| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Message |
Author |
 GA22 AGENDA: Dealing With Member |
uthdude2000 |
S49. V. Procedure In Dealing With Member
In those cases in which he deems it in the best interest of the local church to do so, the state/regional overseer shall have the authority to excommunicate an unruly or uncooperative member without a formal hearing. A member disfellowshipped by the state/regional overseer shall have the right to appeal to the International Executive Committee within 10 days of the written notice of the overseer’s action. The decision of the International Executive Committee is final, with no further recourse for appeal by the member. The local church must remove the name from the membership roll when notified of the action by the state overseer. |
Friendly Face
Posts: 218
7/22/22 1:17 pm
|
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
| |
sheepdogandy |
So the members of the Congregation have no say in the matter?
Centralized government, ya gotta love it.
_________________
Charles A. Hutchins
Senior Pastor SPWC
Congregational Church of God
www.spwc.church |
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 7307
7/23/22 11:23 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: GA22 AGENDA: Dealing With Member |
Quiet Wyatt |
| uthdude2000 wrote: | S49. V. Procedure In Dealing With Member
In those cases in which he deems it in the best interest of the local church to do so, the state/regional overseer shall have the authority to excommunicate an unruly or uncooperative member without a formal hearing. A member disfellowshipped by the state/regional overseer shall have the right to appeal to the International Executive Committee within 10 days of the written notice of the overseer’s action. The decision of the International Executive Committee is final, with no further recourse for appeal by the member. The local church must remove the name from the membership roll when notified of the action by the state overseer. |
I really don’t see how that’s legal. It would definitely be unethical to remove someone from membership without a hearing. Even though I have trouble imagining a scenario where such a unilateral, arbitrary ‘excommunication’ would be necessary, just the fact that it’s in there is incredibly troubling from an ethical standpoint. I’m wonder why in the world this is in our Minutes. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12817
7/23/22 4:24 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: GA22 AGENDA: Dealing With Member |
shaunbwilson |
| Quiet Wyatt wrote: | | I really don’t see how that’s legal. It would definitely be unethical to remove someone from membership without a hearing. Even though I have trouble imagining a scenario where such a unilateral, arbitrary ‘excommunication’ would be necessary, just the fact that it’s in there is incredibly troubling from an ethical standpoint. I’m wonder why in the world this is in our Minutes. |
There has to be a story behind this, right? Something that happened at some church recently that really needed this solution?
_________________
Signature Themes: Connectedness | Futuristic | Ideation | Intellection | Learner |
Site Admin
Posts: 3222
7/23/22 5:47 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: GA22 AGENDA: Dealing With Member |
FLRon |
| uthdude2000 wrote: | S49. V. Procedure In Dealing With Member
In those cases in which he deems it in the best interest of the local church to do so, the state/regional overseer shall have the authority to excommunicate an unruly or uncooperative member without a formal hearing. A member disfellowshipped by the state/regional overseer shall have the right to appeal to the International Executive Committee within 10 days of the written notice of the overseer’s action. The decision of the International Executive Committee is final, with no further recourse for appeal by the member. The local church must remove the name from the membership roll when notified of the action by the state overseer. |
This is a mighty slippery slope here. In the litigious society we live in I cannot imagine anyone on the receiving end of this not calling a high powered attorney and filing a massive lawsuit.
Why not instead require a series of documented steps seeking a resolution to whatever the issue(s) may be? This proposal reeks of heavy handiness and authoritarianism. Then again, it is the CoG.
_________________
“Hell will be filled with people that didn’t cuss, didn’t drink, and may even have been baptized. Why? Because none of those things makes someone a Christian.”
Voddie Baucham |
Acts-celerater
Posts: 787
7/23/22 7:48 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
sheepdogandy |
I knew a man (now deceased) who looked a state overseer right in the face and informed him that he had a lawyer and ten thousand dollars and he would go to church anywhere he wanted.
The overseer turned kind of green and changed the subject.
_________________
Charles A. Hutchins
Senior Pastor SPWC
Congregational Church of God
www.spwc.church |
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 7307
7/24/22 9:15 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: GA22 AGENDA: Dealing With Member |
Cojak |
| FLRon wrote: | | uthdude2000 wrote: | | S49. V. Procedure In Dealing With Member........ |
This is a mighty slippery slope here. In the litigious society we live in I cannot imagine anyone on the receiving end of this not calling a high powered attorney and filing a massive lawsuit.
Why not instead require a series of documented steps seeking a resolution to whatever the issue(s) may be? This proposal reeks of heavy handiness and authoritarianism. Then again, it is the CoG. |
Funny (ODD) for many years past the most members knew of church governing was what the pastors told them after a GA, unless it was line the 'ring' question (LOL) This later generation has a little more interest; this does seem mighty hard and high handed...  
_________________
Some facts but mostly just my opinion!
jacsher@aol.com
http://shipslog-jack.blogspot.com/ |
01000001 01100011 01110100 01110011
Posts: 24285
7/24/22 9:18 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| The issue for me is... |
Aaron Scott |
It would be quite unlikely for the higher ups to not back up a state overseer. THAT is the issue for me.
If I thought that the International level would provide a truly unbiased ruling, I would feel differently. However, it's very difficult to not back up your team, so to speak. it can cause problems all up and down the food chain.
It works the same way in other bureaucracies: people are going to back up those under them. |
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6042
7/25/22 10:25 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Nature Boy Florida |
Agreed Aaron.
If State Overseer kicks them out - EC not going to change it.
Perhaps this will be used to kick out enough members to change a vote on selling the property. I can't see it used for anything else.
_________________
Whether you like it or not, learn to love it, because its the best thing going today! |
Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 16646
7/25/22 11:30 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: GA22 AGENDA: Dealing With Member |
Link |
| uthdude2000 wrote: | S49. V. Procedure In Dealing With Member
In those cases in which he deems it in the best interest of the local church to do so, the state/regional overseer shall have the authority to excommunicate an unruly or uncooperative member without a formal hearing. A member disfellowshipped by the state/regional overseer shall have the right to appeal to the International Executive Committee within 10 days of the written notice of the overseer’s action. The decision of the International Executive Committee is final, with no further recourse for appeal by the member. The local church must remove the name from the membership roll when notified of the action by the state overseer. |
Why not use the Bible instead, or at least something that has a loose approximation of scripture.
In I Corinthians 5, the congregation was to deliver the man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh when they were assembled and the power of the Lord Jesus is present. In Matthew 18, the man is determined to treated like a heathen man and a publican after he has a chance to 'hear the church.'
In I Corinthians 5, Paul made the judgement, but he encouraged the church to judge and this goes on into chapter 6. Matthew 5 also uses legal language-- two or three witnesses, binding and loosing, etc. Apparently, the accused individual could potentially have a chance to defend himself before the congregation if it gets that far.
On one occasion, Paul delivered men over to Satan who had shipwrecked faith that they might learn not to blaspheme. It is possible that a church was involved. Paul also traveled to places where there was no congregation yet. Are we willing to say that a state/regional overseer is an apostle and has authority to do this alone?
How many of you think a denomination has the right to come up with these rules, instead of going by what is in the Bible? |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
7/28/22 1:15 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Quiet Wyatt |
In the General Council this week, the context of the proposed motion (which passed by the way), was given as for instance, in a case where a person was convicted of child molestation, regardless of when the crime occurred, and such was found out by the local pastor (most of us don’t do background checks on people who have just recently started coming to our churches), the local church would have to exclude such a person from membership, and if they had already become a member before such was discovered, they would have to be disfellowshipped by the local church. There was a scenario given by one pastor who said his church and pastor’s council had said, “Well, if Jesus forgives him, we have to as well.”
That pastor said he ended up having to leave that pastorate because his board turned against him when he said they had to disfellowship the convicted child molester. In such cases, the state overseer has the authority to disfellowship/excommunicate such a person, without needing the local church’s consent or a trial.
I’m guessing this is just an extreme safety measure in cases where a local CoG refuses to abide by the Minutes with regard to an unruly member. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12817
7/31/22 2:07 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Stay Strong |
| But is a child molestation conviction biblical grounds for excommunication? I get keeping your congregation safe but a church should at least have volunteer security team members to watch someone like that. I realize dealing with someone like that is very complicated but when it is known who they are a conversation should take place with that person as to what is expected from them if they want to attend. |
Friendly Face
Posts: 226
8/22/22 2:30 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
