Monday, October 5, 2009

Fairness...But With Honesty, Part 3

My parents, my belief in Christ, and my academic training all taught me to respect people. Respect their persons, their property, their feelings, and their ideas. This is the reason why I am going into detail to answer the points raised by Anonymous.

The second paragraph Anonymous wrote today was, "I am fully aware of the entire situation at Takoma Park, and other churches in the Potomac Conference. Stephen Covey suggests that we seek first to understand before we try to be understood. Have you tried this approach? Have you looked for the best in the situation instead of the worst? Have you tried to see what the desired outcome of the changes is for TP? Perhaps you could agree with the outcome and then work TOGETHER on the process that achieves the desired outcome."

This is a wee bit redundant of the first paragraph, nevertheless, I should respond. It's the respectful thing to do, and with no disrespect intended, I have to doubt when you say that "[You are] fully aware of the entire situation at Takoma Park, and other churches in the Potomac Conference." If this statement were accurate, you would know how much we agonised about taking up this cross. You would know all the times we, individually and as a group, have approached Elders Alan DeSilva, Bill Miller, Ray Pichette, Jorge Ramirez, and David Weigley, in a spirit of Christian charity, only to be ignored and rebuffed. You would know the fear most who work in the Potomac Conference office have of speaking out against this evil. You would admit that Potomac Conference has trouble getting qualified people now because of the willful decision to go down this dark path. You would know of Conference officials and workers that have been hounded for taking a Protestant Christian stand on principle. And I think you would be less likely to cast allusions to us behaving like Satan.

Most un-becoming, but as the Bible says, "Forgive..."

As for Stephen Covey, well, I've discussed him in the previous post. I can only pray that your mention of him is not a foreshadow that the Potomac Conference is now planning on inculcating Mormon doctrines into our Church.

There are earlier posts in the beginning of this blog that I wish you would go back and read. We did try, and continue to try to understand what these people are doing and why. We have also looked at the fruits of what has happened.

You boast of your familiarity with what has happened at Takoma Park and the Potomac Conference. I will put it to you again. What good has come of it? Any of it? Further, if this were of God, would there be this confusion? This is at least the second time I have asked you this, and yet you remain silent. What's up with that? Seriously?

You ask, "Have you tried to see what the desired outcome of the changes [are] for TP?" Do you really want to have this conversation? Seriously?

Professionally speaking, process and outcome are linked. In other words, the outcome one wants is determined by the process used. In other words, if you want to get to NYC from DC, you don't buy a ticket that is singly bound for Alabama. It's absurd. That said, it's ridiculous to suggest that any sane person "envision an outcome" without looking at the process that is being used. Looking at the process in the case of the "Great Leap Forward" at Takoma Park, the isn't just cracked, the process in on crack. And look at the devastation in it's wake!

C'mon Anonymous, 'fess up. Would this process be this confused, and problematic if it were of God? What about the Biblical injunction to conduct things in good order and discipline? Again, I ask you, if this process and outcome were honest, why don't your friends take this before General Conference? If it worked in any of the other SDA churches or Conferences, why aren't we hearing about it's successes? Take Jim Bauer, for example. A "Fellow Traveller" of Bill Miller, Bauer pushed this process in the Rocky Mountain Conference. Not only did it not work, Bauer wasn't re-elected as Conference President for a second term because of it.

As a Christian, something as nebulous as a "desired outcome" is no where near important as actual outcome. It's as though you are saying that the ends justify the means, and that is completely wrong.

We've seen the actual outcomes in churches from North Carolina to New Zealand. Both the process and the actual outcomes have compelled Conference, Union, and General Conference officials to speak against it, ranging from Tom Mostert, to Richard O'Ffil, to the Michigan Conference President, to various conference presidents throughout California and Nevada.

Seriously, are you in a state of complete psychological denial that you are not seeing this?

The outcome we seek is an SDA church comprised of people living in the neighborhood immediately around the Takoma Park Church. We seek a Christ centered Church. A loving Church. A working, vibrant, Church. A Church were honesty and transparency are the coins of the realm, not a wounded, limping, dysfunctional, commuter church, devoid of SDA principles and beliefs, and depending on the writings of Ric Warren, oh, and Stephen Covey, as cheap substitutes for Ellen' G. White.

And in the name of Jesus, don't believe we should be compelled to settle for anything less.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Here is a process, "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved" Acts 4:12.
We know that we don't all end up in heaven just because we say "Lord, Lord." We know there is a path to heaven that is right and one that is wrong.
I applaud you for your process and continue to pray for you that God will use you to save other churches thinking of going down the wrong path. -k

Michael said...

You stated; Take Jim Bauer, for example. A "Fellow Traveller" of Bill Miller, Bauer pushed this process in the Rocky Mountain Conference. Not only did it not work, Bauer wasn't re-elected as Conference President for a second term because of it."

Have you fact-checked your reference to being only a "one-term" Conference President? Jim Brauer assumed the Rocky Mountain Conference Presidency in 1995 and held that position until this year. Frankly a bit more than the one term you suggest. If this is any indication of your "facts", one might be worried that other things you have considered "facts" are indeed your version of truth.

RELIGIOUS AND LIBERTY said...

You still didn't deal with the issue that Jim Brauer supported the same kind of change in Church sructure that Bill Miller did. If thi is not true, say so. Also, is he still the Rocky Mountain Conference President? If no, why not? If you want to dispute facts, this is the place to start. Last and most important, if changing the Church organization and Church structure is so important for you, haven't you all taken it to the General Conference in open session? I don't mind nit-picking, but why not start here?

Michael said...

interesting how you appear to always dodge straight-forward questions. I simply ask if you have fact-checked in regards to Elder Brauer. If you insist on straight answers from myself or Anonymous, perhaps you could kindly do the same.

To tell those who read your blog that Elder Brauer was "thrown out" after one term implies a completely different outcome then the actual truth of serving three terms. Having the facts correct is important if you want people to fully understand yor position. To make a decision, judgement or opinion on incorrect facts is leading them down the wrong road.