 |
Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Message |
Author |
 |
Bro Bob |
What would happen if an individual offered to allow a church the use of a piece of property? They would get no deed, but could otherwise improve it and use it as they wish.
No bank would loan them a cent.
They would have to pay for anything they built out of their own cash surplus.
Now, what if a local corporation, operating as a 501.c.3 held that deed? What if seven men of good report who attended that church were the trustees of that 501.c.3, and it's by-laws required their unanimous approval to terminate the agreement to allow the church the use of the land?
Just curious. |
Golf Cart Mafia Underboss
Posts: 3944
3/12/12 11:55 pm
|
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
| Re: Since the they own it... |
theElder |
| Jamie Noel wrote: | It's interesting what you just wrote. I have an older brother that pastors within the COG. In trying to refinance the church, it was discovered that the COG does not own the building, but instead, the state office has it deeded to them. That makes the state office the landlord, right?
Every landlord is responsible for the upkeep of the property, yet, the local church has to replace roofs, HVAC systems, parking lots, etc. The COG owns his church but will not assist in replacing these items needed to continue to function. Sounds like a double standard to me as an outsider. I want to own your "house" but you have to keep it fixed up. As a return, you pay me a "fee" to remain a part of my club. Aren't any of you guys willing to take of the COG glasses and see this? I really don't mean any disrespect. I am not trying to argue. But can't anyone see why they don't want to sign over ownership?
My brother is working his back end off to restore this church. At a time where he should be thinking about getting ready for retirement, he has taking a reduction in church size, pay, and status for the sake of knowing this is where he is supposed to be. I know there is nothing to worry about when you go where God has called you. Ultimately, our trust is in the Lord. But this is a fellowship, right? A brotherhood. A family. Why does it seem to leave some of its members to hang out to dry?
Respectfully submitted... |
I am making some assumptions from your comments in order to respond to them. If I am wrong in my assumptions, I apologize in advance.
So how much rent is your brother's church paying the State Office for use of that building?
Nothing, right? So why shouldn't they take care of upkeep of the property? Do you really expect the State to provide a building rent free and still replace HVAC units or repair a roof, etc?
And don't try to compare the tithe of tithe to rent. If they owned the building and had a mortgage on it they would still be paying the tithe of tithe right along with paying the mortgage. |
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1924
3/13/12 10:00 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Since the they own it... |
Jamie Noel |
| theElder wrote: | | Jamie Noel wrote: | It's interesting what you just wrote. I have an older brother that pastors within the COG. In trying to refinance the church, it was discovered that the COG does not own the building, but instead, the state office has it deeded to them. That makes the state office the landlord, right?
Every landlord is responsible for the upkeep of the property, yet, the local church has to replace roofs, HVAC systems, parking lots, etc. The COG owns his church but will not assist in replacing these items needed to continue to function. Sounds like a double standard to me as an outsider. I want to own your "house" but you have to keep it fixed up. As a return, you pay me a "fee" to remain a part of my club. Aren't any of you guys willing to take of the COG glasses and see this? I really don't mean any disrespect. I am not trying to argue. But can't anyone see why they don't want to sign over ownership?
My brother is working his back end off to restore this church. At a time where he should be thinking about getting ready for retirement, he has taking a reduction in church size, pay, and status for the sake of knowing this is where he is supposed to be. I know there is nothing to worry about when you go where God has called you. Ultimately, our trust is in the Lord. But this is a fellowship, right? A brotherhood. A family. Why does it seem to leave some of its members to hang out to dry?
Respectfully submitted... |
I am making some assumptions from your comments in order to respond to them. If I am wrong in my assumptions, I apologize in advance.
So how much rent is your brother's church paying the State Office for use of that building?
Nothing, right? So why shouldn't they take care of upkeep of the property? Do you really expect the State to provide a building rent free and still replace HVAC units or repair a roof, etc?
And don't try to compare the tithe of tithe to rent. If they owned the building and had a mortgage on it they would still be paying the tithe of tithe right along with paying the mortgage. |
Great question. I think we both know that answer is zero. However, I think he would be more than willing to pay a "rent" amount in order to defer costs of what needs done. I wish I could release more information but I fear he may be the one to pay the price. Lets just say, the church wasn't everything he was told it was when he got there.
What aggravates me (at the risk of saying too much) is that the COG, whom he has defended and served for decades (including 10 years as a state youth director) will not help him refinance the loan. He needs over $200K to fix some immediate needs. He has proven they can pay the mortgage since he has been there, caught up on all debt that was left when he arrived, and the new mortgage payment is no more than the current......and the COG said NO. That's terrible. I am, on a regular basis, losing faith in an organization that I was seriously considering returning to and bringing a 300 member congregation to. These are the things that make me pull back. It may sound wrong, but that's how I feel.
_________________
Stay Positive! |
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1138
3/13/12 12:00 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Agreed...however |
Jamie Noel |
| chainrattler wrote: | | 2ndgeneration wrote: | I do not have a problem with property being deeded to the local church. However, that church cannot expect to be underwritten by the state office when they decided to secure a mortgage loan to build.
A reference was made by one poster about a large denomination whose property is deeded to the local church and that they are doing quite well. I agree with that statement. However, if that is in reference to the Assemblies of God, there are many church properties that are deeded to the Assemblies of God.
If a local church expects the state office to make an initial investment, especially a new church plant, then it needs to be deeded to the Church of God.
If any church not deeded to the Church of God goes into default then they cannot expect the headquarters to bail them out. North and South Georgia both have had and still does have churches that they are paying the mortgage for them. |
Most banks are interested in the "giving units" of the local congregation, not the underwriting of the state office.
It would be better for the states and the International Committee to not have the financial obligation on the balance sheet of the entire Church. The purpose of a corporation in the first place is to share risk and limit liability. The entire Church is on the hook for a great deal of liability the way things are set up now. It would be better if each church were a local nonprofit corporation. |
I agree to a point. If a church is locally owned, then, it shouldn't be borrowing to a point that it would need a larger part of the organization to underwrite. Build the church, create the credit, and build within your means. Just like we are supposed to live. That's our problem. Our culture has created a bailout society. Spend and live like we want and expect someone else to bail us out. Churches to the same. BUILD WITHIN YOUR MEANS so you can keep your property.
_________________
Stay Positive! |
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1138
3/13/12 12:04 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
theElder |
Jamie, I'm sorry your brother is in such a bad predicament.
It seems more than a little foolish on the State's part, if things are as you indicate, since they could be out from under their current mortgage and the organization would still retain actual ownership of the property even after the church buys it.
Hopefully he is on good relations with some members of the State board where he could speak privately with one or more of them and perhaps revisit the issue. If he chooses to do so it would surely be very helpful to his cause if he already has a bank lined up with details on the financing spelled out on the bank's letterhead.
If that is in his plans I would certainly pray for favor and I know many on this board would gladly join in that prayer on behalf of his church. |
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1924
3/13/12 12:41 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Change Agent |
Joshua Henson stated:
"I'm not for or against the deeding system, however, I think its proving to be problematic. I believe we could still keep our general system in place without deeding. I'm also certain that its not a scriptural mandate."
How would you keep the general system in place without deeding? What I am stating here is that this is already happening and the COG is going along with "affiliating without deeding".
What's happening is not being allowed by the COG, however they approve the affiliation by accepting the TOT. Churches are telling Cleveland "take this deal or get nothing". In these situations the church is the dog and the organization is the tail. Churches are controlling the organization. These are large churches! |
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1449
3/13/12 7:29 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
