

And, I need to be clear about one thing: In my opinion, that's a bad thing.

By leaving the parish priest ministry to live in the world as an ambassador of the Kingdom of God, I actually have the conversations Brent advocates.

Having those conversations has become my life in a significant way. I live for the moments those conversations happen.

But what the eNews has in mind? It's not going to happen.

A significant theme in my lost comment to Brent's post was my call, again, to turn from the belief in the church as an institution led by a clergy class...

...and to empower every believer to be a priest.

What Brent and Lance propose is impractical for life in the real world.

It can't work. It won't happen, no matter how valuable the core idea may be.

Until the mountaintoppers repent of and turn from their institutional vision of the church with its stark clergy/laity divide, it can't happen.

Comments on My eNews Comment

Apologies to the few who read the CGGC blog. I've copied my comment to Lance's latest. Mike published it yesterday. For Lance's article, you will have to go to the blog.

Lance suggests that change is hard, really, really hard.

Below the copy of my comment I'll add some observations I believe to be of a prophetic nature about what I've written.

---------------------

Lance,

Yours is an informative and academic post, the sort of writing I enjoy and which is provocative to me and I thank you for it.

I’m somewhat familiar with Deutschman’s, CHANGE OR DIE, and, so, I think I can guess where you will go with your next post.

However, I want to fold into the recipe, one ingredient that is normally left out when organizations, or institutions, like ours attempt to shift direction and move forward.

It is this:

There is a type of change that is not hard. In fact, that sort of change is accomplished so easily that is next-to-inevitable.

In the CGGC, we are already changing. As statistics published during General Conference sessions make clear, we have changed again in the past three years. There are fewer of us. Those who remain are older than our people have ever been. Across the body, our spiritual vitality has diminished to a new low.

More to the point, the characteristics that were at the core of our existence in our first days as the Church of God have changed very radically…and not for the good.

For example, our fierce, white-hot obedience to the Bible as our “only rule of faith and practice,” which could once be taken for granted among people in the Church of God, has disappeared.

The conviction that we should be taking the gospel into the world, once an essential conviction for us, has been replaced with an internal focus.

We have changed dramatically.

And, no one had to master the literature of leadership gurus to create the change that has taken place.

Others before you have been struggling to introduce, to our body, a different sort of change…the change that is hard…for at least 30 years.

I believe that they have, instinctively, been attempting to apply Deutschman’s three step approach, since before he even wrote the book.

Yet, without success.

What we have ignored to this point, I believe, is the reality that what the CGGC is now is rooted in a very sophisticated theology…even philosophy…of church.

You and I reject that way of thinking, of course.

What we can’t do, however, is pretend it away.

Our people do what they do because of what they believe. They believe what they believe about church because of what they were taught years ago by the men who were sitting behind the desk you use, in the office you occupy.

As you attempt to lead the change that is hard, you will be leading a battle over what is true.

You will be fighting against truths once embraced by the people in our body who possessed the highest institutional authority.

You and I may disagree with what most people in the CGGC believe about church but we have to respect the reality that many, even among the CGGC clergy, have very strong and settled beliefs about church and that what they are doing today is the fruit of those very real convictions.

You are not writing on a blank slate.

I believe that you are going to have to find the substance that will erase what’s already been etched in CGGC stone.

------------------

Here are some comments on my comment:

1. Change is not hard. In fact, it is inevitable. However, two types of people have nearly always failed to bring about positive change among the people of the Kingdom of God: First, institutionalists, second, people gifted to be shepherds operating a parish-priest dominated culture focused on church, not gospel.

2. As I note, attempts to bring about good change in the CGGC have been taking place for about thirty years. All of those attempts have failed...as statistics published during the recent General Conference sessions make clear.

3. Change for the good is hard, next to impossible, for institutionalists. On the other hand, bad change, what the CGGC institutionalists have been leading for decades, is, actually, very easy for institutionalists...as our history proves.

4. One thing all failed CGGC attempts at good change in the past three-ish decades have in common is that they were the genius of institutionalists focused on the parish-priest dominated culture, sincerely hoping, yet failing, to move CGGC people not connected to the institutional hierarchy.

5. Led by the people in power in the institutional hierarchy, the CGGC body has been operating under a theology of church that, first of all, is distinctly different from the understanding of church put into practice by our founders in the day that we were being blessed, second, came into dominance in the 1930s, and third, has driven the CGGC's numerical decline and spiritual decay.

6. Change in the CGGC is taking place at this very moment and it is real! We are changing. We have changed compared to three years ago. We have changed from what we were at our beginning. Change in the CGGC is not hard to bring about. Change comes easily. For us, it also has come disastrously.

7. In the last 30 years or so, the people who have attempted to bring about the change that is hard failed were sincere. But, they all failed because they ignored the reality that the battle for change is a struggle between competing notions of truth. Shepherds, of course, are weak on truth, by virtue of their spiritual calling. They are strong on relationship, and, while relationship is important in bringing about change...as Deutschman observes...without foundation in truth, or principle, relationship doesn't help us in the current crisis.

8. False notions of truth don't simply disappear at the convenience of the leaders of an institution. They fight tenaciously for dominence. Lance is not writing on a blank slate.

9. If Lance is going to lead the change that is hard, he will have to confess his own past (if it is, indeed, past) belief in a false truth...the corrupt theology of church. He will have to beg the body for forgiveness and be very clear about his conversion to a new truth.

9. Lance will also have to call past leaders to repent of their service to the false truth, something that will be hard for him, and for them, even with a heartfelt commitment.

10. Those past leaders who won't confess, will have to be disciplined lovingly, but harshly and publicly, if they won't confess their sin.

11. The battle for the change that is hard will have to go through a time in which past error is exposed and condemned.

12. Only those who turn from error and come together loving newly discovered truth will be able to share in the benefits of the change that is hard.

"Al's" Funeral

A celebration of the life of our friend Al was held at the Unitarian Universalist church he attended most recently.

Even though it was the biggest day of Labor Day sale at the store, I was given permission to take off, to skip my manager's shift, to attend it.

We met Al in 1980 because he was about to marry a high school friend of ours. Though our friendship became one of the closest of our lives, we were always on the edge of each other's worlds...because our spiritual lives were so much at odds with each others'.

By the time he died, Al had been a UU for 60 plus years. In the spirit of his church, he happily tolerated every religion, every path to God, even Christianity...with the exception of born again/evangelical Christianity.

As far as people like Evie and me are concerned, he'd have been one of those people who would say, "I love Jesus but I hate (born again) Christians." At times, he was...to use the verbiage of the first-ever CGGC Strategic Plan..."daring" about it.

Yet, our friendship was as genuine, and our mutual affection was as real, as any relationship we have ever had.

Needless to say, attending the celebration of his life created mixed thoughts and feelings.

Listening to his eulogy, spoken by a member of the UU clergy, and hearing memories of his leadership in a number of UU congregations over the span of several decades, I learned things about him...and the world he was comfortable in...that I never knew.

Clearly, hanging with us would have stretched him as much as knowing him challenged us.

In the service, one of his UU friends even called Al a "religious institutionalist."

Al truly loved the UU church. He loved the committees and commissions and councils he served on. He revelled in being respected as a "lay leader" at the congregational and denominational level.

Two thoughts about that:

1. Evie said, as we drove home, that she couldn't distinguish between what the UU people said about their love and devotion to their church and what institutionalists in the CGGC say about ours. God, by definition, means less in the UU world than among other religious connections so the UU passion for the institution, the church, is understandable. I was swooning over how much affection the UUers had for the UU  institution itself. It was unashamed. Unrestrained. To us, that focus on church-above-God is neither understandable nor acceptable in the Church of God. But, the similarities were striking to both of us.

2. It occurred to me that that one source of tension between Al and us that I didn't apprehend until yesterday is his love for institutional religion and our increasing abhorrence of it. On the other hand, by virtue of our disdain for the institutional, we may have seemed less guilty of what Al saw as the sins of born againers. We are born again but not connected to, well, the politics of evangelicals.

Al's daughter, whom we'd never met, shared memories of her dad in the service. She concluded by quoting "verses" that spoke to her about her dad. I don't know the woman at all, so, at that moment, I expected her to recite poetry. What she quoted was, "I was hungry and you gave me something to eat. I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink...(and the four other things Jesus says to the "sheep.") I never actually saw that in Al but, in her eyes, it was there.

-----------------

As you might expect, yesterday was an emotionally powerful day.

Update on Mom

One of the functions of this blog is that it, sometimes, serves as a journal and as the place where I document developments in my life.

I'll do a little of both of those now.

Yesterday everyone in the family, except me, met with the home's personal care social worker and its personal care head nurse to discuss mom. (At the store, we are dealing with a temporary human resource shortage and I worked on my day off.)

It's becoming clear that mom is declining, sliding further into Alzheimer's.

She's not mean yet, though she seems to be heading in that direction. She certainly is becoming obnoxious and increasingly argumentative. She's becoming easily frustrated and she's becoming difficult for staff.

Physically, she's in decent shape. She's still gets around well using a cane. And, that itself is an issue.

And, her memory is shot.

Family and staff discussed various options for optimizing mom's qualify of life.

Evie said that one future option discussed for the first time with mom is placing her in what used to be called a lock down unit.

Mom still is very mobile and her memory is bad. She often doesn't know where she is. And, as she moves around in the home, sometimes forgets where she's going or how to reach her destination.

She is the sort of person who, if she was able to go outside the building, could become lost.

There is a very busy road immediately in front of the home, close to a very popular shopping mall and heavy traffic.

We suspect that, at this point, if she was locked down, she would not handle it well. She will be extremely unhappy and very difficult to be around. Evie has said that, these days, mom's like a two-year old. My brother says that she's like a four-year old bully. There's something to that.

But, her safety has to be a primary concern.

Dad died from complications of dementia less than two years ago. Losing a parent is, of course, always traumatic. Watching a parent die from dementia is difficult in a very stressful way. Seeing it twice, in rapid succession...?

Mom's not at death's door but it feels like the spiral has begun.

A Double-Glimpse from 40,000 Feet

Two foundational observations that I made...again...as I was putting together the 40,000 foot critique of the newest CGGC vision.

1. The whole thing is wrong. If the whole thing was right, i.e., if the paradigm was correct, this vision might groove. But, the vision can't be right because the perspective is wrong, the paradigm, the system from which we are operating, is wrong. We are starting at a wrong place. We can't get to the right place from where we started.

2. The whole thing is at odds with what once was. There was a time when the power of the Spirit and the blessing of the Spirit was so dynamic in the Church of God that, reading Winebrenner's accounts, you get the sense that there was a genuine struggle to know how to keep in step with the work God was doing. Of course, today the struggle is knowing that the Lord is doing nothing among us.

We are at odds with what we once were in many ways. Here is the one way that may be the most essential:

On the day the Church of God formed, Winebrenner preached that the "counsel and work" of the church was, first and foremost, "the conversion of sinners." That focus on people outside of the, well, church who needed Jesus was fierce and single-minded.

From 40,000 feet, that stark focus on winning sinners to Jesus, which was so obvious back in the day, is gone.

Back in the day, the humans who were the driving force of the ministry of the Church of God were, in my opinion, gifted to be evangelists first, prophets second and apostles third. Today, in the CGGC? Well, none of the above.

This second observation is more important than you might think. It may, actually, be a starting place for genuine repentance and change.

Frequently in the Word, people who were powerful voices for the Lord called God's people to move forward by remembering the ways of God's people in the past.

Why wouldn't we do the same?

A 40,000 Foot Critique of the New CGGC Vision

In his August 23, 2019 eNews article, Lance records what he calls, "our Vision." Though he doesn't call it "our Vision Statement," I'm supposing that that is what this is.

This, then, is "our Vision."

Contagious Awakening: By our 200th anniversary (2025), we will equip and release thousands of spiritually charged leaders to every man, woman, and child to whom we are sent. This will happen by positioning ourselves for a movement of the Holy Spirit through repentance, reconciliation, and prayer.

To his credit, Lance becomes philosophical in the next paragraph of the article, explaining what he understands vision itself to be.

Lance says,

When you think about vision, you think about seeing into the future. You think about being able to see what doesn’t yet exist but could exist in the future. Vision isn’t so much about capturing our hopes and dreams for the future, but rather uncovering where the Lord wants to take us in the years ahead. Vision always draws us beyond what already exists and calls us to embrace what could be.

As can be expected, coming from today's Lance, as opposed to the "raw" Lance I praised so highly in a recent post, what Lance writes here is thoughtful and careful. It's progressive compared to the past fallen ways of our institution, yet it's moderate, mellow and, certainty, in no way, daring.

Yet, from way up here at 40,000 feet, the place people with the APEST gift of prophecy spend a nice piece of their time, it's clear that the whole new CGGC Vision thing has one crucial, and deadly, flaw.

The vision Lance describes,

"uncovering where the Lord wants to take us in the years ahead"

is not the work of APEST prophets.

------------------

(Jesus) gave some to be apostles others to be prophets others to be evangelists and others to be shepherds and teachers. (Ephesians 4). He did that, "to prepare the saints for works of ministry." (Ephesians 4) That is, He did it so God's will would be done in the world...by His people...in real and concrete ways.

Each spiritual gifting is unique and important.

All of the gifts function in a way that demands that each gift be acknowledged in the body. The Lord created us to be a body in which all of the parts depend on each other so that if the function of one part is ignored, the entire body suffers. (1 Corinthians 12)

When it comes to uncovering what the Lord wants His people to do, and to be, in the future, if the Lord reveals that information at all, by His design He does it:

1. Not through the leaders of the institution,

2. But, through the men and women to whom He has given the gift of prophecy. (In times when the church is out of step with the Spirit, as even leadership acknowledges we have been, those prophetic voices are heard from the distance, as they call out from the wilderness.)

------------------

As an institutional statement, what Lance calls "our Vision" is a nice, well-polished, and carefully crafted, piece of literature.

What is the chance, though, that "our Vision" actually is God's vision?

Based on the reality that "our Vision" doesn't come into the body through the Spirit, and through the people to whom Jesus would give it.

Zero.

------------------

The ancient Chinese saying contains truth: The longest journey begins with a single step.

If the vision that directs that first step is faulty, the journey will, at the very best, start wrong.

General Conference staff has been talking APEST for quite some time now. Yet, from what I can see, it has never walked APEST.

Charting the course to, as Lance says it, "repentance, reconciliation and prayer," from a biblical, uh, paradigm, would have begun with the words of the prophets.

It has not been.

I'll say what I've said many times:

The people who hold institutional authority in the CGGC are nice people. They have good hearts. They are very sincere. They are likable.

Yet, for all of that, the Lord hasn't blessed their plans and programs for generations.

All of those plans and programs have resulted in increased numerical decline and spiritual decay.

The Lord is not blessing us. If anything, he's cursing us.

This Strategic Plan, with the vision Lance describes, comes from the same bag of tricks our institutional authorities have been reaching into since the 1930s.

This plan sounds as good as every other plan and program our institutional authorities have devised in recent generations.

Yet, the result has always, always, always been the same.

Decline and decay.

We must repent.

Evie's Take on Mom

For an 85 year old, my mom's doing fairly well, physically. 

She is in what used to be called Assisted Living. And, she remains fairly active. She uses a walker to get around, but she does get around. During the day, she's rarely in her room. Visits normally begin with us dashing from one of her favorite haunts to another until we find her.

Her Alzheimer's is advancing, though.

Interestingly, she's not becoming mean but her personality is changing and her memory is shot.

She never remembers our visits. When we visit and she first sees us it's like she hasn't seen us in years. And, she's always happy. She never condemns.

When dad was still around, and still sort of with us, we'd say that mom had become like a seven year old, a bratty seven year old girl.

As we chatted today, Evie assessed mom as being like a two year old.

My first thought was that that was extreme, but having thought it through, I'd have to agree.

You've heard the expression, the Terrible Twos. It's like that.

Dad had another type of dementia and he didn't regress in this way. He sort of simply faded.

Mom's much more of a challenge.

It looks as if there's a family meeting with the home's staff on the near horizon.

CGGC Math

No big deal, really, but the following paragraph appears in Lance's latest eNews article,

By our 200th anniversary (2025), we will equip and release thousands of spiritually charged leaders to every man, woman, and child to whom we are sent.

It's the "our 200th anniversary (2025)" part that sticks in my craw.

Here's the thing. There can be no doubt  whatsoever that the Eldership of the Church of God was formed in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania in October in 1830.

No doubt.

None at all.

The fiftieth anniversary of the beginning of the denomination was celebrated in 1880 and was marked, in part, by a reprinting of Winebrenner's critically important, and now profoundly ignored, 1829 (Pre-Church of God) book, A Brief View, of the Formation, Government and Discipline, of the Church of God...

(1880-50=1830)

My guess, though, is that, if you read Lance's sentence on the blog, you didn't blink. In spite of the actual history, you probably take for granted that what's now the CGGC body will be 200 years old in 2025.

Lance seems to be suggesting that, in 2025, there will be an acknowledgement, if not a celebration, of our beginnings 200 years earlier, in 1825.

So, how is it that a body that was formed in 1830 plans to celebrate 200 years of existence in 2025?

The arithmetic is not difficult. 2025-1830 does not equal 200.

Still, there's no doubt that the people who put together the General Conference Strategic Plan, which envisions so grand an achievement by our 200th anniversary in 2025, are employing conventional CGGC wisdom.

So, where did this peculiar new math come from?

To be honest, I can subtract well enough to know that the numbers don't add up, or, at least, subtract down.

I'm a fairly careful student of our history. Still, I only have an idea about how 2025-1830=200 calculation came to be. My idea is rooted in what I know about our history, but, it's only an idea.

I'd love comments here, on the blog, but I know some of you are cautious about making public the fact that you read this blog, so, on or off the blog conversation will be appreciated.

Being Followed

I continue to reflect on the Leadership Development fad that enamors CGGC hierarchs.

As expected it's present, prominent even, in the first-ever General Conference Strategic Plan.

Yet, I still don't see Leadership Development in the New Testament.

I do see Jesus, "being in very nature God," becoming a servant and teaching that to be great in God's Kingdom is to be a servant and to be the greatest is to be the slave of all.

I don't see Jesus doing leadership development but I do see repeated accounts of Jesus confronting people, saying, "Come, FOLLOW me..."

My ministry is in the world.

I live in the world as a disciple of Jesus and as an ambassador of the Kingdom of God.

And, in my little world, that's worked.

I began in my job as a part-time employee and, to my surprise, quite some time ago, was ultimately invited to join the management team...to assume the role of a leader.

In the business world, leadership is crucial.

Since I'm tasked with leading in my job, I'm especially fascinated watching our institutional church hierarchs scurry around, trying to lead...and to develop others as leaders.

------------------

In my job, in the world, as a disciple of Jesus and as an ambassador of the Kingdom of God, I have a, well, philosophy of leadership.

In my mind, I lead in the world in precisely the way that Jesus says one achieves greatness in God's Kingdom. And, I think that I live out my philosophy fairly well, perhaps better than I realize.

I attempt to become the servant of everyone over whom I have authority.

I've said in earlier posts that there is a team of five managers in my department and I remain convinced that all of the others do the technical part of the job better than I do. I don't think that I do my job very well, though I do try my best.

Nevertheless, I'm stunned, day by day, by the fact that the people who work under our authority FOLLOW me with unusual enthusiasm and gladness.

In my small world, in which leadership actually is in the job description, I do achieve leadership...

...because people follow.

I never attempt to lead. I have no idea how to lead. Moment by moment, I seek only serve.

Truly.

---------------------

For all of our hierarchs' squawking about being leaders in our small part of the Kingdom of God, and for all of their squirming with programs and plans intended to practice leadership development,...

...few people, perhaps even no one, actually follows them, particularly at the level of General Conference leadership.

We have little followership, if we have any at all.

What I wish for our hierarchs is that they'd not aspire to lead.

In reality, they are not leading, if being followed is the measure of effective leadership.

What I wish for our hierarchs is that they learn from what Jesus did...

...and from what He said.

A, not uncommon, Opinion on the Nature of Leadership in the CGGC

Below is a brief comment I received as a part of a recent, rather lengthy, email exchange. It comes from someone who contributes, in a very positive way, to the ministry of this CGGC Region.

The comment is slightly edited to preserve anonymity on every level.

"Regardless of the pastor, what has Conference done for [that church] (and other churches for that matter) that [this congregation] should show them any allegiance?...what do they owe the Conference?"

This is an honest assessment of the how CGGC leadership has functioned in the past, in this Region of the denomination, at the very least.

Trust me. This opinion comes from someone who is informed first-hand.  These are the words of an ERCer who is involved and who contributes to the ministry of the Conference in a very real and positive way...

...but this is also someone whose eyes are open.

It suggests a belief that the people who possess Conference authority believe that they are owed allegiance from the congregations,...

...and that they are to be served, not to serve...

...that they are to be submitted to, and not that all in the Conference should "submit to one another out of reverence for Christ."

My friend suspects that they don't deserve allegiance. And, that they are owed nothing.

He might see this in somewhat harsher terms than do I, but...

...I agree that there's something to what he says,...

...and, I'm convinced that many in the ERC share his view.

A question for the near future us how things may change in the near future as far as the behavior of Conference staff is concerned.

"Al" Died from Brain Cancer

On July 4, I wrote a post on reasons in our lives for sadness and discouragement.

One reason was our long-time friend I called Al had an aggressive form of brain cancer.

He'd just had surgery which was really to create more room for the tumor to grow before it ate away vital parts of his brain.

He chose not to have radiation and chemotherapy treatments and was told he probably had about six months.

He died two days ago.

I described Al as being aggressively anti-Christian. Our friendship spanned nearly 40 years.

It was a challenging relationship. We are as vigorous in our devotion to Jesus as Al was convinced that the church...he was raised Catholic and knew church much more than Jesus...was useless, if not outright evil. Al was very religious in his own way and was an active Unitarian Universalist.

In the end, we fought our spiritual battle to a draw.

While we agreed with much of what Al believed about organized and institutional Christianity, we could never get him to think of Jesus as more than a great prophet or teacher.

There were no last minute opportunities.

His mind went quickly.

We met weekly for many years and almost to the end and I recall hearing him speaking intelligently one week about a book we'd both read. The next week he could only mumble brief, meaningless phrases. Shortly after that, the tumor was discovered.

His wife told us that her greatest sadness is that his mind went so quickly that she didn't even get a chance to say goodbye.

So sad.

Who were You When You were Raw in Your Calling?

I've been thinking this thought for some time and wondering if I have the courage...and wisdom...to put it into human language faithfully.

Here goes.

------------------

I'm convinced that, if you have a ministry calling, your first awareness of that calling told who the Lord wants you to be in Him.

At any rate, that has been the case for me.

After many years, I found my way when I set aside the institutional training and theological education I received which prepared me to become a local church pastor.

I connected to the passions and joys of my first days, weeks and months of sensing a calling. And, I realized that those passions and joys...the vision once so alive in me...were still alive, though I had decided to suppress them in order to operate peacefully in the organized and institutional church.

I recalled, in those first moments, a joyful passion for truth above all things. And, though I didn't recognize it at the time, I connected to the passion and vision of the prophet.

I realized that, from the time I entered seminary and, shortly thereafter, was appointed, for the first time, as a local church pastor, I felt disoriented. I was an "ugly duckling," trying to do the job I was assigned to do, yet doing it uncomfortably and, usually, very poorly.

It was when I read Ephesians 4:13...not 4:11...that I began to live in a way I'd not been alive since I first began to believe I was called.

Ephesians 4:13 puts an expiration date on verse 11, "until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God..."

Ephesians 4:11 is still the way. Jesus is still giving some to be apostles...and prophets and evangelists and shepherds and teachers.

In reality, the passions and joys and visions I experienced when I first became aware of my calling aligned with the Word.

Prophets often pay a price to live in their calling among the people of the organized religion of their time and place. I've paid a price, though not the high price others have paid.

In spite of that, I feel more at peace than I ever did when I was attempting to be a faithful member of the institutional church.

------------------

It's at this point that wisdom is needed. It's because of what comes next that I've been so cautious about writing this post.

------------------

I've known Lance Finley for nearly 30 years.

When we first met, Lance was young. He was a seminary student but he was still raw in his calling.

And, he was a vastly different person than the man you probably know...the guy who occupies the corner office in the denominational headquarters building in Findlay. He was not the sophisticated, careful thinker who writes reasoned and moderate eNews articles that appear on the CGGC blog.

Two thoughts about the Lance I knew then have been floating through my mind.

1. That raw Lance was an iconoclast. (If you need to, look the word up. I know it's an unusual word, but it's the word that keeps coming to me, over and over again. The word fits perfectly.)

2. The raw Lance, I believe, might be the very person, walking in the Spirit's power and in his calling, to show us the way out of our decline and decay.

------------------

One of the Core Values talked in the Strategic Plan is, Daring Action.

Nothing about the plan is daring. The whole thing...

...including and especially the promise that, no matter who you are, you are not expected to adopt it, though we want you to talk about it...

...is daring.

The whole thing is tepid and timid.

So much so that it allows for talk about daring action but promises that no one is expected to practice anything daring.

Interestingly, the Lance I knew back in the day, lived every moment on the edge.

Back in the day, Lance was Daring Action in the flesh.

He was also charming and immensely likable in doing it. He was daring but never  threatening.

He was an instigator. Lance could stir things up. He could promote change. He could make you question silly traditions, or icons.

If you're a geezer like I am, who knew him back then, you'll remember.

Lance stood out. He would, sometimes, make you feel uncomfortable as he made light of silly traditions and silly ways. But, and I'll say this only for myself. He never made me feel threatened.

That raw Lance, whom I remember so well, is gone. As far as I'm concerned, he's not forgotten.

Can today's Lance be convinced to be raw. Not immature, but real. True to who he was when his calling was fresh?

I hope so.

Because...

That Lance. That raw Lance. That guy, I believe, could be the person for this hour in the CGGC.

Update on Evie's Heart Surgery

Evie's aortic valve was replaced one year and one day ago, as of today.

We knew since the early 1990s that the day would come when the surgery would be necessary.

We knew many things about the operation by the time surgery took place.

What we didn't know, really, is what to expect after the operation took place.

On her first day back from the hospital, after the operation, we discovered that Evie's heart was beating at a rate on nearly 100 beats per minute but her pulse was less than 50.

She called the surgeon whose staff told her that this is an issue for her cardiologist. So, we took her to our local hospital.

The first months post surgery were unexpected and stressful as the cardiologist struggled to get the heart to beat properly.

Evie was fatigued as a result of the poor function of her heart and because she was recovering from the trauma of open heart surgery.

In the end, she did recover and is achieving a new normal.

The cardiologist concluded that Evie recovered from the surgery more slowly than many people do but that, in the end, she did recover very well.

Her energy level is not yet what it was prior to the failing of her heart, but it has returned significantly in the past few months.

Ephesians 2:10 says that we are God's handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works. Evie has always lived that teaching with conviction. She's now back at the top of her game.

Again, I have to remind her that, in Galatians, Paul also warned us not to become weary in doing good. She still doesn't handle that part of Scripture very well.

I know many who read this blog prayed, and are still praying for her, for us. For that, I thank you. Others of you reached out in more tangible ways as well and did the good works in Christ's name that He created you to do. You put Jesus' words, "I was sick and you looked after me," into action.

For that, I thank you...and Him.

Talk-ism and the CGGC Strategic Plan

I've seen some of the material published by the General Conference to support the, well, implementation of the Strategic Plan. Or, perhaps, non-implementation.

From 40,000 feet, one truth about the Strategic Plan stands out.

By design, the plan is all talk.

I've made a fuss, in the past, about the fact that there is no intention that the plan be adopted and, more to the point, put into action across the body.

However, as I reflect on the material I've read, it seems clear to me that, the plan is not intended to be walked at all.

It is be talked.

The Strategic Plan booklet is pure To Talk is to Walk-ism.

In the booklet, General Conference staff explains;

"Our expectation isn't that you'll adopt, word for word, the contents of this resource as your church's strategy,..."

The Strategic Plan booklet contains an overview of the plan and suggests many ways to generate, not action, but talk.

It contains for example, "questions to be used with your church's leadership..."

The writers suggest that possible uses of the booklet "could be with membership classes, elder or council training, leadership development, or with strategic planning processes in your church."

Talk, talk, talk. With everyone. With anyone. Talk.

------------------

Let me be clear.

I have no problem with talking about the plan. Of course a boatload of talk will have to take place if there is to be walk.

But, I've asked around. As far as I can tell, there is no vision for the plan actually to be put into action. Implemented. Walked.

In fact, the booklet makes that clear...without shame.

------------------

It's one thing to believe that, due to the high degree of cynicism across the CGGC, that, no matter how hard leadership tries to put this plan into action, it will never become a reality.

It's quite another to note that leadership isn't even trying to have the plan walked.

In his eNews articles, Lance himself notes, from time to time, that, in the CGGC, we tend to talk without matching walk to our talk.

With that understanding, how could the folks in the headquarters building in Findlay even dream of this plan becoming action without assertive and determined effort to get our people to do it?!

Yet, all that booklet considers is ways to get CGGCers to talk, something we can't stop doing in the first place!

------------------

The statistics presented at General Conference reveal an alarming decline in attendance over the in the years between 2016 and 2019 General Conference sessions, continuing a long standing trend.

We need to do something different.

We've been talking big for years. We know the fruit our talk has produced.

We must, actually, turn from falling and foolish ways. The foundation of our fall has been, and, now still is, walkless talk.

We must repent.

The Latest CGGC Fad

Using the word, "aspirational."

I'm going to take the next 11 words to be purely prophetic:

The CGGC will neither repent nor thrive while we are aspirational.

I first picked up on the emerging fad to talk about what we are aspirational about...what we aspire to...what we wish to be true about us in reports I received from General Conference sessions.

And, I developed a serious case of Aspirational Poisoning reading Lance's August 9, 2019 eNews.

"Aspirational" clearly is the CGGC word of the moment, at least in the headquarters building in Findlay...in the corner office, anyway.

Lance's article introduces the new CGGC Core Values which, Lance notes, "...can't be purely aspirational."

Two thoughts:

1. In Church of God movement days, we didn't spend time considering what we wished to be true about us. We cared about what is...in the now.

Winebrenner's three descriptions of the activity of the Church of God, in his address to the Eldership on the day it formed in October 1830, i.e.,

-the conversion of sinners,
-the establishment of churches on the New Testament plan,
-supplying the destitute with the preaching of the gospel,...

...are precisely that. Descriptions.

They were not wishes. They explained what those people were already doing, not what they dreamed or hope, in some distant time, to do.

Winebrenner's 27 point description of the faith and practice of the Church of God, first published in 1844, is also, to make the biggest word possible out of it, descriptional. It wasn't aspirational.

These are 27 descriptors of what the people of our thriving movement actually thought and did.

In our first days, we were concerned with the present reality. Our thinking was not connected to some leader's dream world.

2. Repentance from fallen and sinful ways, and from corrupt thinking, comes from focusing on what is fallen and sinful and corrupt and, by the grace and power of the Spirit, seeing it from God's perspective...

...and experiencing the godly sorrow that, Paul says, produces a repentance that leads to salvation and leaves no regret.

Being aspirational is to consume an opiate.

It numbs the very pain that the Spirit wants God's people to experience, pain that has the purpose of leading His people away from sin into a connection to Him rooted in love. And, it is Jesus who said, "if you love me you will keep my commands."

-------------------

Lance suggested that our values can't be purely aspirational.

The truth, rooted in the teaching of the Word, and demonstrated in the history of the people of the Kingdom, is that we should not aspire. We should deal with the truth about ourselves, no matter what that truth is. Especially when that truth is ugly.

We must outlaw the drug Aspiration.

The Lord of all authority and power and blessing isn't blessing us. Check out the CGGC stats. We are declining numerically. The numbers point to increasing spiritual decay.

Yet, our Lord is pure grace and mercy and blessing.

------------------

What would our Core Values be if they were honestly described?

What might happen if we focused on those ugly truths and not on what we dream might be true?

Might we find the godly sorrow that produces a repentance that leads to salvation and leaves no regret?

We must repent.

But, repentance is the fruit of other things. Aspiration is not in the formula.

Two Specific Thoughts about the 2019 Strategic Plan

1. The plan is absolutely nothing more than a tweaking of the old and fallen ways that have been driving Churches of God and CGGC decline and decay for about 80 years. It's the hope that, if we do the wrong thing really, really well, we'll turn this mess around. It's the insanity of thinking we can do the same old thing and achieve different results.

2. More tragically than that, it's a turning back to the ways of the 1990s and earlier. One of the six foundations of the spirit of the Missional Leadership Initiative is Reggie McNeal's assertion that the body of Christ must stop planning and, instead, begin, spiritually, to prepare, well, to join God in the work He is doing. As MLI concludes, how do we move forward? We move forward by looking back. Like Lot's wife, we yearn for old ways. But, we do it with new vigor and develop and adopt, of all things, a human, strategic plan. There's an irony that the one thing we're repenting of is the spiritual vision embodied in the teaching of Reggie McNeal and MLI...which was Lance's baby!

------------------

Lipstick on a pig.

We must repent.

The Mark of the Least

The new CGGC logo.

I'm still picking up a lot of chatter about it on Facebook and in private communication.

The official explanation from the institutional authorities in Findlay says of the logo, in part, "The mark is comprised of individual elements...."

The "mark."

Hence, based on what I'm seeing of the response to the mark among the people of the CGGC, I think it's fair to call the new logo, The Mark of the Least.

In a Facebook thread, George Jensen says wisely, that if you are "fired up over your disappointment with the new logo more than you are over the fact that we are dying as a denomination and need to repent of our ways..., I suggest you look at your priorities."

Right on. Preach it, George.

For generations we've always found something to focus on rather than repentance. George documents his reason for suggesting that we are dying. It's compelling. We are, as this blog notes regularly, decaying spiritually and declining numerically. George's numbers tell that story.

-------------------

However, I can see that something else could be behind the outcry against the logo.

Criticizing the logo could simply be a safe, shepherdly, indirect, CGGC-acceptable way of criticizing the leadership team that produced the logo.

I can see, in the criticism of the logo itself, feelings that, at least some CGGC pastors and, uh, lay leaders have of the people who occupy offices in the headquarters building in Findlay.

The logo is abstract. It makes no sense.

And, there are comments that make light of the logo or create jokes its expense.  The baseball diamond logo. The Pittsburgh Steelers' logo.

And, it would be more spiritual, and less divisive, to criticize a logo than the Executive Director and Directors of the denomination.

A question that I can't asking avoid is, why all of this brouhaha?

Why does a silly logo, as poorly designed as many of us think it is, matter so much.

We could be talking about the first-ever General Conference Strategic Plan, or the new Mission Statement.

And, I'm suggesting that, perhaps, we are talking about the Strategic Plan and the Mission Statement...

...and about the leadership team that created them...

...and that the chatter about the logo is about something more important than the logo itself.

------------------

But, what's clear is that we are not turning from the fallen and sinful ways that have been driving our decline and decay for more than 80 years.

We must repent.

My Take on 2019 General Conference Sessions

It strikes me that this may turn out to be the most comprehensive news report about General Conference that some of you receive.

------------------

I  was not a delegate. I  didn't attend as a guest. I attempted to stream on line but was never able to open the link on my phone...

...but I exchanged approximately 200 messages with an on site source and followed comments on Facebook.

I have reviewed all the messages in a very stimulating conversation. Here are some takeaways:

1. New CGGC Core Values, a new CGGC Mission Statement and logo and a first-ever CGGC Strategic Plan were adopted.

2. The General Conference gathering epitomized classic, traditional, old time CGGC Talk-ism which has dominated the body for generations, in which speaking good speak satisfies. Since I, personally, can remember, General Conference sessions have been an occasion in which the very best ideas of the moment have been on display but there has never been action on them and, truthfully, action on them has never been considered, nor has it been desired. That's, based on what I'm reading and hearing, what just happened in Findlay. More of the old ways happened in which the best and brightest of the CGGC gather to speak and to exchange good ideas yet no plan of action is even considered.

3. I asked, specifically, now that a Mission Statement and strategic plan has been adopted by delegates of the entire body, if it is expected that, for instance, the ERC will practice biblical mutual submission and set aside its own  Mission Statement and Strategic Plan to put into action what the General Conference...our whole body...adopted. I am told that not even General Conference leadership wants our Conference to implement their plan. The exact answer I received was, "No. We weren't asked to." I have to ask, then, what this was all about...in terms of real world living. Honestly, I see profound spiritual issues...I'll even call it sin...here. Where is mutual submission in the CGGC. Where is obedience to the love one another as I have loved you command! General Conference leaders develop a whole plan without even asking that it be put into action!?!

4. I'm told that, during open discussion time, several delegates criticized leadership for not walking talk in the past. I'm glad that we're now talking about walk but, as far as I can tell, talk about walk is as far as it will go. Here's why: Based on what I've heard, no one noticed that no plan of action was presented.

5. The new Mission Statement isn't a statement. It is merely a slogan. It's not a full sentence and, it strikes me that it is 2019 faddish gibberish: "to maximize our collective potential for kingdom impact." Lots of big words there. I'm imagining it being presented to the typical CGGC congregation that I'm familiar with. And, I'm thinking that most of our people are too polite to physically roll their eyes in public. But, this is precisely what our people have been seeing coming down from the CGGC elite for generations. And, this will go no further than the previous great ideas have gone.

6. There's no repentance and no confession of past sin here. It's tradition for CGGC leaders to think that the next great idea will save the day for them. Yet, good ideas have never been our problem. We've had a steady flow of brilliant ideas since I entered the Conference in the 1970s. Frankly, this particular new idea strikes me as about middle of the pack as CGGC bright ideas go. Several past ideas, I believe, have been far more compelling than this one. We don't need more brilliant thoughts. What we need is repentance. The Lord of all authority and power and blessing isn't blessing us. We need His grace, His mercy, His authority, His power. We need to accept the invitation of Jesus, "Come to me all you who labor and are burdened...take my yoke upon you." What we need is for people with CGGC institutional authority to, first go to Him as broken men and women...and, then, to come to us in confession of sin. What we got this time, again, is people with institutional authority coming to us as wise men and women with yet another set of clever ideas. This is not the way of Christ. And, it will go unblessed and unempowered.

7. The new logo has, so far, done more harm than good. When the people I know have seen it, they don't get it. I certainly don't. I've heard it called a baseball diamond, a take on the Pittsburgh Steelers logo and, at first glance, I saw the New Orleans Saints' Fleur-de-lis. I read an explanation of it on Facebook and, speaking only for myself, I thought that that was also gibberish. I doubt that the logo will unify, but it may well irritate and divide.

8. There are, by the way, new Core Values, four of them:

Total participation.
Daring action.
Vital connection.
Global mobilization.

I'll say, as a student of our history, these actually describe, for the most part, the Church of God in our movement days but I don't see our current General Conference authorities practicing them in any way at all. If we are to embrace these values, I suspect that Lance and some others will have to travel across our body offering tearful and passionate confession of the sin of defying these values for all their years of ministry to our body. Otherwise, these values will only serve to condemn them, and us.

---------------------

Okay. Enough.

I could easily continue but I think that I've made my point as well as I'm going to. And, that I've already prattled on.

Blessings.

We...still...must repent.

ERC/CGGC Hypocrisy about Polity...Under Attack?

To Talk is to Walk-ism reigns in the CGGC to the degree that repenting of it and turning from it has been impossible in the past, though some have attempted to bring about change.

My understanding of the demise of my ministry in the ERC is that the Talk-ists crushed me like a bug because I attacked the Talkism of ERC officials because they defy our polity.

In the day, my message was, and it still is, that the ultimate human authority in the CGGC Body is the Conference, what we once called the Eldership.

To use the $100 theological words: Our polity is Presbyterial.

According to our talk, when the Eldership speaks, Directors, even Executive Directors are required to submit to its authority.

My contention is that it was ERC office holders, not I, who are insubordinate.

I take the Eldership's claim that the Bible is "our only rule of faith and practice" seriously and literally. I submit to the CGGC Mission Statement and its claim that we "establish churches on the New Testament plan."

Whether ERC leadership will continue to be insubordinate to the authority of the Eldership under Nick DiFrancesco remains to be seen.

But, and I want to be clear about this: I am truly and genuinely hopeful.

------------------

I've been watching a situation that's been developing concerning an ERC congregation with which Evie and I have a long and personal connection.

------------------

As I see it, a type of hypocrisy has functioned in the ERC since before I entered the Eldership in the 1970s. That particular hypocrisy may be challenged.

For generations, the ERC has been hypocritical with regard to its polity in a disastrous and dysfunctional way. 

The CGGC claims that its human authority rests in the Eldership the Conference.

Yet, the office holders...the Directors and Executive Directors, even Commission Chairs and members...of the ERC have often behaved as if we are Episcopal and that they possess the authority of Bishops and Popes.

And, curiously, at the same time, defiant and rebellious  congregations are permitted to act as if we are conregational...so long as they pay their tithe to the Conference or, at least, a substantial part of it.

Eldership authority is defied in the ERC by staff, and by congregations, as a matter of course.

So, it may be that the first important test of Nick DiFrancesco will be how he handles this form of ERC Talk-ist dysfunction.

-------------------

As I say, I've been watching what's taking place in an ERC congregation that we know fairly well.

Currently, the congregation is doing what many ERC congregations have been doing since I've been around, that is, behaving as if our polity is congregational and the congregation has the authority to do as it pleases without regard to the remainder of the ERC body.

According to numerous well-placed sources, Conference staff intervened and offered rather specific direction on how the congregation should go forward...

...and, the congregation, under the direction of its credentialed minister, defied the direction of Conference staff.

From what I know from several sources who have connection to these events from different perspectives, this is the case.

Based on what I know, and am convinced is true, the congregation defied CGGC polity and behaved as if the ERC is congregational.

(What I don't know is if the Conference behaved as if Conference staff members are bishops and popes or if they functioned as servants of the Body.)

------------------

Here are some things I do know from a big-picture perspective:

1. Prebyterial polity is unstable. In my opinion, of the three options in polity, Presbyterial polity most closely resembles the New Testament. But, that type of church government tends to break down in exactly the way it has deteriorated in the CGGC. The body becomes institutionalized. The people in the hierarchy quickly come to think of themselves as leaders of the institution, not servants of the body. Clearly, that happened in the past in the ERC. And, congregations lose spiritual connection to the body and begin to behave as if they operate under their own authority. That has been the case with many ERC congregations for generations.

2. Cynicism begins to rule the body. Staffers disrespect many of the congregations and local churches become anti-Conference.

3. The mutual submission described in 1 Corinthians 12 and Ephesians 4 & 5, and the love for one another commanded by Jesus in John 13 disappear.

4. Chaos reigns.

5. Spiritual decay takes place.

6. The Spirit refuses to bless due to disobedience and lack of repentance.

7. Numerical decline often results.

8. After a culture forms around these realities, many of the people who are a part of it, accept the dysfunction as a given, even a good thing.

9. Efforts to behave in any other way are resisted.

10. Attempts to actually change the system are regarded by many to be an abomination...in spite of the reigning cynicism, chaos and spiritual decay.

------------------

And, that is where the ERC is.

Yet, the ERC may be at a moment in its history at which change may take place.

It's hard for me to see, in the ERC, fruit of the godly sorrow that produces a repentance that leads to salvation, at least not yet.

But, disgust with the failure of the old ways did result in the selection of an Executive Director who breaks the mold and he may provide what leadership gurus call the "disruptive innovation" that, in time, leads to genuine godly sorrow...and repentance...and, as Paul describes it, salvation.

------------------

I have no direct involvement in the conflict between church and conference that I've described.

But, many people I know, and care for, and respect, are involved. And, I'm watching, hoping that a longstanding ERC hypocrisy will be attacked and defeated.

Sadness and Discouragement Update

I've mentioned our 95 year old neighbor who needed to move into whatever personal care facility would take her.

We found one.

However, she needed to have a Power of Attorney in order to be admitted.

As an act of "I was sick and you looked after me," mercy, Evie volunteered.

Evie did all the paperwork and our neighbor, Beverly, was admitted into the home.

Evie had been in periodic contact by phone with Beverly's 74 year old son, who lives in Manhattan, to keep him updated on his mom's life.

Beginning the day before the actual move, Evie began having trouble reaching him. He didn't answer his phone.

She tried for several days and began to be concerned. A few other people we know were also trying to reach him, without success.

Eventually, someone was able to reach the person who manages the apartment building. The son was found in his apartment, dead.

That, of course, is extremely sad. Beverly is now left with no family.

However, for Evie, the death creates a mess.

Under New York state law, the body has to be identified...in New York, before it can be released.

Since Beverly is unable to travel, Evie's being told, as POA, she will be required to make the identification.

She's consulted with Beverly's attorney, who says that there's no way to avoid it.

The NYC Medical Examiner wanted Evie to make the identification over the weekend. However, that was not possible.

It appears that Evie and a friend will travel to New York on Tuesday. It will, at the very best, be a long and exhausting day.

One of the foundations of the life that Evie and I live is that, Jesus was perfectly serious when He said that people who show mercy will be shown mercy.

Evie, especially, lives a life of mercy. There are many inconveniences, and many sacrifices, and, at times, hardships in that life. But, much blessing as well.

This is a new one for us.

Evie's walking in faith.

She's seeing it as an adventure.

Servanthood is Incarnational. Leadership Ain't Necessarily.

What I say here's not new for me.

Perhaps more than ever, I'm convinced it's true.

------------------ 

One of the very recent emphases of the CGGC and, for that matter, for most of the institutionalized American church, has been leadership...

...and, for the people possessing institutional authority, to regard themselves as leaders.

In the big, historical picture, this trend is hyper-modern.

Just for fun, try googling Luther's 95 Theses to skim through Luther's assertions about Leadership.

Do a brief study of the Wesleys' leadership course which they offered to up-and-coming Methodists that gave focus to their burgeoning movement in the 1700s.

And, for CGGC people, study the leadership section of the sermon Winebrenner preached on day the Eldership was formed in October 1830 and, of course, those critical leadership principles listed in the 27 point description of the Faith and Practice of the Church of God, from 1844.

------------------

Today's focus on leading in the church and leadership development has been, and it will be, a sure-fire loser.

Why? It spits in the face of Jesus.

The Spirit has not blessed it. He will not bless it.

It, very simply, defies the spirit of everything Jesus taught and did.

Jesus could not have be more clear. To be great in the Kingdom is to serve. To be the greatest in the Kingdom is to become the slave of all.

----------------

The foundation of the gospel is that Jesus who was, in His very nature, God, didn't consider equality with God something to be grasped. No, He made Himself nothing. He took the very nature of a, what?. A servant. He was made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled himself and became to death, even death on a cross. (Phil. 2).

Incarnation.

Jesus chose to make the way, the truth and the life, a human person.

Then, having done that, He made the choice to live in the world as a servant and, ultimately, to offer His body as a sacrifice for all.

Then, He sent His followers into the world to do the same.

The "going" Jesus commanded in the, uh, Great Commission is the command to make the gospel a human, incarnated, reality among all nations.

-------------------

If a person is a servant, s/he must, by definition, be physically present. Leaders don't need to be present to lead. Often they are not. But, a servant must be present to serve.

At the end of the Gospel of Matthew, before Jesus said, "Go," He said that all authority had been given to Him. He had just used that authority to be crucified.

The shameful reality I observe these days is that, as people who hold positions of institutional authority in the church focus more and more on leadership, two realities become clear:

First, they become less like Jesus.

Second, they become increasingly isolated from the body, spend more time thinking and planning, and less time doing. They gather themselves together in their offices and in conference rooms to think and to create strategies. More and more, they are not present among the people of the the church. Certainly, they are not living among the people Jesus called, "the least of these."

They become more like titans if industry, or, worse, bureaucrats, and less like the Son of Man who came not to be served but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many.

And, they are not being followed.

--------------------

When James and John requested positions of authority in the Kingdom, Jesus told them that to attain the highest human authority in the Kingdom is to seek to be the slave of all.

The Holy Spirit has never blessed people who seek to lead the church. He has blessed, and always will bless, men and women who, like Jesus, make them self nothing to become servants...

...in the Kingdom.

------------------

I'm convinced that the declining fortunes of the CGGC would change quickly if the people in it who hold institutional authority would stop saying, "Follow my leadership," and begin to live the message, "Follow me as I follow Jesus, and serve others."

I'm convinced that if that happens, some people will follow and a vigorous remnant will emerge...

...and the Spirit will bless.

We must repent of the leadership fad and compete with each other to be the greatest of all servants, and the slave of all.

Reasons for Sadness and Discouragement

It seems that there's a lot adding up, for me, for us.

Both Evie and I are convinced that our move into an independent living community, which will happen in November is wise.

We've seen so many people, even people who are prepared financially, end up experiencing disaster late in life.

Today, our 95 year old next door neighbor who's in frail and failing health is in a nursing home with her Medicare benefits about to expire. She has adequate savings but is forced to find any personal care facility that can take her...in four days.

She has no family to assist her and no real friends who are still alive. Only Evie and another 81 year old neighbor are willing to help sort out her mess.

We've been through cancer and open heart surgery and have no children and we're not young, though apparently, we'll be the youngest couple moving in to the place we're moving to.

Neither of us have qualms about the wisdom of what we're doing, but there's little joy in it either.

And, lots and lots to do to get the house ready for sale and the move organized.

So, overall, sad, discouraging.

------------------

At the moment, the most intense cause of sadness and discouragement is the fact that a long-time, very close friend has a very aggressive form of brain cancer.

He began to show symptoms only a few weeks ago and had surgery two days ago, surgery to remove only part of a very large tumor. From what we've heard, it's a matter of time, and probably not much time.

Call him Al, has been among our closest friends for decades. We remained close, when we moved from Enola to Madison, NJ, to Ohio and back to PA and while he and his wife moved to various places in Central PA, to FL and back home.

Al is a very aggressive unbeliever.

The most important part of our lives is our relationship with Jesus. One of the most important parts of Al's life is his rejection of Christianity.

Needless to say, it's always been a very challenging friendship. Perhaps, it's the hard work we've all put into it that makes the friendship uniquely special.

As his demise becomes apparent, the mixture of intense feeling is indescribable. Sad. Heartbreaking.

------------------

We've also been touched, saddened and discouraged by the trouble Steve Dunn has encountered.

Steve and I have never been close but I had respected his contribution to the cause of the Kingdom, more than any of the other people of our generation whom I sometimes facetiously  call mountaintoppers.

In 2010, when I rose to speak on the floor of General Conference to express concern about the controversial Credentialing Document, amazingly, the General Conference President said to me, "You can only ask a question." I was flabbergasted, muttered, "What is the capital of South Dakota," and sat down.

But, Steve stood on the floor of General Conference as my advocate. I was, permitted to make my comment. Interestingly, by now even I have long since forgotten what I said that day.

And, I know Steve didn't agree with my position on credentialing.

History has revealed that what I think is immensely unpopular in the CGGC, yet, Steve stood publically for my ability to bring it into the CGGC conversation.

Some who read this won't know the story but we're in prayer for the situation.

---------------------

And, mom's holding her own for the moment but her personality has changed. She's gone. Not all the way, but far enough.

Happily, for the moment, she's not mean, to us, at least...

...but she's no longer here.

Rex Stout's PLOT IT YOURSELF

In preparing for the move, I stumbled on an audio book on TAPE. That's how old it is for me. Books on tape haven't been produced for years.

The book was, Plot it Yourself, a Nero Wolfe mystery, by Rex Stout.

I'm a big fan of murder mysteries and the Nero Wolfe's are, at the very least, among my favorites.

They're short, masterfully written, whimsical and Stout is a world-class wordsmith. If you want to expand your vocabulary, read a Nero Wolfe.

And, Plot it Yourself, is wonderful.

It has Nero Wolfe figuring out who's responsible for a series of plagiarism claims made against successful authors which leads to several murders.

As a murder mystery, the book is so-so.

But, Stout uses the book to, well, philosophize about writing and a writer's style.

I first listened to it a decade ago or more. Much of what I write, even here on this blog, traces to what I learned about writing from that book.

In many ways, that book is the most helpful English course I've ever taken.

Lance's, "What are We Going to Do with What We Know?" CONTAGIOUS Blog Post

Lance's latest on the CGGC blog wraps up his series describing where we are now with a post asking how we're going to behave, based on his description of the state of the CGGC union.

Read the post, please.

In his post, he acknowledges...AT LENGTH...what I've been calling the "To Talk is to Walk-ism," characteristic of the CGGC brand, that is, that, in our body, we tend to be satisfied with talking truth without feeling the need actually to do anything.

Lance encourages us not merely to talk.

And, he says that he prays that we honestly will deal with our present reality.

If the Lord is willing, and if I continue to feel led, I will post a reply on the blog in the days to come. The reply I envision will have some biblical teeth to it.

I'll post this here for now. This is a different comment than I may make on the blog. (I suspect that more people read what I write here than what I put on the CGGC blog.)

-------------------

Lance,

If we're going to change, you are going to set the table. You yourself are going to have to actually DO something different than write articles about change.

If you are going to lead change, you are going to have to set a vivid and challenging example that can be followed...on the level of doing...as Jesus did. As Winebrenner did.

To this point, following you can be nothing more that adding to a conversation that, in itself, will change what no one will put into action.

Please live the change you hope to lead.

CONTAGIOUS Blog Conversation on Lance's Part 16

There's a rather lively conversation taking place on the CONTAGIOUS Blog which was initiated by Lance's, Part 16.

"danh," Dan Masshardt and I have replied. Moments ago, I entered a reply to Dan Masshardt. To this point, Lance himself has not participated in the dialog. Hopefully, he will join in soon.

I suspect that few of you are regular readers of the CGGC blog, but I recommend this thread...and encourage interaction now that danh got a conversation going.

Nick DiFrancesco's Most Quoted Saying (to me, anyway)

I've received several very similar versions of it:

"We say the Bible is our guide for faith and practice. It isn't."

As far as I can tell, everyone from the ERC who's in regular contact with me has relayed this quote to me at least once.

Interpretations of the significance of these words have all also been similar.

People are noting that what Nick said is central to my take on the cause of the spiritual decay and numerical decline of the CGGC, and particularly the ERC, for about the past three decades.

It is.

Everyone, and I mean everyone, in regular contact with me is saying that Nick is a breath of fresh air.

I've never met Nick, so I only know what I know second hand.

What I know is that people who are sympathetic to my take on the debacle of the ERC in the past few years are encouraged...and, some, even, optimistic.

Optimism in the very cynical ERC? That's new for me...and, I've been around for more than 40 years.

Nevertheless, as I see it, Nick is facing some serious challenges.

One of them is the CGGC's deeply rooted history of talking a radical Bible talk yet walking a very bland, traditional, walk.

The people who've been, uh, leading the ERC for decades always have been content to talk radical Bible talk without turning from fallen, traditions.

They're very comfortable with strong Bible talk. But, Bible walk? Not in many, many years!

They, and the rest of the ERC, are going to have to repent of decades of Talk-ism.

Getting CGGCers to change what they actually do will not be a cake walk.

Can Nick lead that change...in behavior?

Based on what I see, up here at 40,000 feet: Nick has the spiritual gifting to lead dramatic change, at least through the calling out of a remnant.

What I've said numerous times lately, in private conversations, is that it can happen but only...

...by the grace of God.

CGGC Values?

The Mission Statement of the Independent Living community to which we're moving operates under the following Mission Statement:

"Founded on Christ's love and Mennonite values, we strive to enrich the lives of those we serve."

The Mission Statement is very prominently displayed on a large plaque in the facility's main lobby and, based on our interaction with these people so far, the mission is central to what they do in real life.

We couldn't avoid seeing the Mission Statement plaque as soon as we visited the home for the first time.

And, the moment I saw the Mission Statement, I asked myself what a similar statement would mean in a CGGC context where the words Churches of God, General Conference were substituted for Mennonite.

My answer? Nothing.

The CGGC has had published Core Values for about 30 years.

My guess is that you don't know what they are and, that being the case, you'd have to concede that they are talk, not walk, for us, i.e., our Core Values are central to nothing that we do.

Look them up.

For the most part, the values we talk are shepherd focused in that they have to do, almost exclusively, with ideals about CGGC flocks gathered for worship.

They certainly aren't adequate to direct the operation of an Independent Living community, or any real life endeavor.

I'd say, though, that they are accurate to the extent that they describe our parish priest/laity obsession, our satisfaction with talk disconnected from walk and our inability and unwillingness to live a faith that addresses all of real life.

Our Core Values, I believe, are perfectly adequate to drive our dysfunction as well as our decline and decay.

It's true that every system is perfectly designed to achieve the results it gets. And, our Core Values, such as they are, are perfectly designed to drive our dive into the doldrums.

One other note.

Winebrenner's 27 point description of the Faith and Practice of the Church of God from the 1840s got it right.

The points covering our practice describe the real life fruit of our actual values in those days and they were radical, matching our orthodox, yet radical, statements of what we believed.

They really and truly describe what actually did in the real world.

We must repent.

Jesus said this to the Church at Ephesus: "Repent and do the things you did at first."

We need to do that.

My Comment on the CONTAGIOUS Blog Discipleship Thread

I put a comment on Michael Martin's thread welcoming the people of the CGGC to a conversation on discipleship.

Mike placed his post on the blog on May 31. Mine, still awaiting publication, will probably be the first comment.

My comment is simple. I can't see a way it can be controversial  though it could make some in the CGGC uncomfortable.

I hope others will enter the discipleship conversation.

"Bill, you have a way of making people feel like..."

I gave up pastoral ministry long enough ago, and, today, I've been living in the the world intimately enough, and long enough, to image how that sentence might have ended.


A few weeks ago, I was managing a particularly stressful shift at the supermarket and I approached two of the millennials working with me to tell one of them what I needed her to do.

I told her in the way I typically speak to the millennials.

Then, over my shoulder, the other one said those words: "Bill, you just have a way of making people feel like,..." and, my brain was already completing the sentence in the way it often would be completed out here beyond the walls of a church building, with the S word, "$hi..," i.e., "Bill, you just have a way of making people feel like $hi.."


To review: I gave up the life of a parish priest, i.e., a provider of religious products and services to be consumed by a passive laity, years ago in order to live in the world as an ambassador of the Kingdom of God. I took a job working in a grocery store.

From time to time, on the job, I talk about what I believe. But, my constant goal is to live what I believe, according to what Paul, in Galatians 6:2, calls, "the law of Christ."

And, trust me, I don't live flawlessly under the authority of the Law of Christ. Often, I leave the job at the end of my day, hanging my head.

And, so, it's important to me, from time to time, to know, well, how a coworker would finish the sentence: Bill has a way of making people feel like...

Happily, my coworker didn't end the sentence, "...$hi.."

What she said was, "...like they're on top of the world."

I was humbled and stunned. And, in the brief moment we had as we both moved on, I thanked her and told her I was surprised by her compliment.

But, the significance of her words continue to swim in my mind.


My goal, as an ambassador of the Kingdom, is not to have people I meet feel like they're on top of the world. My goal is to be a faithful subject living under the lordship of Jesus.

Yet, certainly, living as a subject of the Kingdom means to "love your neighbor as yourself." And, if you obey that part of the so-called Great Command, I imagine that, when you do it, you have a way of making people feel like they're on top of the world.


So, I'll take that...as one person's affirmation that I'm succeeding to some degree in my ambassadorial role.

I'll certainly take that over the increasing isolation I felt as a provider of religious products and services to a passive...and not always appreciative, laity.

The job I do at the store, that makes my ministry as an ambassador of the Kingdom of God possible, is a humble and humbling job. It can feel thankless.

I'll hold on to that, "on top of the world" moment in discouraging moments for a long time.