Monday, December 17, 2012

LCG's Purpose: One Man Rule

Thanks to Banned by HWA I rediscovered this link to a website which extensively discusses the 1998 split between Global Church of God and the Living Church of God.

I find it very sad to read the Board's account of events. I so wish I read these things before choosing to follow Meredith. It could have saved me a lot of trouble.

Member's Comments noting that Roderick Meredith's behavior during the split contradicted his earlier agreement and support for collegial government. Bolding is mine.

IF there was no takeover attempt by the Board then they would have been justified to remove him after he initiated the split by telling people to leave with him and join his new group in his first crisis letter since such an act would consititute church division.

IF there was no takeover attempt by the Board then they would have been justified to remove him after he initiated the split by telling people to leave with him and join his new group in his first crisis letter since such an act would consititute church division. 

Such an action is ONLY justified in this case if there is proof that the board was trying to take over the church. I haven't seen any clear proof so far. If there is proof on the tapes I'm more than honest enough to change my views since we have nothing to fear from the truth and looking fully at both sides of the story.

After saying he still intended to leave on the day, he chose not to give a written resignation in order to induce the board to terminate him so they would look bad in the members' eyes. They accepted his crisis letter and spoken intention that he was still going to leave as his resignation or they fired him depending upon the semantic point of view one decides to take.

Dr Meredith has contradicted his own written statements at least 10 times from the documented evidence that I've seen. Some of those include:

- Saying repeatedly that there is no voting or committees in Global when the Board and council has always voted on motions proposed and there was an executive committee(not to mention the council which fits the definition of a committee also).

- Saying we have had complete unity and harmony at HQ's weeks before the split and then saying they had been plotting for a year or two to take over.

- In his first crisis letter saying he was already starting to incorporate and then in the next letter saying that he hadn't started to incorporate when he wrote his first letter.

- In the October 30, 1998 Journal paper he said that the council, including the other board members, were spirit-led and filled and then the next month says that they are "misguided" and "very political individuals" in November? You have to wonder how men change that fast if that is true? 

- Four times he and the council unanimously agreed that rule by the council is how the church should be run and now he says the Bible never supports that point of view when he wrote so much different to that in the June 1998 co-worker letter. 

If he changed his beliefs the proper thing he should have done was to put that new idea of how the council is ONLY to advise him and not rule on motions to the doctrinal committee and then for the whole council to decide on the matter rather than try and by- pass that established procedure in the church.

These plain written contradictions should bring one point to all the members' attention - do not take Dr Meredith's words at face value - PROVE ALL THINGS AS THE BIBLE SAYS ABOUT WHAT ANYONE SAYS, NOT JUST RCM! 

The number of people I have ran across and heard about who just take Dr Meredith at face value without any back up and who won't thoroughly look at both sides is amazing. I mean, what can it hurt to do just as the Bible says and thoroughly look at both sides and then make an objective decision? I don't mind people eventually deciding to go the opposite way than me just as long as they've thoroughly looked at both sides of the issue. 

There's far too much emotion involved and not enough sound logic being applied in the decision-making going on. I hope we can all be thorough and make calm rational decisions in all of this and love and respect each other regardless on how we all choose and who's side we end up on. I, for one, want to be on God's side whoever I see that He is with regardless of who it is, what people say and whether they have a majority of members or not!

Also here is Raymond McNair's account of the GCG-LCG split.

Raymond McNair noting how Meredith used to support collegial government then rejected it.

Compare Dr. Meredith’s own words regarding Church government—as found in the 1993 booklet titled Church government and Church Unity—with statements he recently made. "Very SELDOM a Central Government in God’s Church Mr. Armstrong knew and many of us who have studied church history know, that in fact very seldom in its 2000 year history has God’s Church ever had one administration, with ONE MAN in charge [including] the Paulicians… the Bogomils of Bulgariathe Petrobrusians of Provencal, the Henricians, Albigenses and Waldenses…. There was NEVER ONE MAN in charge of all these scattered groups, never any central government—though some of those groups were contemporaneous" (p. 8).
Now compare the above quote with a recent statement by Dr. Meredith: "God has virtually ALWAYS worked primarily through ONE MAN in leading or guiding any particular phase of His Work down through the ages" ("Dear Brethren" letter, Nov. 21, 1998). Which of these statements are we to believe?

Here R. McNair notes how Meredith would not listen to criticism and became increasingly autocratic.

In our November 1997 Council of Elders’ meetings, members of the Council (D. Apartian, C. McNair, D. Pack and R. McNair) pointed out to Dr. Meredith numerous instances in which his autocratic decisions were eroding the ministers’ confidence in his leadership. Would he accept this criticism gracefully? No! Instead, he repeatedly accused those who brought this grave matter to his attention of "attacking" him.
By the time the Council again convened in February 1998, it was becoming quite clear to most of us on the Council and the Church Board that the [Presiding Evangelist's] increasingly autocratic approach toward certain important matters was not only contrary to the teachings of the BIBLE (cf. Mt. 20:25-28; 1 Pet 5:3), but also ran counter to our Church Government BOOKLET, and was in direct violation of the BYLAWS of the GCG! During those February Council meetings, we had a two- day discussion on the subject of the proper form of N.T. Church government—and all 13 members unanimously concluded that our "collegial" approach to Church government was correct, according to the Bible. We, therefore, unanimously agreed to support such government in Global. Then, in May, we re-visited this subject, again unanimously agreeing to employ Church government by CONSENSUS, as explained in Dr. Meredith’s booklet.

Here R. McNair notes several instances in which Meredith acted unwisely and the Board tried to save him from his own foolishness.

Did the Board ever attempt to "oust" him from his job, as he [Meredith] charged? Never! Neither did members of the Board of the GCG ever "tie his hands," or "put him in a box," as he claimed. Though we did not "tie his hands," or "put him in a box," we did do certain things to try to protect both him and the Church:

Example # 1 We held back one TV program that he wanted to send out. Why? Because it contained unduly offensive language. In fact, WGN later informed us that they would not air that particular program unless the offending words were removed.

Example # 2 On occasion, we insisted on removing certain offensive or inaccurate statements from his sermon tapes. During one such Headquarters sermon, a couple of ladies actually walked out in disgust.

Truly that Meredith is a scoundrel.

If the Board is right it would appear that Meredith decided he wanted to rule alone. The split was really a plot by Meredith to destroy the collegial government within GCG so that Meredith would be able to rule alone.

Alas, his plot succeeded brilliantly. He foresaw that in such a contest he was able to get most GCG members to follow him. About 80% of GCG's membership chose to follow Meredith and set up the Living Church of God, one of the most largest Armstrongite splinter group there is.

Meanwhile the Board, with only 20% of members remaining, was saddled with unpayable debt and inevitably quickly disintegrated, while Meredith had bought himself a get out of jail free card by simply starting another group free from any liabilities GCG had acquired under his watch.

I am disgusted that I associated myself with an organization created specifically to destroy collegial government and establish one man rule.

LCG is a dictatorship and was created for that very purpose.

LCG is the daughter of Meredith's authoritarianism.

1 comment:

  1. Not to mention, Roderick Meredith is a false prophet of 50 years standing, according to Biblical standards, worthy of the Death Penalty.