‘08 Council Agenda of the CoG

For the next few days, I am going to overview the agenda of the General Council of the Church of God which convenes in San Antonio, Texas as part of our biennial General Assembly.  A good number of those who read this blog are either ministers or laity in the Church of God, largely in Louisiana where I serve as Administrative Bishop or have connection to the denomination–Church of God–with international offices in Cleveland, Tennessee.

It has been my privilege to serve as an elected member to the Executive Council during this past two year term and to view firsthand the process of the agenda’s development and presentation.  Since this was my first time to do so, I will openly admit it opened my eyes to the process which has guided our church during more than 100 years. My insights here are simply my own and do not reflect those of others who sat on the Council this term, nor will I use this platform to advocate for any personal political agenda.  

I love our church, even with its many flaws.  I believe in the future of the Church of God, as well as the history of our fathers before me who likewise sought to lead the church in congruence with God’s will for any group of believers who seek to do His will.  How these issues will come out is anybody’s guess.  Some will not pass because they possess elements which foster deeper questions which need study and development. Some will likely not pass because they are repeats of earlier issues not accepted but continued to be pushed from certain groups of individuals in our church, even though the Council has rejected them before. Some will pass because they make sense and in some way they advance the kingdom and our position in that kingdom.  Every delegate is entitled to his/her opinion and to act upon that with conviction and honor.  The diversity of opinion and thought only makes our church stronger.  Regardless of the outcome, it is my hope we will leave this biennial gathering of our “family” more poised and ready to do God’s work.

One final thought before we get into today’s post on the agenda…

I do not accept the premise that our leaders are corrupt, evil or deceptive.  I have not seen that in any degree which convinces me it is so.  There are those who feel strongly that our Executive Committee is power-hungry and poised to take our church into demise.  I am not of that group.  My view has been one of admiration and appreciation for how hard it is to lead this church and how massive the organization has become.  We need change and there are things we can do together which will help the Church of God be more cultural relevant, more missional in approach and more harvest-minded.  There are leaders who are gifted to help us do that and we are blessed to have such diversity of thought and such unity of purpose as our great church possesses.

Feel free to email questions to bill@lacog.org.  I’ll do my best to respond.

Now for the agenda…

ELECTIONS

The General Council of Ordained Bishops is charged by our Minutes to nominate the following positions for election by the General Assembly..

  • General Overseer–Presently held by G. Dennis McGuire.  He is not eligible for re-election to this position but can be elected to another position on the Executive Committee.
  • 1st Assistant General Overseer–Presently held by Raymond Culpepper.  He is not eligible for re-election to this position but can be elected to another position on the Executive Committee.
  • 2nd Assistant General Overseer–Presently held by Timothy Hill.  He is not eligible for re-election to this position but can be elected to another position on the Executive Committee.
  • 3rd Assistant General Overseer–Presently held by Orville Hagan.  He is eligible for re-election to this position or any other position on the Executive Committee.
  • Secretary-General–Presently held by Paul L. Walker.  He is eligible for re-election to this position or for any other position on the Executive Committee.
**Our bylaws on tenure allow for individuals to serve up to 8 years on the EC but no more than 4 in any one position.
  • Director of Youth & Christian Education–Presently held by Mark Abbott.  He is not eligible to be re-elected to this position.
  • Assistant Director of Youth & Christian Education–Presently held by Tom Madden.  He is not eligible to be re-elected to this position but can be elected to the the position of director.
  • Director of Evangelism & Home Missions–Presently held by Wallace Sibley.  He is eligible to be re-elected to this position.
  • Assistant Director of Evangelism & Home Missions–Presently held by Jimmy Smith. He is eligible to be re-elected to this position.
  • Director of World Missions–Presently held by Roland Vaughn.  He is not eligible to be re-elected to this position.
  • Assistant Director of World Missions–Presently held by Douglas LeRoy.  He is not eligible to be re-elected to this position but can be elected to the position of Director.
Finally, the General Council is charged with the responsibility to elect eighteen (18) council members who meet with the International Executive Committee during the interim between Assemblies for the purpose of conducting business and managing the church.  The make-up of this council is determined by the General Council as follows…9 pastors at the time of their election; 2 members residing outside of the USA at the time of their election.  Members serve two years terms and are eligible to serve two terms consecutively but must be elected at each General Council.  The 2006-08 Executive Council are:
Jim Bolin
Ishmael Charles 
John Childers
Jerry Chitwood
David Cooper
Bryan Cutshall
Joe Edwards
David Griffis
Bill Isaacs
Floyd Lawhon
Mitchell Maloney
Grant McClung
Gerald McGinnis
Oliver McMahan
David Ramirez
Jim Stephens
Larry Timmerman
Mark Williams
*Bold indicates eligibility remaining
**Italics indicate no eligibility remaining

 

AGENDA…REPORTS

There are 24 items on the agenda (not withstanding the election of officials) and nine (9) call for reports to the General Council.  These reports are in some cases, the result of previous General Council work and the assignment to smaller committees to research and develop strategies and bring back reports.  In other cases, the Executive Council has chosen to give a report to the group regarding work it has done in specific areas which may directly impact on the mission or scope of the church.  There is no action other than receiving of the report, although it is possible for a member to offer advice to the committee should their work be continued by the General Council.  

Item #1 will report to the Council on the 2008 Intercessors Conference which was held in Cleveland, TN and will highlight the need for the call of the church to issues and matters of prayer. There is a world-wide prayer movement ongoing and our leadership has chosen to kick-off the agenda with this important item.

Item #5 calls for a report from the Group Health Insurance Committee on their study to explore the feasibility of a national health group insurance plan. 

Item #10 is a report directed by the Executive Council outlining significant changes in the operational flow structure of International Offices as previously approved by the General Council/Assembly.  This report will come in a handout to the Ordained Bishops and will orient to the five divisions (Communication, World Evangelization, Care/Benevolence, Church Ministries, Education) which are now in operation (some are more advanced in operation than others).  This is designed to help the Bishops understand the changes being made in personnel, budgets, etc. as the churches embraces this new shift.

Item #11 will be a report calling for an appointed commission to study our by-law structure and report back to the 2010 General Council. The recommendation reads…That a study commission representing the leadership and constituency of our church is being appointed by the general overseer in consultation with the Executive Committee to study our bylaws and structure and to make a report with recommendations to the 2010 General Council.

Item #17 is a report from the Executive Council on the policy approved in receiving large groups of churches into the Church of God from other countries and comes with this recommendation…

a) In countries where the Church of God is already organized and under the oversight of a national overseer appointed by the International Executive Committee, no new church or group of churches shall be received into the Church of God without the involvement of the national overseer.

b) No church or group of churches shall be organized in any new country without the permission of the regional super¬intendent and field director.

c) In all areas where the Church of God is already firmly established and officially organized, great patience and extreme caution should be exercised when seeking to re¬ceive large groups of churches into the Church of God.

Further, we recommend this policy be referred to the World Missions Board to be published and implemented through their policies and procedures manuals. Also, we recommend the policy be distributed to Administrative Bishops in the United States and Canada and made available to local congregations seeking to plant churches in other nations of the world. 

Item #20 is a report calling for a study commission to outline the structure for the USA National Assembly. This came from the last General Assembly and is designed to allow American Bishops to deal with matters exclusive to the American church in session without the full General Council. This is common practice for all other countries with the Church of God and was adopted last year. The recommendation will ask for specific recommendations on the necessary structure and governance to oversee this national assembly.  The recommendation is..That a study commission is being appointed by the general overseer with representative membership (age, gender, eth¬nicity, laity and ministers) to prepare recommendations for the bylaws and governance structure of the USA National Council/Assembly to report to the 2010 USA National Coun¬cil meeting for consideration. Further, this commission will consider the feasibility of a delegated National Assembly and International Assembly.

Item #22 is a resolution report calling for the official designation of CIMS as the curriculum for lay and ministerial training.  CIMS stands for Certificate in Ministerial Studies and is presently used in the credentialing and lay leadership training components of our educational processes.

Item #23 is a report on Care & Benevolence and stipulates that the care and oversight of the 70+ international orphanages operated under the direction of the Church of God will be jointed coordinated by the Division of Care and World Evangelism.

Item #24 is the report from the Motions Committee and involves those motions submitted by delegates to the General Council but not on the approved/accepted agenda.  These items are reported to the General Council in the order of their submission and acted upon usually with referrals to committees or up/down votes.  This report only comes to the body once all the items on the agenda are completed.  those motions from this committee which are not acted upon generally are then placed on the agenda for the next Executive council meeting who decides if they will be given to the Agenda Committee for the 2010 General Council.

Feel free to post comments for others to review and respond.  

Tomorrow…

Item #2 which one of the hot-button items for this council–the reduction of funds from local churches to state and international offices.  And more…

4 Comments

The Chief Shepherd : CoG General Assembly  on July 5th, 2008

[...] published the significant agenda items on his Forward Leadership website. The first article, “08 Council Agenda of the CoG” gives a general overview with later articles on specific issues. If you are also a member of [...]

Aaron Scott  on July 7th, 2008

Bro. Issacs, you wrote:

“How these issues will come out is anybody’s guess. Some will not pass because they possess elements which foster deeper questions which need study and development. Some will likely not pass because they are repeats of earlier issues not accepted but continued to be pushed from certain groups of individuals in our church, even though the Council has rejected them before. Some will pass because they make sense and in some way they advance the kingdom and our position in that kingdom.”

Can I ask you how in the world these things can “be pushed from certain groups,” while proposals for openness and transparency are REJECTED time after time (I submitted similar proposals in 2006)?

Now wonder we have conspiracy theories about the Church of God! When some groups apparently have the power to force the Council to place something on the Agenda yet again, while proposals for transparency are REJECTED, you can believe that I am going to think the worst.

When someone or some group has the power to force(?) the Council of 18 to discuss whether child molesters can get another shot at membership…while REJECTING proposals for openness, is it any wonder why people might mistrust our leadership?

What group has such power? And what group got the Council of 18 to accept the child molester proposal?

If the Council of 18 cannot discern the vital the value of my proposals over the above (one of which has already had its chance), then how am I to trust the leadership of the Church of God?

Perhaps you can advise?

billisaacs.org » Blog Archive » Correction…if you please!  on July 8th, 2008

[...] Several have pointed out that an error has been made in the listing of eligible individuals for the Council of 18 at the upcoming General Council…and it is true my former list did not include all that were eligible.  A slight increase in my preparation would have prevented this disservice to a good brother.  He has accepted my apology and while asking not to be singled out, suffice to say the list is now corrected and you can review it at your discretion here. [...]

billisaacs  on July 8th, 2008

As to the child molester proposal, that did not originate with the Executive Council…but rather you may remember it was a referral from the 2006 General Council asking for more study and there were additional instructions given to the Executive Council.

In the first meeting, all those referrals and any items from the motions committee that did not have action came before the Council. Some were referred to committees who studied and gave periodic reports and others were discussed.

In the case of the child molestation matter, the Council was required to bring it back to the Ordained Bishops by virtue of the referral. As I recall the change is simply the additional two lines.

On your proposal regarding openness, I must admit that I was away from the council during the time of discussion of your measure. I had been present the entire week but was away for a few hours near the end because I spoke at the NYLA conference on Friday morning when some of the items were presented and I was not present for the decisions on that motion and a few others. Because of this, I don’t feel I’m the best spokesman for your proposals since I did not hear the discussion or participate in the vote, although I have read them in their entirety several times.

There is a need for greater openness and I hope that your ideas, as well as others, gain traction in our church. Because you don’t know me, it might be easy to draw some conclusions which would not be in keeping with my spirit or heart. Like yourself, I love the church, its future and potential. Serving on the Council of 18 has not been a power trip for me but one of genuine humility seeking to serve you and others who desired my voice in this process. I’ve tried to learn, listen and understand how our forefathers established our process and how it can be used to further the kingdom of God which is my true purpose in life and ministry.

Granted, as one of 23, there are going to be moments when decisions are not unanimous, the discourse is emotional and filled with give-n-take and the outcome will not be as some would hope but sitting in that room, I do not get the sense there is a spirit of arrogance or power among any of the members. Many times, the group stops talking, comes to the center of the room and joins to pray over delicate matters. The global needs of the church require serious consideration and this group has done so with great care, in my opinion.

I’m encouraged about the future of our church and glad God has allowed you and me to join our hearts, energies and passion for the goals of winning the world to Christ. Just Sunday, I preached that our lives are witnesses to an unbelieving world and if so, what message is God sending this world through each of us?

Thanks for your comments and participation!

Leave a Comment