Inside United: Realtime

Exciting News & Updates from UCGIA

Late-Breaking News…

April 16, 2010

4:36 p.m. EDT

Further Information Regarding Council Withdrawal of Officers Resolution:

Inquiries have been coming in from several elders asking for more details or specific reasons why the Council of Elders felt it necessary to withdraw the “resolution concerning governance” from the Call and Notice packet for this year’s General Conference of Elders.

I have asked our legal counsel to prepare a statement giving that explanation in response to those inquiries, which should be ready next week.

Roy Holladay

Chairman, Council of Elders

April 16, 2010 - Posted by | Council of Elders |

18 Comments »

  1. Thank you for posting this message.

    I am sure many people are looking forward to reading that statement

    Transparency is greatly appreciated! Lets work together to squash the rumor mill!

    Regards.
    David

    Comment by David | April 16, 2010 | Reply

  2. We’d like to know whether the legal counsel will be our Church Legal counsel our the Outside Legal Counsel?

    Comment by Mike | April 16, 2010 | Reply

  3. Why do you have to wait for legal counsel??? I am sure that you know the answer already. Stop hiding behind “legal Counsel”. A few years ago you told us that you had asked an outside lawyer for advise……why? These are issues that can be settled by using the spirit of God that dwells in us. Stop with the spin and just be honest.

    Comment by Mrs. Finlay | April 17, 2010 | Reply

  4. I Cor.6:4-6
    The “least” brother/sister in the Church of God, should be qualified to “judge” this matter and give a solution. Ancient Israel had these same troubles…

    Comment by Margaret Walker (private) | April 17, 2010 | Reply

  5. Sadly we live in a different world. Everything has to be legal. People can be sued over anything.

    I once organized a tour for our Y.O.U. at an Local prison here. One of the questions asked to the warden was, “what do you spend most of your time doing at the prison?” His reply was “in court.” He has even had to go to court over an inmate suing over the wrong kind of peanut butter.

    God expects us to be wise and sometimes that does involve areas that experts can provide. United in the past few years have sought advise and hired people who are not in the church for many areas.

    One that comes to mind is the people who count the votes at the G.C.E. are outside sources.

    I am not answering for anyone here just giving my opinion on the question asked. There is safety in a multitude of counselors.

    I can site other examples but this is one that stands out in my mind.

    I want to thank the COE for all their hard work and let them know that they are in my prayers.

    Janet Treadway

    Comment by Janet Treadway | April 17, 2010 | Reply

  6. What are the specific areas of disagreement? If you are truly attempting to be open & honest and keep the membership informed, then be very clear about the issues.

    Comment by Ann Hewston | April 18, 2010 | Reply

  7. In our congregation, there is much confusion and concern over this situation. We are being told to talk to the Council about their decision. Who do we talk to? The whole church is in my prayers. Is all this in the best interests of the church as a whole?

    Comment by Valerie Davidson | April 18, 2010 | Reply

  8. I realize that there is a lot that goes on in the governing of an organization that of no consequence to the members. I personally do not feel the need to know the ins and outs of what goes on in the church’s government. The unsettling vibe that I seem to be getting from the tight-lipped statements released by the council of elders seems to point towards a situation where the president had a disagreement with the governing body that he answers to, the situation escalated until the church’s God-given duties were being neglected. Even though the council says that it acted swiftly, it seems to me that here the president acted more swiftly (although outside of his bounds as president) and went straight to the ministry, calling their attention to the discrepancy and the possibility of a vote in the upcoming meeting. An act that diminishes the authority of the council of elders only if their views are not shared by the general ministry, in which case the president would likely come to realize the error of his ways. The men on the council of elders are just that…men, and still possess tendencies towards the shortcomings of our nature. I do not think the actions that Mr. Kilough took are conducive to an efficient manner of doing government but I also don’t think that he would have taken these actions over any small matter. I don’t think that the situation would have reached nearly this magnitude if it was not a VERY big issue.
    I realize that I have used the phrase “I think” several times. Without facts there is nothing else that I can do than make these and more assumptions. Please don’t keep us in the dark.

    Comment by Jerod Brunick | April 18, 2010 | Reply

  9. Jerod wrote above that “the president acted more swiftly (although outside the bounds of the president)”. It appears according to the Churches own Bi-laws, in Article 7.9.2 that the Resolution was well within the bounds of the President. This bi-laws says that “any officer of the Corporation” may submit agenda items for the General Councel of Elders meeting. It appears he was acting well within his bounds as an officer of the Corporation. And considering the conflict that is obvious from the Council Reports over the last 3-4 years, the action was not swift enough, otherwise we would not be in this situation.
    I second Jerod’s comment: “Please don’t keep us in the dark” We had too much secrecy in “Corporation” of the Church.
    Also, remember, there is always two sides to a story. We should be given an opportunity hear the other side to make a wise judgement.

    Comment by Jerry Ross | April 18, 2010 | Reply

  10. Local pastors in several areas have put their most recent sermons on the website, and I have been listening to alot of them. I appreciate their openness and willingness to talk about the problem at hand in the church. Hopefully those involved directly will find some help, comfort, and direction in listening to some of these sermons, as well. God hates division, and I know we all do.

    Comment by Jody Adams | April 18, 2010 | Reply

  11. I am very glad to have this discussion moved to a more private forum than facebook .. I have hated the thought of the public being witness to the adversarial comments that have been flying back and forth there ..

    Comment by robin wojcik | April 18, 2010 | Reply

  12. My previous comment was deleted. It may have been too spot on, it may have seemed hostile (not my intention), but I still cannot help but be highly suspicious once lawyers are thrown in the mix. The job of a lawyer in these situations is to keep a person/ group of people from possibly revealing damaging information. I don’t know what’s going on, so I can’t say anything for sure, but it does seem strange to me that outside [supplementary] legal counsel must be consulted. To borrow a phrase form a beloved childhood literary character, this situation gets curiouser and curiouser each moment!

    Comment by Jihan | April 19, 2010 | Reply

  13. I’m not a fan of facebook in that regard either, in general it allows for the possiblity of some extreme statements or at least some poorly worded responses to any issues mentioned.

    Here’s the thing, I feel a certain personal responsiblity for portraying Christ in front of all the unbelieving people I know, many of them are on facebook.

    So on one hand, “For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen according to the flesh…”

    But on the other hand, ‘For “THE NAME OF GOD IS BLASPHEMED AMONG THE GENTILES BECAUSE OF YOU,” as it is written.’

    That is why I too am very glad to have this discussion moved to a more private forum than facebook.

    Comment by Norbert | April 19, 2010 | Reply

  14. When all of the information came out about the Administration Changes , I too was very emotional and confused about what is going on. I listened to a Sermon by Mr. Mark Mickelson on the members website entitled Differnces of Administration. He points out that even Paul and Barnabas disagreed and had to go there seperate ways, but they did not stop preaching the gospel. We must put our faith not in the COE, or the Adminstration, but put our faith in Jesus the Christ. I feel that we must give the benifit of doubt to the COE, and we have to think with our minds and not our hearts in getting emotional about what is going on, satan will try his best to destroy God’s church and we must be on guard.

    Comment by Tracy Davidson | April 19, 2010 | Reply

  15. Humans are very emotional critters; and with our background, many of us have become distrustful and angry. Any time there is a hint of trouble, the anger surfaces again. Two pieces of advice: (1) Watch your words. You will be held accountable (Matt. 12:37). (2) If you are frustrated or fearful, try talking to God about it, rather than splattering your emotions all over the Internet or at services. Only God can bring you peace of mind when you are troubled (Ph. 4:6-7). Venting may feel good for a moment, but it doesn’t bring peace.

    Comment by CJ | April 20, 2010 | Reply

  16. No doubt the resolution was poorly drafted if success was the goal. Nevertheless, Section 7 of by-laws states that an officer (only one officer required or 4 Counsel members or 25% of GCE–this is an important “check” to the balance of power within the human government we selected) may put an item on the agenda for discussion/voting if done in accordance to proper timing, etc. Many have quoted Section 12 of the by-laws as a justification for removing the resolution arguing that the resolution threatened and/or proposed to change the human governmental structure of the Church. That would seem to be inaccurate. The resolution, as I read it, essentially requested that an investigation or survey be conducted on how the Church is humanly governed—the outcome of which is simply a report to be given to the general counsel of elders for their consideration.

    Now at that time, if the results moved elders or the counsel or whomever to create a resolution that proposes changes to the human governance of the Church, then it would need to go to the amendment committee and follow the rules of Section 12.

    Therefore, in my opinion, the resolution should go to the Conference of Elders in a couple of weeks and be voted on. There, I’m guessing, it would be voted down or at least requests be made that its language be modified greatly before being voted on again anyway.

    We chose this form of democratic government 15 years ago primarily because we didn’t trust each other. We didn’t want one person in charge and have happen again what we just had happen. But that isn’t a well presented argument. What is the difference if one person or 12 people are in charge if God and Christ are not at the center of their (and our) behavior and leading us? Distrust is not a foundation for a Godly endeavor.

    Let’s not let our hurt split the Church again. Let’s fast a bit more. Let’s pray a bit more. Let’s spend a bit more time breaking bread with each other and learning what the other person has to say. Let’s trust God and Christ that their Will will be done and not our own.

    Let’s tone down the rhetoric. Let’s ask ourselves if Christ would be proud of us. I hope He will be when our chapter of the book of Acts is read someday. I’d hate to have read that He replaced us with rocks…

    Comment by David -- member without position in the Church | April 21, 2010 | Reply

  17. “Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger; for the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God.” (James 1:19, 20)

    I encourage everyone to listen to a very short sermon titled “Stir Up Love And Good Works” from April 17, available on the UCG Spokane website.
    http://www.ucg-spokane.org/html/cyberarchive.html

    Comment by Ryan Foster | April 24, 2010 | Reply

  18. […] Late-Breaking News… April 2010 17 comments 3 […]

    Pingback by Inside United: Realtime —2010 in Review « Inside United: Realtime | January 3, 2011 | Reply


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: