I HAVE THEM!!!

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.

[namaste]

May it be known...

I received the Articles of Association from my attorney in the mail this afternoon.  I do not intend to post them on the forum, but I will summarize them as I get an opporutnity.

Briefly, this appears to be an approx. 12 page document, amended in 1999.  The subheadings are: mission statement, statement of faith, membership, board of trustees, executive committee, officers, and amendment of documents.

[namaste]

Let's see here...

The most salient factoid for everyone here will be that this doesn't look even remotely like what was promised in the Error Statement/Apology (in the way of a book of government).  

There's a mission statement and a statement of faith.  I haven't thoroughly reviewed them for anything unusual, but I'd imagine these mirror what's already publically available via the gcc website.

There is nothing (as far as I can tell) that regards the members of churches (the laity) *at all*.  There are procedures for admitting and removing entire churches, but absolutely nothing about what an individual member can do if they feel they are being treated unfairly.

What else...

The "Board of Oversight," listed on the gcc website, appears to in actuality be the Board of Trustees, which is charged in the Articles of Association with handling the organizations business issues (ie, admitting member churches, appointing more members of the Board of Trustees, providing financial statements to member churches, etc.).

In several places, (notably under the Board of Trustees heading), it is mentioned that the responsibility of the Board of Trustees is to draft by-laws for the corporation, hold board meetings for the corporation, etc.  This is significant, because it certainly gives weight to the conclusion that this document is in no way, shape, or form the "book of governance" that was promised.  It appears to be nothing more than a standard document outlining a corporation's official organizational guidelines.

Hmm...

Now this "executive committee" section is interesting...

Apparently 3 members of the Board of Trustees have some extra responsibilities...like considering requests for member churches to deviate from the rules regarding the "Procedures for the appointment and removal of elders."

These 3 persons are also responsible for investigating "irregularities in teaching or practice," and to, "authorize individuals to represent the association in giving counsel concerning the ordination of pastors and counsel concerning a church judgement against an individual."

It appears that the issues regarding church judgements/punishments/etc. (ie, the stuff we REALLY want to see) is in another document entirely: "Procedures for the Appointment and Removal of Elders."

Unfortunately, I don't believe I have any legal basis for demanding they give that one to me.  Maybe they'll provide it because they like me (although this is doubtful).

Okay, so at the very end, there are other official organizational documents listed: "Statement of Core Values," "Great Commission Covenant," and as noted above, "Procedures for the Appointment and Removal of Pastors" (elsewhere termed elders).

We'll be needing the rest of those.

In my previous post, I neglected to send out gracious thanks to Mr. Dave Bovenmyer for providing these documents.  Gold stars and smiley faces for him.  

[theresearchpersona]

What you're looking for is large enough to fill a 2 inch binder (at least that's what they held up). It's separate from what is provided to the government: I saw it at a conference and they indicated it was the leaders only. It's still underway: I suggest you demand he be honest and "walk in the light" before God and men and give him only several days to mail it, asking for no revisions and to not apply any secretive or hush principles they might otherwise, or to omit anything.

[puff of purple smoke]

What you're looking for is large enough to fill a 2 inch binder (at least that's what they held up). It's separate from what is provided to the government: I saw it at a conference and they indicated it was the leaders only. It's still underway: I suggest you demand he be honest and "walk in the light" before God and men and give him only several days to mail it, asking for no revisions and to not apply any secretive or hush principles they might otherwise, or to omit anything.

How long ago was this conference?

[puff of purple smoke]

A question related to the Articles of Association, probably to namaste since you seem to know a lot about this sort of thing. Is the Articles of Association a document that the movement would have had to have, by law, in 1983 when they organized as GCI? What I am getting at is that they are telling us that instead of a Book of Government, they developed the Articles of Association. But wouldn't these articles have had to exist long before 1991?

[namaste]

Puff-
The AoAs are an organizational document, that define the name of the group (GCx), and their relationship to their member church affiliates (ie, the local churches).  I'm not entirely sure (because I don't know the complete history of GC's organizational documents, etc.), but it appears that this document was completed at the time GCx went through a name-change.

ETA: To clarify, GCx legally became a new entity when they changed their names, hence requiring new organizational documents.  Yes, they would have to have had organizational documents (if they were operating as a corporate entity, which is likely) in the 1980s.  But they wouldn't need to be the same as (or even similar to) these.

ALL the document does, is define the relationship between the national organization and the local churches, and sets out the parameters for the board of directors (all GCx elders, guys like Dave B, Rick Whitney, Herschel, John Hopler, Mark Darling, etc.).

This is not any kind of governing document, in the sense that it lays out a "code of conduct" for leaders.  The only thing approximating what might be in the document they promised to produced, is a single line saying that the board is authorized to hear the concerns of the laity.

The AoAs are not in any way, shape, or form, what was promised in the 1991 Weakness Paper.  When Bovenmyer stated in communications with others that they developed AoAs in lieu of the Book of Government, intimating that the Book of Government was developed (albeit with a different name), it is my opinion that he was being deceptive.

[Linda]

In the talk he mentions something about papers needed to get back into the NAE. What organizational papers do you suppose they used to get reinstated there?

[puff of purple smoke]

In the talk he mentions something about papers needed to get back into the NAE. What organizational papers do you suppose they used to get reinstated there?

(Posting my response in the NAE thread.)

[lone gone]

What I think you have is nothing more than a legal document required by the government for the purpose of determining tax exempt status. Any local church body that wants tax exempt status as a religious entity needs one too.

It is not a procedures manual. It only has the definitions of the form of government and descriptions of the various offices, governing personel, and meeting requirements.

[theresearchpersona]

By the way.,

 I could be mistaken between what counts as "Articlees of Association" and some other type of document...though considering what people are looking for, and the way that binder was talked about, I think that is the policy and guideline type stuff, especially on beliefs etc., that we're all looking for.

The conference was the mens' one up at the YMCA in the mountains in Colorado. I don't remember the exact date, but it was early 2007 near may. The conference included people from all over the country.

Honestly this all makes me very sad: a "church" isn't supposed to have anything hidden anyways.

Sorry I didn't take a look at the time...I was intrigued that there was a big binder right next to all the little booklets of teachings that were being given out. It was really disturbing when they said they were working on finalizing everything and then said "this is leaders only". What?

Maybe I'm thinking about "the book of governance", though whether that exists or not I don't know.

[theresearchpersona]

I saw something interesting on the GCC site (here: http://www.gccweb.org/gcc/about/history_long.asp):

In 1989 GCI changed its name to "Great Commission Association of Churches." (Today, the shortened name "Great Commission Churches" is used in public communications, in order to promote the central and historical vision of this movement.) In the early 1990's Great Commission pastors developed a book of government, called the Articles of Association, which were formally approved in 1994. According to the Articles, local churches have final authority over their affairs, under the Lord Jesus Christ. Although each church is autonomously governed, each church is united with the other churches in the association and with national and regional ministries for fellowship, accountability, and mission (US and international church planting.) For information about the accountability process for churches in Great Commission Churches, click here.

The reason I put this up is, does this explanation fall under the scope of the error statement? I was looking through some other threads...those more knowledgeable about this, does this all appear honest and good?

Also, on the main site there's a quote that they'll put these up on the public area of the GCC website...anyone know what part of it they'd be talking about?

Also, under "Pastornet" there's an "Organizational Documents" link...but it's password and username protected: this is the only group I've ever seen to block public access to such important information. : (  It's also the only one with a secretive training environment for "leaders" (which aren't even qualified biblically). : (

I think that's the point, though. It seems like the criticized aspects were made more subtle and often driven into the "leader" training...and into the youth areas, and it's slowly re-rearing its head elsewhere, or worse, simply under different terms.

[jehu]

Honestly this all makes me very sad: a "church" isn't supposed to have anything hidden anyways.

Dude.  Honestly.  What rock have you been living under?  I don't mean to do a driveby on you.  Did you miss that Benny Hinn and several other evangelists were sought by a Congressional hearing on financial accountability and that many never responded?  Have you checked for any skeletons in Youth With A Mission's closet since the Colorado Church shootings?  Didja miss the thing where the Catholic church has a problem keeping the hands of their clergy off of little boys because they try to counsel child molesters themselves and transfer them from parish to parish rather than turning them in?  The religion now waving the banner of Christ is firmly in the camp of the Deceiver.

[Left]

Are you suing GC*?    Or just one location in specific?   I haven't been able to follow what these forms are about, but it is interesting to read...