GCM "Partners" as posted on the Wikipedia article

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.

[bothered]

From the wikipedia article online about GCM:

Partnerships

GCAC works with a number of organizations that share its aims including Samaritan's Purse, Global Pastors Network,[42] Wycliffe Hall, Oxford, and Wycliffe Bible Translators. GCM maintains a Council of Reference.[43] These members do not run or manage GCM, but affirm their support for the ministry and serve as a source of counsel for GCM leaders.


Could someone who knows better explain what it means that GCM is "partnered" with, say, "Wycliffe Hall" Oxford University?

[randomous]

Wycliffe Hall, Oxford University is a seminary, and it has an official partnership with GCC to train European people who want seminary training.  There are two in the US with the same type of thing.  FYI, you may be misreading the paragraph - the Council of Reference is totally separate.

[puff of purple smoke]

From Traveling preacher shares experiences: Short continues campus evangelism after 26 years :

Short never finished college. He said his denomination, the Great Commission Association of Churches, does not ordain based on seminary education, but rather on the minister's relationship with God.

"Personally, that's where we [GCAC] think a lot of churches are weak because they don't have an example of people living as Christian leaders," he said. "We'd say American Christianity has cluttered what it means to be a pastor and a simple calling."

Short said the authority to preach does not come from ordination but from the Bible, and added that there were no seminaries in the New Testament church.

[bothered]

Hey randomous,

Hmmm...still not sure what you mean be "officially partnered." Not trying to be argumentative, either. Just sincerely trying to understand exactly what this means. Does that mean Oxford University's Wycliff Hall automatically accepts GCC staff into their BA/MA theologically related programs? If not, and they have to apply like anyone else, how is that different than any other denomination applying to Wycliffe Hall? Does Wycliffe Hall do trainings for GCM staff in Europe that is more substantial than any other denomination? If so, could you give me an example of one? And, if so, how is that different than Wycliffe Hall doing trainings for other kinds of denominations? Outside of GCM saying they are partners, could you give me some understanding (perhaps through a couple of practical examples) of this "partnership" and how it plays out, outside of, say, just something that any Christian denomination could attest too?

In other words, if you mean "partnership" in a very general sense, like "we are all Christians trying to reach the world for Christ," then I guess I understand, but that doesn't make them any different than any other Christian group and thus it would seem odd to point them out, or go out of your way publicly, (i.e. wikipedia) and designate them a kind of "partner."  However, if you mean, something far more substantial, then what do you mean?

I wonder if Wycliffe Hall even knows that GCM has labeled them an "official partner." It wouldn't surprise me if the principal of Wycliffe didn't know that, or really knew much about GCM at all. (I mean, part of the point of this website and wikipedia is that most people, even inside GCM, don't know much about this organization, right?)


Basically, it seems very misleading. I don't think that Wycliffe Hall Oxford University has any "partnership" with GCM that is, say, any more substantial than other Christian organizations desiring to get theological training at Oxford. (As a side note: I bet GCM is probably the least represented denomination there, if there is any GCM staff, past or present, that have studied there at all. Do you know any GCM staff that have a degree from Oxford in divinity/theology? Even if GCM could say they have, how does that constitute a "partnership?")

My point is that I don't think GCM can call Wycliffe Hall a partner in the sense that most people would understand that word, to say the least.

Thanks for any light you can shed on this...
 

[randomous]

What I meant is that the leadership of GCM and of those three specific seminaries had reached agreements regarding GCM missionaries getting training there.  That's my understanding, I'm sure those seminaries have many such partners so I would agree that it's likely if they have a new president that he would not be likely to be aware of the specifics.  My understanding of the specifics is that it mostly regarded in-ministry type training, not residence degrees.  So distance things and weekend or week-long intensive courses.  They do offer specific courses for GCM missionaries to travel to once or twice a year.  And they are mutual partnerships, so all three of those seminaries are aware.  Wycliffe specifically is there to offer courses to the GCM missionaries in Europe, which I think they do once a year.
So yeah, it's not a general partnership.  The best of my understanding is that those have all agreed to an official relationship with GCM for missionary training.  It would take a long time to finish a degree through one of those partnerships, but they are beneficial.
By the way, it's important to note that GCM is in no way a denomination.  You can argue GCC is, but GCM is a missionary-sending organization.  It's important to partnerships like these because they only apply to staff, which includes those working with Acts 29 and other organizations.  The seminaries are partnered with GCM as a mission organization, not GCC as an association.  That's why you find them listed on GCM's website and not GCC's.
That's pretty much all I know about that topice, hope it helps.

[bothered]

Hey Randomous,

Thanks for your attempts to try and explain this too me. Unfortunately, I don't know if I am any better off then when I first asked the question. But, again thank you for your sincere help here, it is greatly appreciated. Honestly, I might even be a little more confused, but that isn't necessarily your fault either. Would it be fair to say that you only have a general understanding yourself concerning this matter? And can't really draw in specifics behind the general statements about this relationship?

Here are some of the things you mentioned and forgive me if I didn't get them right. I am laying it out this way, just because it is easier to talk about, not in a kind of I "gotcha" sense. I understand you are just throwing this stuff out here and aren't spending tons of time on it too.

"It is likely the new president isn't aware of the specifics"

I agree, but I would say it is because there really is not a partnership there worth calling a partnership, if that makes sense. At least not anymore, if it ever was really to begin with. There was at one point something brewing - even indirectly related to GCM - (see below), but what you have today isn't really anything worth mentioning in an article about yourself or on your official church website.

"It is mostly in-ministry type training, not degrees"  & "distance things and weekend or week-long intensive courses"

U.S. GCM staffers actually fly from the U.S. to Europe and spend perhaps thousands (round trip ticket, plus cost of retreat, plus cost of lodging, food, etc.) to do a week long training or even a weekend training? I guess there must be some serious coordination going on for this to practical happen, especially if this kind of money is being spent. Do you know who organizes these things in GCM? (I always thought GCM staffers struggled with raising enough support just for the day to day things, let alone a round trip week retreat to Europe. Do you know any staffers who have done this?) Do you know any specific dates? Topics of discussion? Do you know when the next training is? Do you know who to contact about this? How do you sign up?  


"Offering specific courses to GCE missionaries in Europe, which they might do once a year."

Why doesn't the GCE Europe Website list them as a partner? They "might" do this once a year? So you don't really know for sure?

"It would take a long time to finish a degree there"

Are you implying that Wycliffe Hall would offer degrees for free outside of the conference fees or retreat fees or whatever (and without having to be formally admitted) to GCM staff, but it just isn't practical?

--------
See: The GCE Europe website and under "partnership organizations" Oxford, Wycliffe Hall is not listed. http://www.gceweb.org/links.htm Why is that? Also, go to the website's "news" section it covers from October 2008 to January 2010 and it lists all the past and upcoming conferences, prayer events, awake conferences, etc. http://www.gceweb.org/news.htm Again, oddly enough, there is no listing of these retreats you are speaking of and you would think they would have it on this page right? Especially if this relationship is such a substantial thing.

Interestingly enough GCE is partnered with the ECPN, which I think offers trainings and what not. It is the last link under the partnerships heading. Which I think is a good and cool thing.

So, here is my understanding of how this all came about. I am open to corrections here too. So, let me know if I got it wrong:

Somewhere along the line a professor or two at Wycliffe Hall, Oxford had made connections with a few of the national leaders of GCM. There was perhaps a hope of having a partnership with Wycliffe Hall that was more substantial - like you said the week-long courses, etc. etc. I also think they may have done something in the states associated with the online learning stuff - just one course. But, again it wasn't associated with GCM. In the end though, I don't think it panned out, even in Europe. But, because communication is so poor in GCM, and GCM struggles to define its polity, its method, where it is supposed to be (I recently talked to a National Leader who said that GCM was always a "mid-western movement" if anything and my thought was like, huh, what?), and add to that the fact that people had a genuine reason to feel excited about the possibility, and then finally add in there that the right hand doesn't always know what the left hand is doing in GCM, you get a recipe for people thinking there is something, when there really is not. There were still some lingering vagueness about the relationship and in the midst of that it was plopped up on the website and there you have it.

Of course, GCM staff can still do courses at Wycliffe or go to any conferences, but they can go just like anyone else can go and it is not specifically designed for them. In other words, not in context of an official, formal, substantial partnership. I would also say that Wycliffe Hall would serve with GCM and would be willing to serve GCM, just like they would serve with other denominations or para-church ministries and in that sense you might be able to call them "partners" in a very general we-are-all-in-this-together-as -Christians-sense. But, it is not the kind of thing I think you can plop up on a public statement in context of defining who you are as an organization, if even on a very summary kind of level (i.e.wikipedia article.) Kind of like Samaritan's Purse. I mean anyone can be a partner with them. You basically just have to say to them "yeah, we will put together boxes." And bang, you are "partners." I think most organizations know that.


This is all important to me for three reasons a.) because in some respects - however large or small -  it is arguably a microcosm of some issues in GCM; as in the vagueness, the lack of communication, the lack of accountability, the constant and seeming inconsistencies in communication and specific details on things that represent GCM in a way they are not. My hope is that GCM would really pursue clarifying who they are and in that they can clarify who they are "partners" with, not only for the sake of GCM, but for their so-called "partners" and b.) because on the wikipedia article GCM had a chance to define who they were and of all the things they chose to put up their, part of it consisted of "partnerships" and then they listed Wycliffe Hall as one and C.) because it misrepresents who GCM is today and may cause parents or students to trust this organization undeservingly. So, it seems significant to me, in that sense. (but, had I just heard this at some staff meeting from some GCM staffer, in passing or something, i probably would have just blown it off.)



------------------------------
As far as GCM as a kind of neutral missionary sending organization. Wow. That is a topic for another time and I think it has already been discussed in this forum here and there.
 

[randomous]

I'll work backwards through your post.  I think your misunderstanding starts with your reading of the Wikipedia article.  The reference to Wycliffe Hall is there from GCM's partners page.  You can go and look at it at http://www.gcmweb.org/who/Partners.aspx.  When individuals were editing the Wikipedia page (GCM never "had a chance" to edit the page - anything on there has to be sourced), it was decided to just mention a few of the more notable (read: have own wikipedia article) partners on the partners page.  At the time there were three specific seminaries GCM went to for ministry preparation - RTS, Winebrenner, and Wycliffe Hall.  As you can see from that partners page, that list has expanded.    There are official, mutually recognized relationships with all those partners.  The reason I don't think a new president would know about it is because these types of partnerships are of very little concern to the president.  They are fairly common and numerous for a seminary, and not really executive level decisions.
As I said, Wycliffe is pretty much exclusively for GCM staff working in Europe.  I know you don't appreciate the distinction, but these are partnerships with GCM, not any of the organizations they serve (including GCC, GCE, Acts 29, and other).  That's why it wouldn't be on the sites of any of those specific groups.  And yeah, I doubt US staff would fly to Wycliffe Hall.  I do know some that fly to Ohio or Orlando for courses with the other two I mentioned, courses which are organized specifically for GCM staff.
GCM staff are able to get credit for the short courses, I was saying it would take a long time to finish a degree getting 1 or 2 credits a couple times a year.  Those courses cost each person money, btw.
So yeah, the idea that we're talking about a generic conceptual relationship is flawed.  As for specificity, I would expect a college to put a lot more public detail on their website regarding partnerships with other seminaries, because that's important to prospective students.  You can look on most mission organizations' websites (and lots of other types of businesses too, profit and non-profit, for that matter) and see a substantial list of partners such as the one on GCM's site.  There is rarely much detail.  As for trust, I agree that if people trust the partners it might lead them to trust GCM.  Like it or not though, those groups do have some official relationship and level of trust of GCM.  So your issue is probably more with them, if there's really any issue here at all.

[bothered]

First, I am discussing Wycliffe Hall's relationship with GCM, not RTS-Orlando or the other seminary. So, I would appreciate, if this thread continues, with you or others, it would stick to this relationship alone.

Like you mentioned above, GCM staff, who are serving in the United States, are not flying to Europe for courses offered specifically for GCM staff at/through Wycliffe Hall, Oxford. From what I understand, it is just not being organized and has never been organized in the history of this so-called partnership.

Also, adding to what you said in your last post, I agree, if their are seminaries offering courses in the U.S., it would be RTS-Orlando and Winnebrenner-Ohio, but only with those two seminaries, not Wycliffe Hall, Oxford. So, it doesn't surprise me that sometime with the past few years, a course or two has been offered through RTS or Winnebrenner. As far as I know, Wycliffe Hall has also never done any courses (and definitely not Oxford credit courses) here in the United States specifically designed for or to GCM staff. (Personally, I think it would be great for GCM to have this happening.)

As I mentioned before, the closest thing I know of (I was a part of a church in the mid-west at the time) occurred once 4-5 years ago and it was in context of developing an online education program that was NOT associated with GCM or its subsidiaries in any way. So, Practically speaking, this partnership never really existed in the first place and didn't really get off the ground. To my understanding, this is also where the initial discussions began and it was where Wycliffe was perhaps approached to do these kinds of things. So, yeah, at that time, it was probably some kind of mutual agreeable relationship that hoped to be more than generic. But the actual conversion, handshake, or whatever it was is not what this thread is about. Rather, it is about what is actually happening and how that should influence what is projected about the partnership today.

And, as far as I know, these Wycliffe-GCM-specific courses are definitely not happening today either. If, however, someone can produce specific details of these Wycliffe-GCM-specific courses continuing today in the U.S. or Europe, then I will happily retract my statement. When I say specifics, I am talking about future dates, times, locations, topics, some kind of information sent out to staffers who desire to take the courses through Wycliffe, a newsletter, an email update, something that is actually tangible that represents the reality of the Wycliffe-GCM partnership today. If you don't know those things Randomous, then just say so, it is not a big deal that you don't know.

Also, I am not convinced that GCE Europe wouldn't have posted something in the "news" section about these Wycliffe courses/retreats taking place, especially since they have already posted events that relate only to GCM staffers. (See on the GCE Europe Website under "news": April 2009 02.-06.04. GMR – Great Commission Missionary Retreat – Bled, Slovenia.

In the overall GCM scheme of things, this partnership issue is not really a big deal. There is just something inside me that desires honesty and accuracy from GCM and it kind of bothers me when it doesn't seem to be the case - be it a small thing or a big thing.


On a Side Note:

True, I don't see the distinction between GCM and GCE. For one, Mr. Joey Dunn is the managing director of GCE (as stated on the GCM website) and is on staff with/through GCM and on the Board of GCM (as stated on their website). He has also pastored GCM churches for years and is partly responsible for how GCM staffers go about raising support. The way I see it "GCE Europe" is "GCM," but it is basically just a different name. I understand you don't respect my lack of distinction concerning these organizations, but that is how I believe it basically should be seen, at least today and for years to come until real changes have been made.

Also, you mentioned other ministries and non-profits listing partners and what not. I agree some do probably post partnerships. So, I did a very casual, albeit, superficial look-up of the Acts 29 Networks, Chi Alpha Christian Ministries and Campus Crusade for Christ. None of these organizations list partners on their home website and none of these organizations have partners listed on their wikipedia page either. CC for C has other ministries listed, but of organizations started and/or run by Campus Crusade, but nothing else I could see. So, it at least tells us that other respectable organizations similar in many respects to GCM are not going out of their way to list partnerships. But in GCM's defense, these other organizations probably feel more secure with who they are too.

[randomous]

The reason RTS and Winebrenner are relevant is that those partnerships were made at the same time for the same purpose as the Wycliffe one.  GCM's HQ is in Orlando, hence RTS; GCC's HQ is in Ohio, hence Winebrenner; and GCE is in Europe, hence Wycliffe.  They are pieces of the same puzzle, strategically speaking. 
It is completely irrelevant that US-based GCM staff don't fly to Wycliffe and Wycliffe doesn't do courses in the US.  Those wouldn't make any sense.  The partnership with Wycliffe is for the benefit GCM staff based in Europe.
The GMR retreat you see on the website is not a GCM staff retreat, nor is it organized by GCM.  "Great Commission Missionary" is not the same as "GCM Missionary" or "GCM Staff". 
You say "as far as I know, these Wycliffe-GCM-specific courses are definitely not happening today either."  It's funny to see you say "as far as I know" in the same sentence as "definitely".  You obviously have no specific knowledge about what is going on, and you have absolutely no reason to doubt.  What we do know is that the US-based partnerships made at the same time and for the same purpose as part of the same strategy (to provide continuing education for GCM staff) are operational.  So why would you say "this isn't happening" without any evidence of that?  And then to question GCM's honesty?  That's just immature.  I'm beginning to question whether you care what's true in this situation, as you're making an issue about something you have no basis to make an issue about.  I thought you were actually asking a question at first, but I appear to have been mistaken.  You're obviously happy to make accusations without knowledge or evidence.  To reiterate - you admit you have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA how the Wycliffe partnership is playing out, yet you act as if you're certain nothing is happening.  To paraphrase a certain doctor, it's clear somebody needs healing and is willing to place a head on a platter for any or no reason.  Pretty sad.   

[Linda]

And then to question GCM's honesty?

While not addressing the issue of Oxford's connection to GCM, I do have first hand knowledge about an issue of honesty regarding GCM.

About a year and a half ago, on their web page GCM took a shot at this forum (by calling us all "detractors"). Last time I checked, that judgmental bit of ad hominem was still up. After being directed to that page, I looked at some other info posted there and noted that they claimed to be a member of the NAE. I went to the NAE web page and GCM was not listed (GCC was listed, but Tom Mauriello had gone to great lengths in the "detractors" paragraph to say that GCC and GCM weren't even part of the same organization).

I then called NAE headquarters out east and they gave me the number of the guy who was in charge of membership in Colorado. After pressing him, he mentioned that GCM at that time was not a member of the NAE. However, he did explain that they had received an application for membership a day or two earlier (after it had been noted on this forum that they weren't members) and that the membership would be considered at their next meeting which was a few weeks in the future. GCM at that point knew that they were not members of the NAE, but as far as I remember didn't correct that info on their web page.

Bottom line: For several months GCM claimed membership in NAE. When this forum pointed out that they were not members, they applied for membership. So, at some point, they knew they were not a member yet they still claimed membership. So, yes, GCM had not been fully honest in the past about their relationship with an organization.

If I weren't so busy, and really cared, I'd give Oxford a buzz!

[MidnightRider]

to randomous or anyone who might know:

If I were to call RTS Orlando and ask them what kind of partnership they have with Great Commission Ministries, what would they say?

[randomous]

RTS - After you found the right person/department, they'd probably say that they were partnered with GCM to provide continuing education for GCM's working missionaries.  

Linda - Your bottom line doesn't match your timeline.  They didn't claim NAE membership for months until something was pointed out on this forum.  This is another example where the general lack of experience in the nonprofit world creates a misunderstanding among people on this forum.  Somebody at NAE said it was all good, and gave them that graphic.  I think you're attributing a simple administrative/bureacratic error to dishonesty, which is a mistake.  The people at NAE obviously knew it would be accepted, as did GCM, as was proven slightly later.  I do think you're being a big selective in your memory, if I had time to go back and look at it I would.  But not today.  

On a side note, what would you call yourselves if not "detractors"?  "Warners"?  You certainly fit the dictionary definition of detractors in that you seek to take away from the reputation of GCM.      

[Linda]

Linda - Your bottom line doesn't match your timeline.

What are you talking about? I just re-read an e-mail from Tom Mauriello acknowledging in February of 2008 (the 19th to be exact, at 5:15 pm) that on their web site GCM had claimed membership in the NAE when they were not members and hadn't even applied for membership. Their application was received in February of 2008 and according to Tom's letter was to be voted on in March of 2008.

Bottom line: GCM CLAIMED MEMBERSHIP IN THE NAE BEFORE THEY HAD EVEN APPLIED FOR MEMBERSHIP.

I am a warner. That's why I post on GCM warning. I post in the hopes that people will understand the errors they have been taught and correct the errors they continue to perpetuate. Since that doesn't seem to be happening, I also post to warn Christians (parents especially) about the past history and present concerns of this shepherding group.

Also, I want heads on a platter.

[bothered]

Hey Randomous,

I would appreciate it, to say the least, that if we continue to discuss this Wycliffe Hall-GCE/GCM relationship, we would stay away from personal judgements/attacks that imply (or clearly state) some negative characteristics about whoever is writing, as opposed to what is actually being written in and of itself. I say this because I was a bit overwhelmed and surprised by your last post (calling me immature, calling me sad, talking about my need for healing, saying my post wasn't sincere, etc.). I didn't deserve that kind of response. I definitely think if we continue we have to treat each other respectfully and with dignity. It was out of character from what are threads have been up to at this point and it was disappointing to see, if even for that reason alone.

To reiterate:

My question was and is sincere. I am open to someone providing specific examples of how this Wycliffe-Hall GCM/GCE relationship is practically playing out today or will be in the future, in Europe (or even the United States). This is a sincere opportunity for me to get clarification. I am confused when you say I have absolutely no idea what is happening in this relationship between GCM/GCE and Wyclifffe. I do know many details regarding this relationship with Wycliffe and they are details that would logically cause me great skepticism to this relationship being a practical reality today.  But, I did assume, however wrongly perhaps, that if it was practically happening today, it would be easy for someone on this forum to clarify.

It seems like you don't really have specifics to offer other than your general understanding of the relationship between Wycliffe and GCM/GCE today. As I said above in my other post, it is not a big deal if you don't know. And, as I said in my other posts, when I say specifics, I am talking about future dates, something sent out to staffers, etc. etc. I am not talking about the general understanding of it all. I understand that a meeting of some kind took place between Wycliffe Hall people and GCM/GCE people years ago and there was an "agreement" on some level. I agree with that, it happened and it might have been appropriate back then for GCM to put Wycliffe up on their website (if they even need to put up stuff like this on their website, but that is for another thread.)


Thank you for helping me get an understanding of what you think this overall and general picture looks like with Wycliffe Hall and GCM/GCE.

But, as I have said in my other threads, or at least have tried to clarify time and time again, I am looking for actually specifics. Something, for example, as someone simply saying "I have or know of someone who has a current flyer, newsletter, email, something said at a recent GCE (or even GCM) staff meeting, that tells us there will be a Wycliffe Hall Oxford related training/retreat/speaker/whatever, specifically organized for GCE (or even GCM), in March of 2010 or November of 2009, or whatever, and that if we want to sign up or attend we can and this is what we need to do to make that happen." "I could also send this information to you or give you the direct contact information of the person who would be able to easily verify it."  (I understand this would have to probably come from someone either in GCE or someone who knows someone connected with GCE (as you too have made clear in your posts).)

The real answer, I am beginning to realize, may include just contacting Wycliffe directly. Linda let me know if you contact Oxford and do tell us what they say!

Also, I am comfortable with my thread, specifically with you, ending. As I think we are going back and forth on some level and I am not really getting my desire for specific details answered from you.  You did not have to respond to this thread, but you did. That is fine, but unfortunately, you don't have the specific details I am looking for.

I still, however, would like to offer anyone else a sincere and respectful opportunity to give specific examples (not a general understanding) of how the GCM and/or GCE Wycliffe Hall relationship is playing out today.

Thanks my fellow GCM Warning travelers! Also, thank you Linda for sharing your story! Very interesting! I also agree with Linda, I would classify myself as a "warner" and especially to parents.

------

Randomous you said:

"The reason RTS and Winebrenner are relevant is that those partnerships were made at the same time for the same purpose as the Wycliffe one."  "They are pieces of the same puzzle, strategically speaking."

Not sure why this statement counters my point that I just want information about Wycliffe Hall. These three seminaries are not working together to plan trainings for GCM. It is not like RTS is calling up Wycliffe and asking permission to do a training or calling them up and asking them if they could plan a GCE training together. They do their trainings separately. Hence, I want information on just those Wycliffe GCM/GCE partnership trainings. If they do exist today, that is.

 

[AgathaL'Orange]

I think that the "partnerships" as well as the "council of reference" make GC look more legitimate.  But the problem is, no one really knows what the partnership or council does.  Once I emailed every person on the council of reference asking the relationship.  I received not one reply.  I have no idea what that means.  Perhaps they get a lot of email?  Perhaps they thought I was spam?  Perhaps they didn't know what I was talking about?

I think that question about Wycliffe Hall is incredibly important.  Partnerships make you look good, and honestly if an independent, trained group actually LOOKED at GCx and said, "Hey, it appears that the dysfunction is really only held to five or so pastors worldwide, but as a whole everything else looks good and as it should be, I'd be more likely to drop GCx "warning" and let it go.  But I don't hear defenses, I don't see change in writings and teachings, I don't see partners or councils ever meeting or even KNOWING about GCx.  It makes me think that GCx is name dropping. 

Name dropping is dishonesty.

And I agree that it's no reflection on Randomous if he doesn't know.  I appreciate your loyatly to GC, and it may very well be founded, especially in this area.  I'm sure this thread isn't an attack on HIM. 



I think people just want to know what a partnership with GC constitutes because parents are looking at these things and honestly that whole Oxford thing makes everyone think, "cool!"

[Linda]

FYI, I have contacted Wycliffe Hall, Oxford and am awaiting their reply. I'll let you know what I hear. I'm thinking, though, that I probably need to make a fact finding trip there just to verify any info I might get. Anyone want to join me? We could have tea at the Bird and the Baby and do some more in depth research.

[Linda]

This just in.

Kerstin from Wycliffe Hall has just forwarded my "enquiry" to the Director of Administration and wishes me the best.

I'll keep you informed...

[bothered]

Great! Thanks Linda!

I sent you an email just as second ago.

Look forward to their response...

---

Agatha your post basically hit it on the head. Thanks for your thoughts.

[Linda]

I agree, Agatha. The GCM Council of Reference is a JOKE!

Dr. Ray Ortlund has been listed there for years. He passed away on July 22, 2007. I have mentioned that before with the thought that someone in GCM would correct that obvious blunder.

Also, FYI, I have a copy of a letter from an ECC pastor who sits on the board of GCC citing the GCM Council of Reference as something that adds credibility to Great Commission Churches and suggesting that Great Commission churches must be great because look at all the important people who are on their Council of Reference! (So that's why I don't buy the GCC - GCM are separate unrelated organizations argument). I have lots of interesting letters!

Lesson learned from all of this: NEVER LET YOUR NAME BE LISTED ON A COUNCIL OF REFERENCE! They are just using your name to add credibility to their organization in which you have no say.

[randomous]

Bothered - I appreciate that you are beginning to realize that it was unreasonable to expect specifics.  I do still have trouble understanding how you can be asking a question at the same time as saying you have definite proof it isn't happening but not providing that.  I think you should refrain from making accusations until such time as you have reason to.  Otherwise, it seems like you're just picking an area where there isn't likely to be much information available for that reason to somehow back up your accusation that GCM's being dishonest.

I'll be interested to see if Wycliffe gets back to anyone.

Linda - Ray Ortlund isn't on the GCM Council of Reference, I have it in front of me.  Yes, people do allow their names to be put on councils of reference BECAUSE they believe the organization is credible, not because they want to have a say in the management.  They are busy people, busy with their own ministries or careers, and I wouldn't expect them to reply to anyone really. 

Agatha - I'd like to hold you to that.  Do RTS and Winebrenner not count?  There are a lot of partners, and people on the council of reference, who have said that very thing by endorsing GCM through those relationships. 

BTW, nobody says GCC and GCM are unrelated groups.  They are separate in management though.  The current GCM director has never even been part of a GC-related church.  And whether you want to acknowledge it or not, GCM sends missionaries for totally unrelated groups like Acts 29 network.  So trying to equate them is just disingenuous.

On the topic of warners vs. detractors - I think it's more than a little unreasonable for you to expect them to call you warners when your actions fit the exact definition of detractors.  So instead of getting angry, you should accept it as part of the territory.