Actscelerate.com

Travis J. calls for "No compete clause"

Acts-celerate Owner Posts: 6957 **3/3/13 1:11 pm**

While posting in the thread about the church in Savannah going independent, Travis Johnson suggested the COG begin having pastors who receive underwriting from the organization, sign a "No compete clause."

Following is Travis's post and some of his observations about the Savannah situation:

POST BEGINS: "This is going to end any kind of denominational underwriting. I cannot respect this action in any way as presented publicly.

I do not claim to have all information. I'm sure there have been missteps. The COG has a persisting problem in how we resolve conflict with leaders in administration and behind pulpits positioning themselves as above being questioned and unable to be perceived as being wrong.

We think we're always Spirit-led. We aren't. Sometimes, we are doing what we know to do and are right...and sometime wrong. Even our best Pastors and best Administrators are sometimes Ego-led, Ambition-led, Crisis-led, and locked into ridiculous attempts to meet wrongly placed expectations.

Some thoughts:

1. If you receive underwriting, you should sign a non-compete agreement that you will not under any circumstances while that note is in effect to leave COG oversight to minister within a specified number of miles of the church borrowing money. It is not ethical to receive funding like this AND shortly thereafter remove your church and the revenue source. Afterall, the revenue source and the church were shown as justification for said underwriting.

This is wrong. There is no justifying this action outside of some sort of unfaithfulness on the part of the denomination: abuse, massive doctrinal shift which is unfaithful to Scripture (see Presbyterians, Episcopalians), etc...

No non-compete should HAVE TO be done. It should just be something that brothers don't do to one another. And, since we're slinging titles of Bishop, etc... Bishops certainly shouldn't engage in these types of leverage games.

2. Actions which place the burden of this note on the COG are not actions solely against a legal entity. It is an action against me, my church, my family, my church family, and the mission of Jesus as stewarded by the COG.

Crude legal and organizational movements like this impact how we will trust one another. This is how the world functions. The Church of Jesus Christ should not.

Are there denominational issues? Absolutely. I know them intimately. I know them first hand many times over. I've had leaders look me in the eye and red-faced tell me I have no future in the COG and work to back up that statement. As a faithful son of the COG, that hurts. But, one person's dysfunction does not justify dysfunction on my part. WE MUST BE DIFFERENT.

I've also watched saints, pioneering saints be ripped to shreds...and watched the denomination do to their church's property and assets what is now being done to the denomination at IWC. It's barbaric. It sows seeds that bring a terrible harvest. For me, it was a call to action not to be quiet while that kind of wrong was being done.

There is a way to break fellowship. And, there is a time for it. But, this is not how it should be done.

3. We are presently reducing the amount we send into to COGHQ. Our fellowship had not been faithful in disbursing those monies for mission. So, some of these talents were taken from us. This has required sacrifice for a number of good people.

But, if while we are going through this, we can get the mission part right (there is still room for much improvement), the challenge will be less. But, insult is added to a perceived injury when we short-sheet the fellowship while it is downsizing by stiffing it with a bill that they were asked to co-sign for.

The ripple effect of that is pretty substantial. The one leaving may not feel it as they withdraw. But, those of us who aggressively posture for mission within the COG will feel it as less trust will be extended towards us AND as all of us left are looked at to shoulder the heavy load that was dumped on the way out the door.

I had a house built for me (as did about 70 of my neighbors). My builder knowingly used defective material that substantially impacted the health of my family and the state of my finances. Courts sided with me that this well-heeled contractor was liable to compensate me and my neighbors and make us whole for financial losses (which were substantial).

He filed bankruptcy and reorganized under a new name to avoid standing behind his product and commitments. My whole neighborhood got rocked. Years of investments and increase were squandered by an unscrupulous GC. I really don't see a difference here.

This is a shame...not reflective of who we are called to be."
_________________
The largest room in the world is the room for improvement.

Re: Travis J. calls for "No compete clause"

Friendly Face Posts: 258 **3/4/13 2:30 pm**

Truman Here

Acts Enthusiast Posts: 1073 **3/4/13 7:11 pm**

Love this

Belt Jerker Posts: 511 **3/5/13 12:00 am**

Travis,

I really like this post. I agree 100% with you on the no compete clause. I agree with you. I cannot believe this has not been presented in our denominational structure. However, I believe the COG should look at ways to do away with underwriting altogether.

The COG is undergoing some major financial cuts. We must look at our entire structure. I would personally like to see us discuss the possibilities of making the credentialed ministers pay tithes into headquarters. Notice I said discuss.........This is happening in other denominational circles. These discussions may be happening or perhaps have already happened. I am looking to dialogue, not stir up trouble or cause confusion. This may not be the route we should take. I simply want to have a discussion. This is not an anti COG bashing session. Lets look at some of the possibilities.

Pros I see:

1. Every minister would be required to pay tithes. Overseers, Evangelist, professors, pastors, missionaries anyone with credentials. No one would be allowed to put tithe money in some other ministry project. No excuses of a tough economy, or tired of paying the "denominational tax." I believe this would give extreme credibility and restore integrity to the ministry of the COG.

2. No more of this discussion of tithe of tithe.... We in essence work for the COG and we would pay our tithes to our denomination.

3. More money for the local church to plant churches, do missions, etc.

4. I believe it would be an increase in revenue. Again this is why I would like for us to discuss and dialogue about this.

5. Our layman would see this as a major step forward, and world missions giving would go through the roof.

Example: Let's say we have 15,000 ministers and the average salary is $25,000. That would be $37,500,000. Divided by two is $18,750,000 to state headquarters and then $18,750,000 to general headquarters. Again these are presumptuous numbers. I have no idea how many we have. I do think the 25,000 salary is conservative. This may not be feasible. I am not presuming to be the voice here, but this would at least be some good points of discussion.

BTW I hope you guys are having fun at Hydrate. Wish I was there. Too much going on and things are extremely tight financially for us. Having to tighten up the old belt. I am reading some really positive comments via social media.

Agreed

Acts-celerater Posts: 854 **3/5/13 5:49 am**

I agree with Travis and Chris. First, I recall going to pastor a church that had been through the wringer and I was trying restore some stability and trust, but the two former pastors remained in the same city and both were trying to start their own works. So while I was trying to bring restoration and rebuild, they were contacting the people to come with them. I was very upset, but we survived, and neither of the other two attempts did. Still, I felt that what these other two former pastors were doing should not have been permitted.

Second, as far as pastors/credentialed ministers paying tithes to HQ and State, I like it. My only question is whether this would only be tithes of ministry money, or any and all income tithed to HQ/State? I'm also curious how this would affect pastors of affiliate churches whose pastors may not be credentialed with the COG -- assuming this is possible.
_________________
Mark E. Hardgrove, D.Min., Ph.D.
Senior Pastor Conyers Church of God
http://www.conyerscog.org
Dean & VP for Academics at BHU
http://www.beulah.org/

Acts Enthusiast Posts: 1021 **3/5/13 8:56 am**

Perhaps the no-compete clause is needed, though it strikes me as very sad that we would have to put into writing something that should be basic integrity? I guess it's harder to say, "God told me to stay in this city" when you're basically saying "God told me to break my word that I solemnly gave in writing."

As for ministers tithing instead of a church paying ToT - that sounds like something that would shift much of the burden of financing the denomination onto smaller churches. A big church would save many thousands in no longer paying ToT, but would hardly miss receiving the pastor's tithe. In most smaller churches, however, the pastor is the biggest tither in the place, and the ToT to be saved would not compensate for the loss of the pastor's tithe.

Also, it is harder for the pastor to encourage others to tithe into the local church if he/she is not doing so. In fact, under our existing minutes, wouldn't this mean the pastor would not be allowed to speak in church business meetings? I am on the road posting from my tablet - & I don't carry the minutes with me for light reading in the airport - but I seem to remember something about those who don't tithe into the local church therefore keeping silent when the business of the church is being discussed?
_________________
Senior Pastor, Solid Rock Church, Drogheda
National Overseer, Church of God, Ireland
Executive Director, Evangelical Alliance Ireland

http://eaiseanchai.wordpress.com/

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 12817 **3/5/13 9:04 am**

Nick,

I was thinking the same thing. I have friends and family who pastor in the A/G, in which essentially the minister's pay most of their tithes into the denomination, and that kind of set-up does place a much greater burden on smaller churches with bivocational pastors.

i thought we already had one of those...

Acts-celerater Posts: 733 **3/5/13 9:06 pm**

when Paul Walker was GO I thought it was introduced. when you build or relocate. we sought to relocate at one time (when I was in FL) and we had to submit a covt not to compete that included where we could go, and such.
is this not the case anymore?
- Darius

nick, mark

Belt Jerker Posts: 511 **3/5/13 9:52 pm**

This is a valid point. I believe the ministers can pay tithe to the local church and then the local church would send it to headquarters. It could be done with the current church report system.

I believe churches would appreciate this more than having to send in the 10 percent of the tithes. I do believe it would make some ministers uncomfortable, because there would actually be some accountability.

Nick, as far as the smaller churches are concerned, I would say some folks pay into the general fund because of our current structure. I think it is a stretch to say this would put a greater burden on the smaller churches. I have several staff members and retired ministers who would be paying into headquarters. It wouldn't be much of a cut for us. Thinking out loud...I have 6 credentialed staff members, 9 retired ministers, 6 professors.

Bottom Line: I am tired of being saddled with church's debt. There is too many in the COG who are not paying their debts to headquarters. I am not talking about tithe of tithe. I am talking about loans. I believe we as a movement need to get out of the real estate business. This could be an option to expedite this process. I am young and naive, but I really believe this should be considered. It may have been explored and studied. It may be the dumbest perspective ever.

Finally, I am also weary of losing good men and women because of our financial structure. I know the AG is doing this and how many times larger are they than us? I am COG blue and gold, but we must address this critical issue IMHO.

Golf Cart Mafia Underboss Posts: 3944 **3/5/13 11:15 pm**

Brother Park wrote:

I have a question

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 5431 **3/6/13 2:35 am**

since the Church of God does have a hierarchical polity and according to the minutes no local church has the right to withdraw, wouldn't that automatically put the denomination under an obligation to underwrite loans with lenders such as banks?

How can the denomination not be expected to guarantee repayment of loans since the local churches have no legal independent existence apart from the denomination as a whole?

It seems to me that the only way the denomination could be entirely off the hook for underwriting loans is if the COG went the route of the A/G and allowed each local church to be autonomous and self-governing, with local incorporation with the states in which they reside. Then it could be argued successfully that the denomination did not have a controlling interest in the church property and could not be required to underwrite loans for building programs and expansions.

Of course, if the COG went that way, it will probably destroy the present system of pastors being appointed to churches, because being self-governing and autonomous (and just in fellowship with the COG) would mean allowing the people to elect and discharge their own pastors, as is done in sovereign churches in the A/G.

Does this make sense, or am I missing something?
_________________
Randy Johnson, Pastor
Ickesburg Church of God
85 Tuscarora Path
Ickesburg, Pennsylvania

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 13654 **3/6/13 8:47 am**

How would this be enforced? Would the Church of God take non-compliant minsters to court for breach of contract and seek the recovery of damages? Because I don't see something like that happening, and if you don't have teeth behind the clause, you're relying solely on the integrity of the man signing it. You'd hope that would be enough, but in the worst of cases it certainly will not be.

Acts-pert Poster Posts: 16646 **3/6/13 9:16 am**

Truman Here

Acts Enthusiast Posts: 1073 **3/6/13 10:55 am**

I have said all I wanted to say about this situation , But this thread has taken on a turn to which I will post a thought ,

Any Pastor in the great Church of God who was not Taken into the Church as a member or a pastor who does not or has not taken in members by the MINUTES is asking for trouble ,BIG TIME , If one follows the MINUTES he has untold protections in many areas ..

The Minister should always include this expression ... Quote

item 4... Are you willing to abide by and subscribe to the discipline of the Church of God as outlined by the Scriptures and set forth in the Minutes of the General Assembly ?

The Minutes offer three ways one or may be should be used in taking in new members .
1 . Counsel with prospective members privately concerning the membership requirements and their responsibilities to them .

2.. Conduct special membership classes where prospective members are taught membership requirements .

3. Read and explain the membership requirements in a public meeting .

I would say that ET never did any one of the three listed above . I apologize to him if he did follow any one of the three .

I would never even think of receiving a person into membership who would not say an emphatically ... YES to this statement ..

If ET did this then 95% of the members would have known that they had joined a CHURCH OF GOD . Shame on him or any other pastor who has ever done what he has obviously done .

Have we really come to the place that we are so ambitious to receive folk as members that we will take just anything into church membership that they do not know what they are joining and we do not know who or what is joining the church ??/

I hope we are smart enough to avoid this .

God Bless . T

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 7307 **3/6/13 11:02 am**

There was no membership instruction when I joined the CoG.

No explanation of hierarchal goverment was given.
_________________
Charles A. Hutchins
Senior Pastor SPWC
Congregational Church of God

www.spwc.church

Acts Enthusiast Posts: 1073 **3/6/13 11:24 am**

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 5431 **3/6/13 11:46 am**

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 13654 **3/6/13 12:53 pm**

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 13654 **3/6/13 12:56 pm**

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 12817 **3/6/13 1:06 pm**

One thing the A/G used to do when I pastored with them was they tried to get all "sovereign" churches to sign a reversion clause, whereby if the congregation ever ceased to exist or decided to go independent, all property would revert back to ownership by the District Council. Since the A/G is a lot more loosely organized than the CoG, it is typically not that hard for a local A/G church to go independent and retain their property if no reversion clause has been put in place. The reasoning behind the reversion clause was purportedly to maintain the property as an A/G church in the event of a local church wanting to pull out, since the members who paid for the property supposedly intended pay for an A/G church, not an independent one.