Welcome to De-Commissioned, a place for former members of the Great Commission movement (aka GCM, GCC, GCAC, GCI, the Blitz) to discuss problems they've experienced in the association's practices and theology.

You may read and post, but some features are restricted to registered members. Please consider registering to gain full access! Registration is free and only takes a few moments to complete.
De-Commissioned Forum
September 21, 2017, 02:25:07 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: GCC and GCM  (Read 57493 times)
Tom_Mauriello
Obscure Poster (1-14 Posts)
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3



WWW
« Reply #40 on: February 21, 2008, 12:28:31 am »

Lots of posts since my last one ...

The NAE screw up was an oversight on our fault.  Our Board approved our joining in 2007.  At that point my team in the office moved ahead and worked on the paperwork and filing information and sent it in.  We did not realize a vote would also need to take place.  We will correct the site next week and also apologize to the NAE.  We are joining under the organization heading, not in the church group, so we will be listed on a different page as a seperate organization once it all goes through.

My point in posting here was not to rewrite history or misinform.  After we updated our site it seemed to cause a lot confusion and make things worse and I hoped I could help.  All of the GC acronymns do not help!  The histories do connect, the current leadership structures are what provide a different context for guidance and leadership in the churches.

The Tempe Church is a GCC church, but may have or had missionaries serving there, but would be under the direction of the local elders / GCC.

The updates we made to our page were a result of feedback we received, including some from members here.  The point of noting the churches and not the mission organization is one of leadership context.  The doctinral issues can only be dealt with through the leadership boards of the church groups.  GCM serves a wide variety churches now, including some that have never been a part of the GC Movement.

I know this is frustrating for you all ... I do appreciate whatever grace can be given me in the midst of it.

Tom
Logged
lone gone
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 279



WWW
« Reply #41 on: February 21, 2008, 07:10:22 am »

Thanks Tom,

You inherited an organizational mess and now are dealing with the fallout.

Sadly this does point out the lack of maturity by leadership when they first set this up years ago. Making modifications while maturing seems like the right thing to do, but in reality it shows how little effort was made  to consult with anyone outside the "movement"  who could assist with pretty basic administrative matters.

Hiring you from the outside shows improvement in judgment by someone.
Logged
Linda
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1642



« Reply #42 on: February 21, 2008, 07:15:55 am »

Tom,

Thank you very much for posting and answering questions.

I do need to let you know that I was told that application for membership in the NAE came "sometime in February" in the form of an online application. So, whoever was supposed to fill in the application, didn't do it in December right after the meeting.

As I understand it, the board of NAE must approve all applications and the next meeting after your application was received will be in three weeks. But, I suppose it is more of a "rubber stamp" meeting and can understand how you would think that if you filled in the application and paid the money you were a member.

Also, about the comment in your Q & A, the word "detractors" means:

Quote
to diminish the importance, value, or effectiveness of something


I don't think that this forum is diminishing the effectiveness of GC organizations in any way. Actually, they are doing a great job of that by themselves. My goal in posting is to inform people that there are some very non-traditional views held by some GC pastors, there is a history of abuse and excommunications that seem to continue (and an error statement, I might add), and the views and behavior seem to be part of the belief system. So, the only thing left (after trying to correct the errors with the leaders) is to warn people (and some of those people may just be pastors) that some of the beliefs held by GC churches are highly unorthodox and very unsound.

So, could you call us a group of "warners" instead of "detractors"? :lol:

At any rate, thanks for posting here. I understand that GCM works with non-GCC churches, and maybe your goal is to serve more non-GCC churches than GC churches, but as it stands now, in the minds of many in GCC, the two organizations are pretty much the same thing.
Logged

Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift.
namaste
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 201



« Reply #43 on: February 21, 2008, 07:46:36 am »

So...lemme get this straight.

According to Tom, the President of GCM, we shouldn't be worried about GCM, because they're just a shell-entity for staffers to use to raise support.  GCM staffers could be anywhere, with any church (the vast majority are with GCC, however).

So people shouldn't be upset with GCM, because they're just a fundraising entity, they should complain about GCC, because they're the church group that actually hurts people, and has authority over the GCM staffers?!

GMAFB.  

I know you don't intend it to be this way, but this is the most ridiculous thing I've heard in awhile (what's more, I think you know why that is).

Yeesh, are you guys a "church" organization, or a banana republic?

The problem here isn't excessive use of acronyms.  Wishing for something doesn't make it so.  The plain facts are that GCM has a shady past, and GCM staffers have done some HORRIBLE things to the unfortunate souls in their paths (and wakes, for that matter).  I hope the powers that be will quit trying to shirk responsibility for this by talking in circles about whose organization is supposed to do what.

Here's a great question: does GCM have any authority over its staffers behavior?  From what I've read here, the answer appears to be a (qualified) nope.  So, if someone takes issue with the conduct of a GCM staffer, to whom should that someone go?  

Hmm....I can't decide if this is a banana republic, or Tammany Hall.
Logged

Om, shanti.
namaste
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 201



« Reply #44 on: February 21, 2008, 07:50:03 am »

Okay, having thought about this a little bit more, it appears that GCM is trying to move from GCC-entity to an independent fundraising unit for people to raise support.

Fine.

In the interim, however, there's obviously going to be a lot of confusion about who does what, and it's going to take a lot of PR to effectively separate the two organizations.

My issue, is that intimating that the two are separate entities now (as GCM tries to do in its defense on its website) is blatantly misleading.  GC* is quite a ways from being able to claim that as the case.

That's all I'm saying.  :wink:
Logged

Om, shanti.
namaste
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 201



« Reply #45 on: February 21, 2008, 07:56:13 am »

Here would be a more appropriate quote for the "I've heard things about GCM" on the website:

Quote
I have no doubt that you've heard questionable things about GCM.  GCM was originally conceived by GCC as a way to provide interested individuals with a means of raising support to become missionaries in their churches.  While the vast majority of GCM staffers today are with GCC, GCM is also used by individuals who are not affiliated with GCC, serving instead with different entities.

We understand that GCC and GCM share an organizational history, and at one point in their history, it was difficult to distinguish between the two.  Today, however, our goal is for GCM to become its own, independent organization to be used by missionaries raising support.  

This is a big change for our organization, and one we're very excited about!  In the meantime, if you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us for more information.  Likewise, if you have feedback or concerns, we welcome your contact and input.
Logged

Om, shanti.
AgathaL'Orange
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 962



« Reply #46 on: February 21, 2008, 08:15:46 am »

That's great, Namaste... and nice too!
Logged

Glad to be free.
MidnightRider
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 290



« Reply #47 on: February 21, 2008, 12:01:01 pm »

Quote from: "Tom_Mauriello"

I know this is frustrating for you all ... I do appreciate whatever grace can be given me in the midst of it.

Tom_M,

I think the grace would flow a little easier if it were not for the dismissive way the critics are talked about on the web page
http://www.gcmweb.org/who/OthersSay/Questions.aspx

If it helps to set the record straight, what criticisms of GCM have been offered that would apply only to GCC/GCAC/GCI/GCwhatever and not to GCM?
Logged
Linda
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1642



« Reply #48 on: February 21, 2008, 01:46:38 pm »

Tom,

I confess, I am a Googler. (But I'm not repenting of it!)

I was trying to find a list of GCMC churches and also a list of GCMC board members. Instead I stumbled upon this.

http://64.233.167.104/..www.gcmweb.com/about/amr2002/locations.asp..

It says:

Quote
GCM is a member ministry of the Great Commission Association of Churches (GCAC) based in Columbus, Ohio, and acts as the international missions organization of GCAC.


This was from a 2002 Annual Report.

I couldn't find any more recent reports, but perhaps you could shed some light on the situation. It looks like as of 2002, GCM was a ministry of GCAC. It would also appear judging from the list of churches mentioned in the report that GCAC churches and what are now GCC churches were the same churches.

So, what I am wondering is when did GCM break with GCC and/or GCAC?

Thanks for taking the time to explain this.
Logged

Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift.
Linda
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1642



« Reply #49 on: February 21, 2008, 04:44:42 pm »

I'm still googling, sorry to say.

I found this link with the following quote from a Q & A. The date on the web page was Feb. 12, 2008:

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:y7U0KD84c4MJ:www.discoverlifespring.com...

Quote
8. Any special ministry focus?
Generally, our priority has been on reaching the youth. Historically, GCC began as a movement on college campuses in order to reach the next generation. GCM, which is GCC's international mission organization, provides support for all U.s. campus ministry efforts. GCM directs all U.S. campus ministry efforts. As we've grown as a movement of churches, we've planted more and more churches in U.S. communities to the point that today most of GCC's members are in community churches. As part of this community ministry a major focus has been on high schools. Finally, because of our emphasis on reaching the whole world with the gospel, we are increasingly putting more emphasis on international ministry through GCM, which also coordinates all overseas ministry.
Logged

Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift.
jehu
Administrator
Regular (15-99 Posts)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 94



« Reply #50 on: February 22, 2008, 09:15:43 pm »

Quote from: "jehu"
I don't suppose we'll get any clarity on why there is a new acronym, GCGF, and why an organization of some few tens of thousands needs to operate with so many legal identities.


Well, hey, it's been over a week. Let's give Tom a break on the questions. It might be a little intimidating for the poor soul to try to answer so many. Let's just assume he popped by for a press release unless he comes back for a discussion. Remember, this guy is an outsider. While GCC and GCM may have different legal identities, even a well-intentioned person would have difficulties in establishing distinctiveness in terms of facilities, theological inspiration, and cashflow. Some of us can definitely attest to our difficulties seeking intellectual independence from this crowd. Perhaps Tom is just getting his mind around what a huge task this is.

Would it be easy to create distinctiveness at the Rock, Fort Collins? Well yes, the task would be rather daunting since The Rock uses the Summitview facilities for worship, since the Rock has a tradition of going to all the GCC retreats and conferences (e.g.: Faithwalkers, seasonal retreats with speakers like Mark Darling), and the bonds have even been marital (e.g.: Tom Brown (GCM, now in El Paso) married to Rick Whitney's (GCC) daughter). Yeah, I'd say Tom M. has his work cut out for him.

But please give me caution if I put words in his mouth  :wink:  It's just so hard when there's a protracted silence.
Logged
maranatha
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 75



« Reply #51 on: February 22, 2008, 10:27:35 pm »

"I recently heard a brother comment on our church asociation's recent history.  He used the phrase, "Our organizational wilderness..."
He was reflecting on some of the changes we have been wrestling with as a church movement.

I understand what he means.  We have gone through changes and it seems like there is no end to the number of Great Commission, GC acronyms", that we can come up with.  I understand his humor and maybe his partial frustration.  

But honestly, nothing has changed.  We are still the same group of men and our bond remains strong.  We have lost  a few and yes, it hurts and yes, there have been challenges.  All movements of God have lost men.  Even our Lord lost a few.

But nothing has really changed."

Rick Whitney in "On the Wall" booklet (spring 2006)
(page 12)
Logged
DrSam
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 273



« Reply #52 on: February 22, 2008, 11:15:03 pm »

From what I see that God is doing that appears to be significant is that He is creating an "unmovement." I'm in that movement. I'm done with "movements" as we tend to define them. I know more and more former pastors, church planters, etc. that are leaving "Evangelicalism" to embrace a simple model of Christianity that is reaching and touching more and more post-moderns of this world. GC, just like many other former cool groups, and old denominations are a thing of the past. I really think that God really doesn't care about "movements." He does what He pleases. If we are there and surrendered, we get to ride the tide in, individually or with others. God is not stuck on a "group." Isn't that wonderful? It is all about Jesus and Jesus alone! I'm enthralled by that very thought!

I feel sad for Rick because deep down he's a very good guy but he is sorely stuck. Praise God that he loves Jesus still. He's just stuck. We must be humble that we don't feel elitist in where God has us now in His will. Spiritual pride is very sophisticated and it can come in a variety of forms. None of us is exempt from that danger.
Logged
Tom_Mauriello
Obscure Poster (1-14 Posts)
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3



WWW
« Reply #53 on: February 23, 2008, 09:27:34 am »

Thanks all for your replies and questions.  Thank you also to Jehu - it will be tough for me to keep up in a 'conversational' way that many here do.  I will try and stay on top of questions, but I travel a lot and also need to make sure I am properly communicating.

I will gather a list of the GCMC churches and their board.  They are working on a website, but have not completed it.

Our legal affiliation with GCC (GCAC) ended in 2006 or early 2007.  I will get the specific date so I don't have another NAE type mix up. Smiley  It was determined in 2006 but may have been officially voted on in 2007.  We still serve and partner with GCC (GCAC) churches in much the same way as before, but with seperate entities now.

I like Namaste's quote ... I will review it some more and see what we can do.

As to the responsibility between a church and us as the employer, we leave doctrine and philosophy of ministry to the church level.  We should be notified if a GCM employee was acting inappropriately or abusively.  The difference between personal behavior and ministry approach and philisophy might be grey at times, but we would certainly enter into that discussion.

Thanks
Tom
Logged
theresearchpersona
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 418



« Reply #54 on: February 23, 2008, 04:00:08 pm »

Quote from: "Tom_Mauriello"
As to the responsibility between a church and us as the employer, we leave doctrine and philosophy of ministry to the church level.


Tom, that's very hard to bite, and I'd imagine epecially among those here: that's what we were all told about GC...and which we found to be a lie in many cases (though not necessarily all), or which basically didn't matter because the leaders of different Churches were in cahoots.

And quoting you, isn't this a problem? There are "tiny" things that people today explain away in Paul's letters which he ended that if anyone thought he was religious then they had to recognize the things that he wrote were from God.

Some of the things quoted from "old GC" such as not having anything to do with someone etc. aren't illegit...if applied properly in the proper circumstances, because the point is to restore a brother in error; but in many cases that extent isn't required to restore someone or not. They also need be applied properly, such that when someone publicly rebukes another in error concerning teaching (which is public, this is not private matter) then all are not only edified, but involved to decide what to do with him. In matters of sin...those go the Matthew 18 route, and then eventually involved the entire congregation.

But as for doctrinal matters, if your'e not throwing out those who, say, teach God is not omniscient, which is clear-cut from scripture that He is, you're in violation of many things Paul the Apostle (and other Apostles, etc.) commanded, and those false teachers are teaching of another god. Did you realize that many GCC/GCM leaders currently fall into this camp? Then there's the unbelievable reality that others are preaching against it...check out Ochuk's blog. This isn't a "together for the gospel" kind of circumstance, but one where some men within are denying the only true God, and have wrested the gospel by doing so. Thus it's no wonder that even the ones teaching otherwise end-up adopting the methodologies of the ones teaching falsely...if God doesn't know who He will save (since he obviously DIDN'T choose them like Jesus said, before the foundation of the World) then we have to adopt every worldly marketing strategy, every vain "philosophy of ministry" and "expression of worship" that just. might. work. They say they believe that the gospel is "the power of God unto salvation" but they deny it by all this other junk.

And these men get this stuff from reading pathetic materials that argue these things...which a youngin in the faith who reads his bible could probably pick-apart in an instant.

Yet there are those teaching that God's knowledge is subsequent to our actions, not before...in GC/M, and you'll "leave this to the local level", hugh? How pathetic: and what an enemy you make youself to Christ if by this you excuse yourself, or your organization, from culpability in supporting those who might bind sheep in chains for doctrines they imagine rather than learn of God. "God, I only sent those who were denying your sovereignty and so doing things their way, I didn't support them"...

And I don't mean any of this to say "go away" or whatever, nor to dismiss you: just to call you out on it. Remember what Jesus went around preaching, "repent"? Well, I would say do so...and read-up on what Paul had to say of doctrine and theology, AND practice.

Remember when we're told the things written in scripture of Israel etc.  wee written for examples to us? Remember that Aaron's sons were killed by God not for adultery, fornication, blasphemy, or any other thing but offering a "strange fire" before the alter?
Logged
Linda
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1642



« Reply #55 on: February 24, 2008, 07:57:17 am »

Quote
Our legal affiliation with GCC (GCAC) ended in 2006 or early 2007.


This is helpful to know. Was there an announcement of some sort when that happened? Also, it might be helpful for us to know how ministries were divided when the legal break happened.

While sorting through a stack of papers yesterday, Terry came across an 8 page brochure (from 2000) that is entitiled "Great Commission Association of Churches". At the back it says:

Ministries Within Great Commission Association of Churches and then lists two categories. The first is, "General Association Ministries" which include GCLI, Daylights, prayer partners, and church accountability and arbitration. The second is "Great Commission Ministries". There are 4 categories under GCM. 1. Community (under that it says church planting, pastor training, church consulting church resources.. 2. High School (under that HSLT, SIP, high school workers conference) 3. College Campuses (under that title relevant and innovative evangelism, church based ministry on campus, college conferences, LT, mobilization in ministry.)4. International (under that reaching and training international students, short term ministries, church planting outside US and missionary mobilization.)

I guess I would like to know which of these former GCM roles fell to GCC when the change happened and what does GCM still do.

Some specific questions would be:
1. Is GCM still involved in HSLT?
2. Do GCMC pastors still have to do the GCLI training?
Logged

Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift.
namaste
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 201



« Reply #56 on: February 25, 2008, 08:25:01 am »

Mr. Mauriello-

I just wanted to pass along a few quick observations that I think might help you understand these issues a bit better.

First, as someone familiar with the legal mechanics of the way groups choose to formally organize, the fact that GCM is now "separate" legally from GCC means diddly to me.  Formerly intertwined groups separate "legally" all the time, and for myriad reasons.  GCM, for example, has had quite a history where the IRS is concerned.  What matters to me, is that the two groups are actually separate in the way they are run.

Right now, that's not the case.  As long as there are any members of the GCC board on the GCM board, they are not separate.  As long as GCM students are being encouraged to attend GCC-based conferences, LTs, etc., they will not be separate.

I'd be interested in hearing more about what "separate" means.  Right now, they're still very much inbred.

In that regard, I hope you'll be completely upfront about GCM's ENTIRE history (including who started to organization, and the problems that have occurred).  Pardon me for stating the obvious, but it looks to me like you've simply created a new acronym to make it more difficult to find historical information about the group.

I hope you'll make great efforts to make sure that you're completely upfront about the history of your organization.

Finally, regarding the autonomy of the local church...

I realize that this is a principle that many fundamentalist/evangelical churches share, but do keep in mind that GC* is somewhat of an oddity in this regard.  Those who insist on the autonomy of the local church also put the laity (that is, the congregation) in control of how the church is run.  Those who are into the apostolic succession model rigorously monitor their pastors in order to make sure that teaching, behavior, etc. is kept "in check."

GC*, promotes local church autonomy, doesn't give the congregation control over church matters, and doesn't meaningfully monitor/regulate the behavior of its pastors, elders, or staffers.  Presumably you'll agree that if GC* did these things, a great deal of problems could have been avoided.

My point is, autonomy of the local church is not an excuse for permitting the kinds of abuses that have occurred in the past.  If GCM is to become a better organization, I hope you'll realize that you're going to have to flex some serious muscle, and go to great lengths to keep pastors, elders, and staffers from continuing the abusive practices that have occurred in the past.

If you're going to solicit people's experiences, and then not do anything to  publicly address the wrongs people have suffered, then be prepared to take some serious flak for it.

Likewise, don't insult my intelligence by claiming that GCM is a "different" organization (one that doesn't hurt people), while refusing to deal with the actions and teachings of GCM leaders.

One important way you can differentiate yourself from GCC is to MAKE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE all of the rules/regs for your organization (including the processes for appointing and removing elders, behavior/teaching standards, etc.), and provide concerned individuals with a meaningful complaint/dispute resolution process.  GCC really dropped the ball in this regard, and if you were to do these things, it would go a long way towards ensuring the public that you're a different organization.
Logged

Om, shanti.
Linda
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1642



« Reply #57 on: February 25, 2008, 09:30:34 am »

Quote
Finally, regarding the autonomy of the local church...

I realize that this is a principle that many fundamentalist/evangelical churches share, but do keep in mind that GC* is somewhat of an oddity in this regard. Those who insist on the autonomy of the local church also put the laity (that is, the congregation) in control of how the church is run. Those who are into the apostolic succession model rigorously monitor their pastors in order to make sure that teaching, behavior, etc. is kept "in check."

GC*, promotes local church autonomy, doesn't give the congregation control over church matters, and doesn't meaningfully monitor/regulate the behavior of its pastors, elders, or staffers. Presumably you'll agree that if GC* did these things, a great deal of problems could have been avoided.


Yes, Namaste, you have hit the nail on the head.

Two things come to mind. The first involves just how someone gets "recognized" as a pastor in a GC church. And, as we have all figured out it is a bizarre form of "apostolic succession" going all the way back in church history to the 1970's and self-appointed (like it or not, that's what he was) apostle Jim McCotter. He, and a few others, apparently recognized themselves and then became the ones who bestowed the mantle of leadership on the rest. So, every current GC leader's authority can be traced back to Jim McCotter.

Also, even though they call themselves elders and say they are "presbyterian" (because that means elder led), they are using equivocation when they use that word and tell people that if we disagree with them, we are disagreeing with how a major denomination, The Presbyterians, run their churches. LET ME TELL YOU, THEY ARE IN NO WAY RUN LIKE THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH. In a Presbyterian church, the congregation elects elders for a certain term. They meet as a session and have limited decision making power (pastor's salaries have to be voted on by the congregation, the budget has to be approved by the congregation, major decisions require a congregational vote). The Presbyterian elders also participate in the local presbytery where there is accountability from the top down. So, even though the congregation votes, they are not "congregational" in government. They are elder led and accountable to both the congregation and the denomination.

My second point, in GC, the local church is not autonomous. Don't they tell people in a statement that if they have a problem with the local church they should take it to the national leaders for resolution? They want to have it both ways.

I am looking at a deposition done on Bill Taylor, the first elder to be excommunicated. It was signed by Dennis Clark, Mike Keator, Fred Colvin, Brian Catalano, Dave Gumlia, Jim McCotter, Gary Kellogg, Mike Royal, Herschel Martindale, Rick Harvey, Rob Irving, Dave Bovenmyer, Larry Clemente, and Steve Schoenberg. Wasn't Bill from a church in Ohio? I don't think all these men were from his church, and unless they were this is demonstrating a history consistent with what they now believe that the national leaders have the final say. Therefore, the local church is not autonomous.

And, make no mistake, when we use the word "local church" we are talking only about the "local elders". The local congregation has no say (and often no knowledge) regarding matters of the local church.
Logged

Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift.
AgathaL'Orange
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 962



« Reply #58 on: February 25, 2008, 03:33:46 pm »

Linda and Namaste are 100% correct.  I ditto their posts.
Logged

Glad to be free.
G_Prince
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 303



« Reply #59 on: February 25, 2008, 03:34:57 pm »

Tom- here is some more unsolicited advice from an anonymous poster on the internet. Take GCM and run...run as far as you can from GCC. If you really are a separate movement then get the heck out. This movement is going to cause nothing but trouble for your organization. I suggest severing ties as amicably but quickly as may be. Think about the situation with "you know who Nate's pastor" now multiply by 100. Do you really want to be stamping out brush fires for the next 20 years of your life?
Logged

Here's an easy way to find out if you're in a cult. If you find yourself asking the question, "am I in a cult?" the answer is yes. -Stephen Colbert
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
SimplePortal 2.1.1